Trump Pragmatically Seeking Benefits for the US

As a protectionist president who promised to prioritize the interests of the United States, Donald Trump has been actively engaged on the world stage. In just the past week, Trump has been busy conducting business transactions with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. He lifted sanctions against Syria, negotiated the release of American citizens detained by Hamas, ended military attacks against the Houthis in Yemen, and reduced tariffs on China.

Trump also instructed Ukraine to speak with Russia in Turkey, continuing quiet negotiations with Iran regarding the nuclear agreement, and even claimed to be working towards a ceasefire negotiation between India and Pakistan.

Everything is moving quickly and jumping from one issue to another. Both allies and opponents are equally bewildered. From this busyness, Trump's vision, which is based on trade in international relations, can actually be observed. Like a businessman, he is more inclined to seek business opportunities and profits.

During his speech in Saudi Arabia, Trump focused on trade rather than the chaos in the Middle East. BBC News, Saturday (17/5/2025), stated that Trump's prospects are based on a straightforward and pragmatic mercantilism where countries engage in business transactions for mutual benefit. If there is mutual profit, peace will follow. Such is his belief.

During his time in the Gulf countries, Trump did not mention multilateral cooperation against the threat of climate change, for instance. There was also no discussion regarding challenges to human rights or democracy.

For Trump, and this was emphasized throughout his visit, the United States should not interfere in the affairs of other countries, let alone judge and punish them. This reluctance to intervene is evident when it comes to the India-Pakistan conflict. In the past, the United States often played a role in ending conflicts between the two.

However, U.S. Vice President JD Vance has stated that the conflict is not America's business and that the U.S. cannot control both sides. Nevertheless, in the end, Vance and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called India and Pakistan, urging them to de-escalate tensions. When a ceasefire was agreed upon, Trump hastily claimed it was due to U.S. diplomacy. India denied this, asserting that it was the result of a bilateral agreement.

Trump's rapid movement is also due to Trump who is always a "one man show" or a decision maker in US foreign policy decisions. For example, the decision to meet with the new Syrian leader who was once considered a terrorist by the US, Ahmed al-Sharaa, and lifting sanctions on Syria.

This move is seen as a reward for the investment agreement that Trump secured in Saudi Arabia. The decision has not only surprised many in the Middle East but also within the US government.

Diplomats in the US have stated that the pattern of impulsive decision-making without internal government discussions is common in the White House. The outcomes are not always positive and tend to be risky. This is partly due to Trump's lack of consistency, as he often changes his mind.

Like the issue of U.S. tariffs on China. Initially, the U.S. tariff for China was 145 percent, then China retaliated and the market plummeted. U.S. businesses suffered. Trump changed his mind by reducing the tariff on China to 30 percent.

This has become a new pattern of US diplomacy: issuing demands as maximally as possible, threatening, negotiating, then declaring victory. For observers, Trump's transactional strategy may succeed with easily reversible decisions such as tariffs. However, it will be more challenging to apply this to long-term diplomatic efforts such as conflict resolution.

Trump's policy on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, for instance, often fluctuates and leaves US diplomats confused. The BBC reported that US diplomats have begun to suspect that Trump does not actually know what to do regarding the war in Ukraine. Trump may simply be looking for a way to resolve the issue as quickly as possible.

There are two other decisions that are also confusing. First, Trump agreed to a ceasefire in Yemen due to questioning the effectiveness of costly airstrikes. Initially, Trump wanted a prolonged military operation. However, while in Saudi Arabia, Trump admitted that he does not like war. He prefers to engage in business.

Secondly, the U.S. Special Envoy for the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, held the fourth round of negotiations with Iran regarding efforts to curb its nuclear ambitions. Both parties indicated that an agreement may be achievable. Discussions about a joint U.S.-Israel military operation against Iran appear to have subsided.

From these two decisions, it is evident that the United States is acting directly against Israel's wishes. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has appeared to be ignored in recent days. Trump traveled around the Middle East without visiting Israel. He lifted sanctions against Syria also without Israel's support. The ceasefire with the Houthis occurred just a few days after the Houthis attacked the airport in Tel Aviv, Israel.

So, what are the results of Trump's travels in the Middle East? Will it bring about change? Not necessarily. The battles and humanitarian crisis in Gaza continue without resolution. Israeli attacks have even intensified. Trump's ambitions for normalizing relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia are still far from reality.

The Russia-Ukraine conflict will continue as the ambitions of Russian President Vladimir Putin remain unchanged. Behind all the agreements to cut tariffs with the United States, whether with the United Kingdom or China, there is still global market instability.

The only lesson that can be drawn is that there is finally a clearer picture of Trump's global ideology. He is not an isolationist, but rather a mercantilist who holds an optimistic hope that capitalism can resolve conflicts. Trump's hasty attitude in wanting to quickly address issues in the Middle East, Ukraine, and others may be because he wants to focus more on facing his greatest adversary, China.