(check against delivery)
TRUMP 2.0 IMPLICATIONS FOR KOREA AND THE WORLD
6 August 2025, Nairobi, Kenya
It is a rare privilege for me to be able to come from East Asia to this dynamic city of Nairobi to speak about Korea and the world at a time of such turbulence, change, and uncertainty.
Today, the world is facing a big question. It is whether the map of the world’s hegemonic power is changing. In other words, who will write history’s chapter for the rest of the 21stcentury? And will there be an end to the long American century?
For over a century, the US has been the predominant global norm-setter, especially since the end of the Second World War. However, its traditional power projection capabilities are now seen increasingly unstable, and China is rapidly chasing the US from behind.
The current international situation is stained by ongoing crises, chaos, and changes caused by the twin wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, regional conflicts, climate crisis, pandemics, global supply chain disruption and so on. Underlying these crises is the growing distrust in global governance mechanisms, complicating any cohesive international response.
At the core of these disruptions lies the resurgence of great power rivalry and the return of geopolitics.
Bluntly speaking, President Trump's return to the Oval Office contributes to the worsening and complicating of various global issues. His guiding slogan, “MAGA (Make America Great Again), now resonates like a troubling current condition of the US in global affairs.
Some pundits say that the identity of the US is shifting from full-fledged liberal democracy to so-called competitive authoritarianism, a system that can be observed in many illiberal democracies.
At the same time, his transactional viewpoint is shaking the world with tariffs as its main weapon. This manifests itself in leading the US to policies of protectionism, xenophobia (anti-immigration), isolationism, as well as expansionism.
In particular, his unique view of alliances is making traditional allies and longstanding friends uncomfortable while causing other autocratic or authoritarian leaders to cheer. Indeed, we are now standing at a historical inflection point– one that invites us to look beyond traditional power centers and acknowledge the emergence of new actors on the world stage.
Let me pause here briefly to acknowledge the importance of our host continent, Africa, in this global transition. Africa, particularly East Africa, is no longer merely a passive geopolitical stage but an active agent in shaping multilateral cooperation. The continent’s youthful population, rich resources, and growing economic ambition place it squarely at the center of the shifting global order. The current reconfiguration of power presents a window of opportunity for Africa to help define new norms of diplomacy, development, and solidarity.
(Impact on the Korean Peninsula)
Allow me to now turn to the Korean Peninsula.
With the inauguration of the new government on June 4, domestic political uncertainty was thankfully resolved. President Lee Jae-myung demonstrated to the world that Korea is back to business as normal by participating at G7 summit meeting in June in Canada. But he faces both longstanding and emerging challenges in domestic and foreign policies.
Pragmatism in foreign policy is a keyword for the Lee Jae-myung administration. He proclaimed that he will put priorities on the Korea-US alliance and trilateral security cooperation between Korea, the US, and Japan, and, at the same time, pursue pragmatic diplomacy with neighboring countries like China.
This raised some debates regarding the compatibility of the two positions. Unusually, the US government spokesperson announced that US remained concerned and opposed to ongoing Chinese interference and influence in democracies around the world.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry immediately responded that Beijing never interferes in other countries' internal affairs and warned the US to not project its actions onto Beijing and stop driving wedges in China-South Korea relations.
This is but one example that demonstrates how President Lee has before him a set of difficult and sensitive problems that require a higher-degree equation to navigate.
The US is the only country with which the Republic of Korea maintains a treaty alliance. With 28,500 troops currently stationed in South Korea, the US will soon put pressure on burden-sharing issue. The US recently demanded that allies, including Korea, increase their defense spending to 5% of GDP. Trump has previously depicted South Korea as a “money machine” and demanded it bear more costs for hosting US troops. Friction over cost-sharing could carry the potential to grow into larger issues like US troop reduction or withdrawal. Indeed, in his first term, President Trump harbored ideas of reducing or withdrawing US troops from South Korea.
While troop withdrawal is unlikely without US Congressional support, it would create anxiety in Seoul as North Korea may misinterpret Trump’s rhetoric as a weakening of US security commitments to South Korea.
President Lee will also face two security-related issues with the US. Those are the issue of ‘strategic flexibility’, which connotes the extended role of US troops beyond the Korean Peninsula; and the transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON), which is now in the authority of the US commander in Korea.
These issues will be viewed as sort of ‘litmus paper’ to gauge the future of the alliance relationship between the two countries.
On North Korea matters, Trump has been beckoning to Kim Jong Un with the intention of resuming the same high-stakes, “top-down” style summit meetings that transpired twice during his first term. The new South Korean government also recently sent rapprochement signals by unilaterally prohibiting private sector’sflights of leaflets from the South and turning off the military loudspeakers installed along the DMZ line.
North Korea reciprocated by suspending their noise broadcasting toward the South. However, the North has so far refused to receive President Trump’s personal letter addressed to Kim Jong Un.
Given the new reality of rapidly strengthening military cooperation with Russia, Kim Jong Un may find little incentive from the US, let alone South Korea, assuming he has the upper hand in future negotiations with the US.
In South Korea, it has been a long-time dilemma as to how extensively the rapprochement approach, sometimes dubbed the “sunshine policy,” can be offered to the North without addressing the fundamental questions of North Korea’s nuclear development program and its extremely hostile attitude toward the South.
(Impact on Global Affairs)
Now, let us turn more broadly to the impact of President Trump’s policies on Europe and other regions.
President Trump has, more often than not, criticized NATO allies for their so-called “free ride” on the US security umbrella without due contribution for collective European security. NATO countries recently agreed to increase their defense spending to 5% of GDP by 2035, accommodating the demand of President Trump.
He has once threatened to reduce aid to Ukraine, potentially tipping the balance in Russia’s favor. Aligning with adversaries and alienating friends is a serious mistake that could embolden Russia, weaken transatlantic unity, and thereby destabilize security not only in Europe but beyond.
The US air strike on 3 Iranian nuclear sites on June 21 was a shocking departure from its conventional policy of keeping distance with direct military involvement in Iran. Two days after the bombing, President Trump announced, and Israel and Iran agreed on cease-fire. But the situation remains fragile and volatile and the war left a lingering geopolitical effect on the region and beyond. The assessment on the scope and scale of the bombing damage is still a subject of debate and dispute. How long can the cease-fire hold? Will the diplomatic negotiation follow to deal with Iran’s nuclear program? How would other countries like Moscow, Beijing and Pyongyang interpret all these? For now, there are more questions raised than the answers made.
Concurrently, Trump’s isolationist tendencies mean the sharp reduction of traditional US involvement in global institutions (e.g., UN, WHO), leaving a power vacuum.
US withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement for the second time has definitely weakened US commitment to climate targets, severely hurting global coordination.
Many countries around the globe now see the United States as an unreliable partner. This loss of credibility undermines not only American diplomatic leverage, but also the broader multilateral system.
The world has evolved beyond a US-centric model of climate leadership. The European Union has pursued robust climate action with consistency, introducing mechanisms like the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and legally binding net-zero targets.
At the same time, China has emerged as the world’s largest investor in renewable energy, accounting for almost half of all global investments in clean energy technologies in 2023.
In this multipolar climate landscape, the US finds itself increasingly alienated as others advance and temperatures keep surging. Climate leadership may no longer wait for Washington.
In addition, bypassing institutions like the WTO, IMF, and World Bank has caused a major ripple effect in Africa as reducing foreign aid (USAID), closing diplomatic missions, and disregarding the effective role of the UN has compounded preexisting development challenges.
As a result, the spirit of multilateralism and global cooperation has been severely damaged. Eventually, this hurts the soft power and long-term interest of the US.
At the beginning of President Trump’s first term, as his drastic policies sharply broke with conventional practice, people were wondering whether it was a temporary aberration in US policy, or the beginning of permanent disarray into the future.
Three and a half years from now, the Trump era will be over. Yet the damage has already, to a certain degree, left lasting scars, and some undesirable impacts on the international community will surely continue to linger into the future.
As the overall role and influence of the United States in the world change, China endeavors to outsmart the US in every possible area it can try. Russia will attempt to follow suit. Other groups like the BRICS will raise their independent voices whenever possible. And in this multipolar world, the US will then no longer be able to claim its dominant status.
(Conclusion)
Taken in full, Trump 2.0 pursues two mutually-contradictory policies simultaneously. It tries to both impose its position on the world, and distance itself from the world. This will ignite foreign policy unpredictability and chaos, and contribute to destabilizing the international order; especially regarding alliances, trade, and diplomacy.
For South Korea, as its new administration settles, US unpredictability could mean not only extra pressure on defense spending but also greater regional insecurity, and more difficult navigation of the US-China rivalry.
For the world, it could signal a vivid shift away from cooperative global governance to the doctrine of “every man for himself,” elevated transactionalism in international relations, and ever-rising geopolitical tensions across Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.
And yet, the world, in its current composition, is not properly poised to deal with these worrisome phenomena. It is important that we must remind ourselves of the principle of multilateralism; cooperation and inclusiveness rather than confrontation and exclusive attitudes.
United efforts to promote international cooperation, considering the role of the Global South, and strengthening key cooperation between developed and developing countries are now needed more than ever.
Korea has risen from the shackles of colonial rule and the ashes of war to one of the world’s top 10 economic powers. And Korea owes much of its birth and prosperous life afterwards to the UN, its only ally and the international community. Indeed, Korea is the only country that has transformed itself from an aid recipient country to donor status after WWII.
But Korea does not forget its past, nor the path it took to get to where it is now. And today, Korea wishes to pay this forward to international society by actively engaging and helping those in need through a variety of actions.
In June last year, the Korean government hosted the Korea-Africa Summit and announced plans to provide $10 billion in official development assistance (ODA) by 2030 to strengthen the foundation for sharing Korea’s development experience and promoting cooperation with African countries.
But rather than limiting Korea’s global role to traditional development assistance or security alliances, Korea now envisions a more equal and forward-looking partnership with Africa. Areas such as green technology, digital innovation, smart infrastructure, and education offer powerful opportunities for co-creation and mutual advancement. This evolving approach reflects Korea’s desire to work with African nations not as donors to recipients, but as strategic collaborators shaping a shared future.
This is just one of the many policies that exemplify Korea’s will to reach out to the world. Such collaboration aligns closely with the forum’s call for inclusive, sustainable, and strategic cooperation between the Global South and emerging middle powers. Korea will continue its policy of tailored ODA programs that accommodate as much Africa’s necessities as possible.
In this changing world, the Republic of Korea is able and willing, and stands ready, to actively contribute to restoring multilateralism and promoting unity between the global South and North through the exercise of its unique position as one of robust and responsible middle powers. Thank you. /END/
|
