In the early months of his second term, U.S. President Donald Trump has wasted no time asserting his combative “America First” vision of international politics – one that discards alliances, dismantles institutions, and replaces diplomacy with coercion. A good representation of this shift is the near-total dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). This federal agency has provided humanitarian aid and assistance in many developing countries for decades. And, no less important, it has been a cornerstone of U.S. influence and soft power since the Cold War. While previous administrations – Republican and Democratic alike – viewed foreign aid as a tool of strategic influence and humanitarian commitment, Trump sees it as a wasteful subsidy to ungrateful nations.
Trump’s America First approach is characterized by an open hostility toward traditional allies and institutions, in a much more pronounced way than during his first term. Just weeks into office, Trump withdrew the United States from the World Health Organization and (again) from the Paris Agreement, the most important agreement on fighting climate change. He has imposed ever-higher tariffs on allies and adversaries alike. His approach is not merely transactional – it is deliberately antagonistic, a bullying style of diplomacy that leverages the United States’ economic and military might while scorning the norms that once underpinned the postwar international order and that the U.S., on the front line, contributed to building.
Ironically, Trump’s approach to international relations is playing the game of his proclaimed main enemy: Xi Jinping’s China. For years, Beijing has been accused of using “sharp power” – a mix of economic coercion, diplomatic pressure, and information control – to undermine Western influence and reform the international order in a way that better suits Chinese interests. Under Trump, the United States seems to no longer resist the idea of a new global order. Instead, his administration is embracing China’s approach to international affairs.
As shown by the confrontation that took place in the Oval Office with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump’s worldview aligns more closely with Xi’s authoritarian pragmatism than with the liberal internationalism of his predecessors. Both leaders see global governance as a zero-sum game. Both are interested not in moral values but in practical gains. Both use state power unapologetically to secure strategic advantage. And both seek to bend smaller nations to their will – not through persuasion or partnership, but through leverage and intimidation.
Different Goals, Same Outcome
This convergence of strategic logic raises an unsettling question: Is the U.S., under Trump, unintentionally doing the ideological work of Beijing? By hollowing out institutions like USAID and undermining the legitimacy of alliances, Trump is weakening the very system that has for many years supported U.S. influence in the world and set the West apart from authoritarian challengers. He is, in effect, validating the Chinese argument that liberalism is in decline, that democracy is inefficient, and that power is the only real currency of global politics.
But now, as Trump’s second term reveals itself to be much more aggressive than the first, U.S. soft power might experience an irreversible decline, leaving some space for a rebound of China’s soft power.
The abrupt dismantling of USAID has halted essential humanitarian projects, healthcare initiatives, vaccination campaigns, and educational programs, directly harming vulnerable populations worldwide. This vacuum provides Beijing with a significant opportunity to expand its influence through global health diplomacy, especially in the Global South and Africa. China has increasingly positioned itself as a reliable health partner, providing medical aid, vaccines, and healthcare infrastructure to developing countries. In Africa, China’s extensive provision of medical supplies, training of local health workers, and the deployment of medical teams have deepened Beijing’s diplomatic ties and bolstered its image as a pragmatic and dependable ally.
The same is true for Trump’s cuts to Voice of America and Radio Free Asia, which have been well received by The Global Times, a Chinese Communist Party-led tabloid, reflecting the geopolitical advantage Beijing gains as the United States retreats from its traditional soft power roles. These cuts significantly diminish the U.S. ability to counter China’s narratives, especially in regions where Beijing seeks to project influence without Western interference. China’s own international broadcasting and media platforms, such as CGTN and Xinhua, now face less competition in shaping global perceptions, particularly across the developing world and Africa, where U.S. media previously offered alternative viewpoints. The erosion of U.S. media outreach allows Beijing to more effectively promote its state-centric narratives, reinforcing the image of China as a reliable partner and diminishing the resonance of criticisms related to human rights abuses or authoritarian governance.
