US President Donald Trump’s comeback to the White House in January has ushered in an overly grandiose global vision: He is aiming to construct a new world order centered on his preferred “America First” credo, which places US interests at the forefront of all foreign policy musings.
However, far from having its groundwork based on moral considerations, Trump’s vision has always been anchored in his transactional approach, and those demands have since become more unsettling and malevolent. Trump is pushing his agenda forward by using an amalgam of vindictive rhetoric, tariff-laden measures and political coercion.
The world is now approaching an era of unprecedented uncertainty, marked by the rise of Washington as a “transactional hegemon.” The US’ post-World War II era of maintaining a US-led system of security alliances, and acting as a global guardian of free trade and stability against authoritarian tyranny is on the verge of collapse.
In many respects, the superpower is no longer dedicated to using its power leverage to uphold liberal principles, shoring up the liberal international order and providing international public goods willingly. Rather, the Trump-led US is capitalizing on its outsized economic and military capabilities to acquire trade and investment benefits, and expand US territories overseas.
Nor would Washington be willing to cover the expense of security insurance to longtime allies and partners at no cost. To get the US provision of security and good graces, and mitigate Trump’s flurry of trade measures, countries are anticipated to meet his demands, such as increasing their defense spending, meeting tariff criteria and making “payments,” one of the initial options considered by the Trump administration.
However, Trump does not step away from supporting allies and partners. His endorsements are few and far between. The US under Trump 2.0 is highly selective — limited to like-minded states with the willingness towards burden-sharing — and sparing with its backing. Trump’s take is straightforward: Other countries should pay more in exchange for economic benefits and security protection from Washington.
It might be naive to yearn to bring back US moral or absolute support, as for Trump, there is no such thing as a free lunch. In light of his transactional reflections regarding trade balances and security arrangements, the transactional foreign policy of hegemony suggests that “everything is on the table.”
Trump’s transaction-driven stance and the resurrection of revanchism could make the anti-US sentiments run deep in Southeast Asia, where most middle and small states gained independence thanks to their dogged resistance to European colonial rule and imperial expansion.
Even more worrisome is that authoritarian powers, especially China and Russia, could be emboldened by Trump’s expansionist ambitions and the money-for-territory approach, leading to the degradation of sovereignty and territorial integrity that have been crucial in preserving global security for decades.
At a time when the future of global governance is clouded by the erratic policies of a superpower, rising powers in the Indo-Pacific region should take the lead. Capable and traditional middle powers, such as Australia, Japan and India, should stop their superfluous debates on Trump’s capricious foreign policy dispositions and embrace shared leadership with regional and rising powers, including Taiwan, South Korea, Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam.
As international cooperation is the foundation for the world’s progress, second-tier nations should count on functional and strategic motivations to foster it as normative and domestic motivations dwindle in Washington. The world is yearning for practical, non-ideological and issue-based cooperation among states of divergent political composition.
For instance, Indo-Pacific middle powers such as Japan, Australia, India and Indonesia are well-positioned to spearhead concerted efforts to address common security issues, such as climate change, human trafficking, submarine cable infrastructure and online disinformation.
Although Taiwan’s international status is contentious, the nation’s hands-on knowledge and expertise make it an ideal partner for Southeast Asian nations looking to build resilient economies supported by high-tech innovation and an agriculture bolstered by “smart, resilient, sustainable, and healthy” strategies.
Additionally, in this fragmented world, emerging powers should join hands to devise a stronger “networked security cooperation,” perhaps starting with human security projects and regional economic integration to mitigate the negative aspects of the US’ aversion to commitments and Trump’s bullying transactionalism. While abandonment and entrapment are menacing for middle and small states, strengthening self-reliance and attaining collective security should top the list.
Huynh Tam Sang is a Young Leaders Program member of the Pacific Forum, a research fellow at the Taiwan NextGen Foundation, and a doctoral student in the Taipei School of Economics and Political Science at National Tsing Hua University.
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
RSS