Trump’s proudly professed vision of greatness has once again become foreign policy, casting doubts over the stability of America’s relationships with even its closest allies. Could this sudden shift in paradigm strengthen China’s positions globally?
Donald Trump’s territorial pursuits are handing China geopolitical gifts that Beijing’s strategists couldn’t have engineered better themselves. As Washington stakes claims to Greenland, the Panama Canal, and Gaza’s “Riviera,” it dismantles its own authority to challenge China’s expansionist agenda.
The irony cuts deep: each American grab for a plot of land provides China with fresh ammunition to justify its own ambitions. Beijing can now frame its claims over Taiwan and contested waters not as aggression but as strategic necessity—mirroring Washington’s rhetoric in the name of “international security.” This transformation extends beyond mere territorial disputes; it fundamentally rewrites what constitutes legitimate geopolitical action in the 21st century.
The seeds were planted earlier, with the 2021 U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan signaling the sunset of Pax Americana and the beginning of an era steeped in imperial nostalgia. As Washington’s renewed ambitions fluctuate between the Arctic, Middle East, and Latin America, it has inadvertently legitimized aggression— such as Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine.
U.S. Special Envoy to Ukraine and Russia Keith Kellogg meets with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in Kyiv, Ukraine, February 20, 2025, ramping up talks on the minerals deal.
Trump’s Europe Exit, Beijing Walks In
Trump’s expansionism comes with a flip side: retrenchment in Europe, abandoning the continent to its fate, most evident in the case of Ukraine. In contrast, those who believed Biden’s approach to Kyiv was altruistic missed the mark. The strategy was to prolong the war as much as possible—weakening Russia, selling arms, while avoiding direct risks.
U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham referred to the war as a “goldmine,” revealing the underlying calculus: “We haven’t lost one soldier, we’ve reduced the combat power of the Russian army by 50 percent… this is the best money we’ve ever spent.” Trump, however, views the situation through a different lens—focused not on pre-war impact but on the post-business aftermath: critical minerals and reconstruction deals are waiting.
China now has access to every chapter of the U.S. playbook for potential expansions, and as a result, sees Trump’s second term not as a threat, but as an opportunity. The real prize is the unraveling of U.S. dominance, even as Trump strives to project the opposite.
In reality, American diplomatic hooliganism has shattered the illusion of Washington as a steadfast guardian of global order. The withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, erratic alliance management—particularly in Europe—, and a regression to 19th-century territorial ambitions expose a foreign policy driven by raw self-interest rather than principle.
This reorientation in priorities is precisely why the Communist Party of China focuses not on reacting to U.S. theatrics but on recalibrating its long-term strategy. While American politics unfolds like a reality show, Beijing will quietly advance its ambitions, shaping a future based on its own calculations—not the impulses of the Oval Office.
In this context, Europe has emerged as China’s greatest opportunity. Trump’s Greenland gambit, direct talks with Putin over Ukraine—bypassing both Kyiv and European allies—along with tariffs and aggressive rhetoric from him and JD Vance against the EU, have deepened transatlantic rifts. Furthermore, their interference in member states’ elections only worsens the divide, though this should come as no surprise, given that many of these states attempted to hamper the U.S. last election as well.
By sidelining Brussels and undermining NATO’s collective security, Washington signals that America’s commitments to Europe are not just conditional but expendable. This reorientation is crucial for China, which, following the failure of the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI)—negotiated over seven years but never ratified by the EU due to U.S. interference—now finds itself reassessing its relationship with Europe.
The hardline stance of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has so far hindered meaningful engagement. However, with Europe distracted and fragmented by U.S. actions, China sees a fresh opportunity to strengthen alliances and reshape its relationship with Brussels.
Europe’s Strategic Paralysis Opens the Floodgates
Already adrift, Europe now faces a U.S. administration that treats it with open disdain. Torn between outrage and dependence, it cannot formulate a coherent response—leaving Xi Jinping a perfectly placed opportunity to extend his influence.
Brussels’ latest reactions to American contempt reveal not only institutional paralysis but also profound strategic missteps. Von der Leyen, isolated from Trump’s inner circle and still waiting for the White House call, scrambles to reassert Europe’s subservience by doubling down on transatlantic loyalty—pouring funds into American LNG and defense firms.
After years of hawkish rhetoric on China, she recently pivoted—with all the credibility of a used car salesman’s warranty—toward “constructive engagement with China,” calling for a “more balanced relationship.” Her 2025 Davos address softened criticism of Beijing, framing the 50th anniversary of EU-China relations as “an opportunity to engage and deepen our relationship.”
The EU’s strategic confusion manifests in more diplomatic contradictions. The spectacle is remarkable—perhaps unprecedented. High Representative Kaja Kallas’ novel concept of China as “partly malign” while affirming Washington as Europe’s “most consequential partner and ally” reveals the boundaries of her geopolitical vision. Meanwhile, Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič’s waiting months for contact with Trump’s team while declining Beijing’s invitations, exemplifies Brussels’ self-defeating approach to “strategic autonomy.” The absurdity speaks for itself.
This endless parade of inconsistencies seems to have no end in sight. When historians look back on this era—if they deem the positions of these leaders worth studying— they won’t believe the extent of their ineptitude. Take Friedrich Merz, the presumed next German chancellor, who dutifully recites calls to contain an “axis of autocracies,” lumping together China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea without a hint of nuance. He even champions a “permanent” European naval presence in the Indo-Pacific, as if Europe had the means—or the inclination—to project power globally when it cannot even handle Ukraine.
Reality, however, has a way of intruding. At the Munich Security Conference, American Vice President JD Vance did not bother entertaining Merz’s grandstanding. Instead, he sat down with the leader of the AfD—the far-right party now polling second in Germany—delivering a far clearer message about where American priorities lie. Vance’s pointed speech buttressed the move, labeling the EU as an entity fraught with American enemies—an unsettling portrayal that shows, though, he has not been keeping up with Brussels’ stances.
JD Vance has met with the leader of Germany’s far-right Alternative für Deutschland party, breaking a taboo in German politics as the Trump administration continues to court and promote far-right populist parties across Europe.
In Beijing, this is met with incredulity. Although the speech may contain certain truths about European overregulation, energy dependencies, and the impact of “woke culture,” it requires deeper analysis to understand its true significance and how it will affect Sino-European relations.
Because Vance also demonstrated an inability to differentiate between the effects of war, murder, and destruction, and the harm of European overregulation on American big tech—grouping them together. He proclaimed the “arrival of a new sheriff” in Washington, as though that was a positive development. This, from the same person who, with equal certainty, declared in 2016, “What percentage of the American population has Donald Trump sexually assaulted?” Despite the amount of incongruities in his 19-minute speech, his central message was clear: the West as we’ve known it for the last seven decades is finished.
Indeed, EU member states struggle to offer any viable alternative or credibility in the face of this chaos, due to a lack of leadership. Berlin is consumed by election jitters, Paris by economic turmoil, and Madrid by corruption scandals. With Franco-German leadership in disarray, the EU drifts without direction. Italy and Poland may show more resilience, but they cannot make up for a paralyzed Brussels. Europe isn’t merely distracted—it is fundamentally incapable of asserting itself on the global stage.
Lastly, NATO’s predicament sharpens the crisis even further. Trump demands increased defense spending while simultaneously scaling back commitments, pushing an impossible 5% target when even Washington struggles to meet it. Europe already directs 63% of its military procurement to American firms—any increase only deepens this dependence. Meanwhile, Trump’s reluctance toward new conflicts forces NATO to forget its Asian ambitions, another win for China.
From MAGA to MCEA: Make China Empowered Again
For Beijing, this confluence of events represents a strategic jackpot beyond its wildest expectations, which transforms Xi’s China Dream from aspiration to achievable reality. Each U.S. unilateral action validates Xi’s national rejuvenation and approach to international relations. With Europe, this change could begin with a speedy renegotiation and potential adoption of the CAI.
As Washington’s credibility erodes, Beijing’s patient, systematic expansion of influence will appear increasingly attractive to nations seeking stability in their international relationships; when great-power disputes are driven by personal whims rather than institutional structures, smaller nations reconsider their alignments. And, this is how great powers—and those vying for the title—operate.
This moment goes beyond a simple power transition—it signals a profound reordering of the global system. The world is not merely witnessing a changing of the guard, but the rapid disintegration of the West as a geopolitical entity, with China poised to capitalize on the ensuing turmoil. As the ripple effects of Trump’s actions reverberate across the international stage, they don’t just hasten China’s ascent—they legitimize its vision for a post-American world order.
