Brzezinski, who leads the Brzezinski Group and serves as a Senior Fellow at both the Atlantic Council’s Europe Center and the Brent Scowcroft Center on Strategy and Security, shares his thoughts on U.S. relations with Europe, Russia, China, Canada, and beyond. This discussion explores the consequences of Trump’s unorthodox foreign policies and how they could influence the global order.
Q: What is your take on how the world is changing in the era of President Trump? Is the world order drastically shifting?
Brzezinski:
Trump is definitely introducing a new approach to international affairs, especially in terms of U.S. interests. He is moving away from the traditional focus on values and alliances, replacing it with a more mercantile, transactional style. He appears to view international relations through an economic and security lens, but with different priorities. For example, he seems to view the Western Hemisphere—especially the U.S. southern border—as central to U.S. security, while Europe, in his view, is more of an economic competitor than a strategic partner. In contrast, he has bolstered the U.S. military presence at the southern border, focusing on immigration as an urgent threat.
Q: How do you interpret his stance toward Russia?
Brzezinski:
Trump has repeatedly expressed a desire to work with Russia, often calling the country a potential partner. His Secretary of State has shared similar sentiments after their discussions. This is reminiscent of past attempts at “resetting” relations with Russia, but previous resets have ended in failure and often worsened tensions. I find it concerning that Trump seems to be repeating the same mistakes by trying to treat Russia as an ally, despite its aggressive behavior and history of undermining U.S. interests.
Q: How does Trump approach the Middle East, particularly with regard to Gaza and the Palestinian issue?
Brzezinski:
Trump’s rhetoric on Gaza and the Palestinian situation has been deeply troubling. His statements about pushing Palestinians out of their homeland are not only immoral, they are also destabilizing. Forcing people from their land would likely incite unrest and generate significant resentment from the Arab world. Such actions could ignite a broader regional conflict, making the situation even more volatile.
Q: Do you think Trump might push the U.S. to leave NATO? He has shown skepticism toward the alliance in the past.
Brzezinski:
Trump has certainly demonstrated skepticism toward NATO, perhaps more than any of his predecessors. However, despite his criticism, he has consistently stated that he has no plans to leave NATO and has even expressed pride in pressuring allies to increase their defense spending. I believe NATO will remain intact under his leadership, though the pressure on Europe to spend more on defense will likely continue.
Q: What is your opinion on Trump’s relationship with Canada? Why is there such tension?
Brzezinski:
Trump has had a strained relationship with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. One of the main reasons for this is the Canadian government’s effective resistance during NAFTA renegotiations. Trump’s ambitious plans to overhaul NAFTA were largely watered down due to Canada’s negotiating skills. Additionally, Trump has a broader goal of territorial expansion, and this could be contributing to tensions with Canada, as well as with other regions like Greenland.
Q: Do you think the U.S. tariffs will harm the American economy in the long run?
Brzezinski:
While tariffs can be effective tools in some situations, Trump’s approach has been blunt and erratic, leading to a lack of confidence in his economic strategy. The ongoing back-and-forth on tariffs, particularly in the car industry, could hurt American consumers and businesses in the long term. For example, the Ford F-150, a top-selling truck, may become non-competitive internationally due to tariffs, which could lead to price hikes and decreased sales.
Q: Is China considered the U.S.’s number one threat now, as it was during Trump’s first term?
Brzezinski:
China remains a major concern for the U.S., both economically and militarily. It is often referred to as the “pacing threat,” a term used to describe a significant challenge that the U.S. must stay ahead of. The difference now is that Trump’s stance on Russia is evolving, and while Russia’s aggressive actions remain a concern, his current rhetoric treats Russia more as a potential partner, which is worrying, given the security risks it poses.
Q: What do you think about Turkey’s relationship with the U.S. and the possibility of its alignment with Europe on defense matters?
Brzezinski:
Turkey is strategically important, especially due to its complex relationship with Russia. While Erdogan has a closer rapport with Moscow than most European countries, he also understands that a strong partnership with Europe is crucial for his security interests. With the U.S. increasingly distant from Europe, Turkey may turn to European countries for collaboration, especially as it seeks to play a larger role in addressing Russian aggression.
Q: Do you think countries like South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines should start thinking about their own defense mechanisms, given U.S. uncertainty?
Brzezinski:
Absolutely. Countries in the Indo-Pacific are closely watching the developments in Europe and the U.S.’s commitment to defending Ukraine. If the U.S. continues to show weakness in its European commitments, countries like South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines will likely reassess their own security strategies and may need to rely more heavily on their own defense capabilities or regional alliances.
Q: Can American democracy withstand the kind of shifts that Trump is pushing through? Is there enough resilience in the U.S. political system?
Brzezinski:
Despite the challenges posed by Trump’s actions, I believe American democracy has strong enough checks and balances to withstand his attempts to alter the political system. The resilience of U.S. institutions and culture is vital, and while we are currently in a challenging period, the long-term outlook remains positive. I would bet on the U.S. in the long run, as it has weathered many storms before. The midterm elections will be a crucial moment to gauge the level of support or opposition Trump’s policies generate.
Q: Do you think the midterm elections will show significant opposition to Trump’s policies?
Brzezinski:
Yes, the midterm elections will be a key moment for assessing the public’s reaction to Trump’s initiatives. His narrow victory in 2024 and the tight margins in Congress mean that his political mandate isn’t as strong as his administration might claim. If his policies lead to significant opposition, the midterms could signal a shift in the political landscape.
