resident Donald Trump's renewed emphasis on dividing the international system into spheres of influence represents an overdue recognition of geopolitical reality over ideological fantasy. For decades, American foreign policy has been imprisoned by the illusion that the post-Cold War “unipolar moment” would last forever—that Washington could reshape the world in its image through democracy promotion, humanitarian interventions, and ever-expanding security commitments.
Trump’s approach, whatever its rhetorical excesses, acknowledges what every serious student of international relations understands: Great powers have legitimate security interests in their near abroad, and attempting to deny this reality produces conflict rather than preventing it.
The bipartisan foreign policy establishment clings to the notion that America must maintain primacy everywhere, all the time. This maximalist vision has produced a series of costly failures ranging from Iraq, to Libya, to the futile attempt to integrate Ukraine into NATO’s orbit—an effort which contributed to the current catastrophe. The spheres of influence framework offers an alternative: recognizing that Russia has interests in Eastern Europe, that China has interests in East Asia, and yes, that America has interests in the Western Hemisphere.
This is not appeasement, but prudence. It’s the difference between George Kennan’s containment of the Soviet Union and the neoconservatives’ project of global transformation. The Monroe Doctrine, after all, was itself a sphere of influence claim—one that served American security for generations.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member