The midterm elections in the United States usher in a new period of political uncertainty, with consequences that extend far beyond America’s borders. Donald Trump is entering the final phase of his presidency with limited scope for domestic reform, but considerable room to manoeuvre on the international stage.
American political history shows that presidents who lose their legislative strength often turn to foreign policy in an effort to secure their legacy. Some pursue historic agreements, while others resort to military operations. The difference lies in how power is exercised, the quality of the decisions made, and an awareness of their potential consequences.
In Trump’s case, the problem is not simply his political weakening. It is the combination of his personally unpredictable conduct, his confrontational view of international relations, and his limited trust in institutional decision-making mechanisms.
A president who feels politically constrained may seek to regain the initiative through actions carrying significant geopolitical risks.
The Middle East is the most sensitive arena. A new military escalation against Iran could destabilise the entire region, disrupt energy markets, and trigger a chain reaction across the global economy. Similarly, a more aggressive policy towards Cuba would reignite long-standing confrontations without any guarantee of success.
At the same time, Europe must prepare for potential upheavals in transatlantic relations, US support for Ukraine, and the management of its relations with Russia and China.
The underlying issue, however, runs deeper. The concentration of enormous international power in the hands of a single leader, without adequate political checks and balances, exposes the weaknesses of an international system that remains excessively dependent on the decisions made in Washington.
Europe cannot afford to remain a passive observer. It needs a unified foreign policy, credible defence capabilities, and strategic autonomy.
The greatest challenge of the next two years will not simply be what Trump decides to do, but whether the rest of the world will be prepared to deal with the consequences of his decisions.
Because in foreign policy, the absence of political constraints does not necessarily translate into greater freedom. More often, it means greater risks for everyone.