Executive Summary

• Trump’s style is more pragmatic than ideological, more founded in his belief in his ability to influence international leaders through his personality than incentives.
• Trump will rapidly move on executive orders, some having immediate international impact. In the administration State will take the policy lead, followed by Defense.
• Region by region analysis indicates Trump priorities will be the Middle East, Ukraine and China. In the long-term maintaining pressure on China, reopening the Red Sea to trade and keeping Iran more in check will benefit all democratic nations.

Trump’s International Team Takes Shape

The selection of Marco Rubio as the next Secretary of State and Michael Waltz as National Security Advisor were balanced against the unexpected announcement of Pete Hegseth as the nominee for Secretary of Defense.

Rubio is a hawk on international issues, believing engagement with allies is crucial for US successes abroad.  In a 2015 article published in Foreign Affairs, Rubio ticked off the failures of the Obama Administration and outlined the resulting challenges.  “As the world has grown more interconnected, American leadership has grown more critical to maintaining global order and defending our people’s interests, and as our economy has turned from national to international, domestic policy and foreign policy have become inseparable.”[1] Rubio’s approach is essentially Peace through Strength; promote prosperity (a rising tide lifts all boats); and a renewed moral clarity regarding America’s core values.  Rubio correctly views Russia’s aggression, Iran’s intransigence and China’s global ambitions as threats to US National Security.  Changes in US National Security Strategy under Obama as well as cuts to the Department of Defense a decade ago have, in Rubio’s view, marked the path for aggression for these three adversaries to follow since 2012.

Trump believes in his ability to influence leaders with his personality (carrot) and negative incentives when his wishes are not followed.  However, his failed relationship with Angela Merkle culminated in Merkle’s stark criticism of Trump’s unwillingness to concede the 2020 election to Biden.[2]  The bond began to unravel years earlier when Trump threatened to pull out of NATO because of nations’ failure to pay their fair share (2.0% of GDP).  Trump, ever the Real Estate broker, saw this as European nations “squatting” and not paying the rent.  Trump said he went to “… all of the leaders of NATO, and they weren’t paying their bills. I love real estate. When someone does not pay, you say they are delinquent. You’ve got to pay your rent.”[3]  When Trump took office in 2016, only 5 NATO members met the 2% minimum.  When he left the White House, that number had almost doubled to 9 nations.  NATO estimates that this year, 23 of 33 nations will reach that goal.  Notably, nations west of the Adratic Sea (except Slovenia) are not forecast to make the 2% goal while those closest to Russia continue to increase funding in their defense.[4]

The implications of a Secretary Rubio and his more traditional approach to foreign policy combined with NATO’s resurgent investment as a result of Trump (and Putin’s) actions may allow for a new approach to NATO.  Many Trump supporters are arguing for a lesser engaged US military in Europe while maintaining the nuclear umbrella.  For 30 years, from the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990 until 2020, NATO nations spent considerably less on their own defense.  Now, Trump can honestly claim that his hardline approach to NATO has paid benefits.  For example, in 2014 total combined expenditures from Canda and NATO Europe nations (2015 dollars) were $250 million.  The US spent over $660 million on defense that year alone.  As a global power much of those dollars went to other national security needs across the spectrum, but the difference is stark.  In 2024 NATO estimates their expenditures will exceed $425 million while the US will spend over $754 million (again in 2015 dollars), a comparative increase of almost 20%.

What might happen with Ukraine and NATO?  Trump is on record stating the US would remain in NATO if European nations “pay its fair share” and stop taking advantage of US support.[5]  However the characterization of that membership may change.  It is likely that Trump will want to reduce the defense budget upon taking office.  Projections of current year spending on defense top $1 trillion per year in the next four years, a number Trump will likely view with skepticism.  The problem he will face is that the highest costs are for military operations such as training and planning, maintenance of equipment, and most of the military healthcare system: $318 billion in 2023; and personnel, $184 billion…almost 60% of the total budget.  Although the operations slice of the budget has grown in the past 50 years from around 28% to just under 40%, personnel costs have contracted from 40% in 1973 to just over 24% in 2023.[6]  Decisions on savings are therefore more complex looking to the next 4 years.  Reducing personnel has both near and far term impacts on the budget but also risks a smaller and less capable force that can credibly deter or respond to aggression.  Reducing operations and maintenance could eventually bring back the “hollow force” of the 1970s…many units with little combat capable equipment or adequate dollars for readiness training.

Currently the US has 100,000 troops in Europe of a total of over 2 million in uniform, including reserves and national guard.  Consequently, a reduction of forces in Europe would have little appreciable impact on defense spending but an outsized impact on how the US commitment to NATO is perceived by allies and potential enemies.  Reducing joint training with NATO would also seem to be a ripe fruit for picking, but the decrease in familiarity between US and other NATO forces would have an equally outsized impact on US readiness if called upon for military operations.  The best-case option would be for the president to note the improved spending patterns of most NATO nations while encouraging more to meet the 2% minimum. The worst-case option would be an ill-informed proclamation of US isolationism with a drastic reduction in basing and personnel in Europe.  Rebasing forces in the US will be costly, and closing bases on the continent solves only makes Russia’s decision easier.  Rubio will have substantive opinions on these options, but it is unlikely Hegseth (if he is even confirmed) will have value in the discussion or decision.

Executive Orders

There continues to be considerable speculation about which executive orders Trump will sign, revoke or reinstitute during the first days in office.  Many of the EO’s will address domestic issues (transgender rights, critical race theory, birthright citizenship etc.) but others will likely have more international impact.  Chief among these will be Trump’s approach to border security, the “mass deportation” of illegals residing in the US, and possible new tariffs on imports, specifically from Mexico and China.

As a pragmatist Trump will realize the economy is finally recovering from the high inflation that marked Biden’s first years in office.  He will likely enact border protections first, followed by the deportation of illegals who are threats to national security or criminal enterprises.  It is also likely he will moderate tariffs until he sees how the global economy and some of our competitors react to his re-taking office.  Knowing that excessive tariffs are paid not by the exporting nation as much as the US consumer, it is possible he will target various nations and industries to ensure he is taken seriously and that US consumers are more protected from rising costs.  His goal is to bring manufacturing back to the US and leverage decisions by Mexico and others.

Trump has suggested he would impose tariffs on all goods of between 10-20%. He also vowed to tax imports from Mexico, the U.S.’s No. 1 trading partner, by at least 25% if Mexico doesn’t help mitigate immigration to the U.S. Also, he has suggested a 60% tariff on Chinese goods.[7]  Trump is unlikely to want a trade war, but he is serious about US consumers being treated fairly, and equally serious about stopping illegal immigration.  These threats are real, but his lack of specificity may indicate he will hold fire on some of the more drastic measures and see how the international community reacts.  If Mexico does not make immediate progress on reducing the flow of illegals to the US southern border a series of tariff actions is likely to follow.

Regional Priorities

Trump has already been on the phone to world leaders in conflict ridden areas, although the exact content is unknown. It is likely he has warned Putin that his terms for peace in Ukraine are not acceptable while expressing a willingness to find a way forward in talks.  Trump probably correctly perceives that NATO expansion to Ukraine was in some measure a trigger for Putin’s invasion, but it may be too late to reverse that decision by NATO.  In the Middle East Trump may give Israel support while strongly urging the government to stop the killing and re-focus on hostage recovery.  Israeli gains in Lebanon and Gaza have been substantial in terms of eliminating hostile leadership, and this may be an inflection point allowing for the tempo of the fighting to decrease.  A promise of stern policy approaches to Iran would also be a welcome by Israel.

Rubio understands the threat from China on multiple levels, his discussions with Trump on their combined approach to China will yield some change in economic policy while continuing things like the CHIPS Act to ensure access to microchips and supporting software production capabilities.  Rubio will also probably attempt to strengthen ties with Asia’s other democracies, supporting freedom on China’s borders

Yemen will also be a focus area for the new Secretary of State.   Rubio has long believed that Biden’s decision to remove the Houthis from the list of foreign terrorist organizations shortly after taking office effectively lifted restrictions on their access to funding, weapons, and international support. He subsequently criticized Biden’s termination of support for Saudi-led counterterrorism operations against the Houthis, citing concerns about the humanitarian crisis in Yemen.  Instead of disarming, the Houthis have gained control of major population centers in Yemen, launched attacks on Abu Dhabi, and continued to terrorize civilians as well as international shipping through the Red Sea.[8]  Rubio as SecState will push for fewer limits on attacks against Houthi leadership and weapons storage sites.  Instead of tying up the US Navy in the Red Sea, he will push for relaxed policies with Saudi Arabia and the UAE, allowing them to lead the fight against Houthi terrorists with our support.

In today’s world of terrorist organizations, all roads lead to Iran.  Rubio has been clear that sanctions are necessary but despite passage of the Stop Harboring Iranian Petroleum (SHIP) Act, nothing has been done by the current administration.  In a statement prior to the election, Rubio and Senator Risch (R-ID) argued that Iran continues to fuel terror from the sales of illicit oil to Beijing and accused the Biden administration of not following the law which allows them to impose sanctions against those supporting Communist China’s purchase and delivery of Iranian oil.[9]

Tuning up Houthi leadership and pressuring Iran will have short term negative impacts but likely long-term benefits.  The market will react unenthusiastically to aggressive actions by the US and allies, but in the long-term maintaining pressure on China, reopening the Red Sea to trade and keeping Iran more in check will benefit all democratic nations.

Conclusion

It is likely the confirmation of Marco Rubio will have the most immediate effect on US political and economic policy.  Although many executive decisions will be forthcoming in the first weeks of the new Trump administration, the ones concerning trade and our responses to terrorism either directly or through our allies will be the most impactful.  Trump believes in his ability to influence leaders with his personality and is willing to use negative incentives when crossed.  The president will probably acknowledge the improved spending patterns of many NATO nations, while strongly encouraging the rest to meet their agreed-to 2% minimum contribution.  A complete withdrawal from NATO is unlikely but a restructuring of our priorities may be in the offing that would put more European nations at the front with US support.  How this is manifested will be challenging as NATO looks to the US for things like tactics, strategies, and equipment/technology development.

In terms of the administration, the Department of State will set more of the agenda due to Rubio’s experience, eloquence and intellect.  Defense will follow their lead or be embroiled in debates about things like the future of women in combat.  In the long-term maintaining pressure on China, reopening the Red Sea to trade and keeping Iran more in check will benefit all democratic nations.

 

About Michael Snodgrass

Michael Snodgrass retired from the U.S. Air Force as a Major General in 2011. He is currently the President of SG Strategic Solutions LLC.

He has extensive command and leadership experience in the U.S. Air Force and joint world, as well as a wide range of disciplines, including defense and aerospace, technology development, government acquisitions and requirements, foreign military sales and leadership coaching.

He consults with the government, defense industry and other businesses on a wide range of topics. In 2019 he became an adjunct contract professor supporting the U.S. Air Force on strategy and policy development.

From 2014 to 2016 he was Vice President, International Business Development at Raytheon Corp. Prior to that he was Director of U.S. Air Force and Federal Aviation Administration programs at Engility Corp.

General Snodgrass joined Burdeshaw and Associates in 2012 and is a Senior Consultant for numerous clients in the defense and aerospace sectors. Prior to his retirement, he was U.S. Air Force Assistant Deputy Under Secretary for International Affairs; responsible for formulating and executing USAF Policy, Strategy and Programs for Building Partnerships and integrating Air Force policy with international partner goals, totaling over $40 billion total program value.

From 2007 to 2010 he served as the first Chief of Staff, U.S. Africa Command. There, he was responsible for the construction of the country’s newest Unified Geographic Command.

He has commanded at the squadron, group and wing levels and has lived in/visited over 50 nations while in uniform. He has over 3500 flight hours in various aircraft including the F-16, F-15, F-4, C-130 and HH-60, as well as over 100 combat missions in Operation Desert Storm.

In addition, General Snodgrass teaches leadership and management courses. In his spare time, he provides leadership coaching and training to the U.S. Air Force ROTC unit at Florida State University.

[1] See:  https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/restoring-america-strength-marco-rubio?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=wp_todays_worldview

[2] See:  https://www.politico.eu/article/angela-merkel-slams-donald-trump-capitol-riot/

[3] See:  https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/natosource/trump-confirms-he-threatened-to-withdraw-from-nato/

[4] See:  https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2024/6/pdf/240617-def-exp-2024-en.pdf

[5] See:  https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-says-he-wont-quit-nato-if-europe-pays-its-way/

[6] See:  https://www.pgpf.org/budget-basics/budget-explainer-national-defense

[7] See:  https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/11/11/what-are-tariffs-trump/76195638007/

[8] See:  https://en.barran.press/news/topic/3189

[9] See: https://www.rubio.senate.gov/rubio-risch-on-biden-harris-continued-appeasement-of-iranian-regime/