Trump's War on America

“Donald Trump is compromised,” Republican political consultant Stuart Stevens told former CNN news anchor Jim Acosta on January 19. “He’s acting as a functional asset of the Russian federation,” Stevens, who at one time served as Mitt Romney’s top campaign strategist continued. “And if you are a Republican senator and you’re going along with Donald Trump, he is compromising you….

The degree to which the Republican party has been compromised by Russia, I think, is one of the great underreported, understudied stories of our time. And it's been going on for a while. I mean, you go back to early warning signs, the way that they [Russia] funneled all this money into the NRA, and they were compromised by this, and then they clearly compromised the Heritage Foundation. And now you have that consistently for decades the single greatest antagonist to the Soviet Union and then an expansive Russian Federation was the most conservative element of the Republican party. And now it's the beating heart of the pro-Putin [constituency].... You don't say that you're a Ronald Reagan Republican, the guy that stood in front of [the Berlin wall and said] "Tear down the wall Mr. Gorbachev," and you go along with Donald Trump. No.  Either you're lying then or you're lying now. I think all this stuff that we put out as principles for the party were just marketing slogans.

Whether or not concrete evidence of Stevens’ assertion is ever found, it has become clear over the first year of the second Trump term that the effect of many policies and actions of the administration is to weaken the nation domestically and internationally, to cause harm and hardship for citizens at home, and to darken the vision of the nation’s future.

Ironically, Trump’s “America first” policies often line up with what a foreign rival like Russia might want to achieve. “So what we have gotten out of NATO is nothing,” Trump said last week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “… except to protect Europe from the Soviet Union and now Russia. I mean, we’ve helped them for so many years. We’ve never gotten anything,” he continued. In addition to ignoring indirect military, political, and economic benefits, Trump’s assertion ignores NATO’s invoking of Article 5 – its collective defense agreement – which has happened only once: after the terrorist attack on the US, September 11, 2001. A coalition of NATO forces fought for years alongside US military in Afghanistan, with many nations suffering casualties, notably Denmark which lost more than 40 soldiers.

In a related bogus assertion Trump claimed that until he “came along” the US was paying for “nearly 100% of NATO….” While the portion of the NATO budget covered by the US was significant it was nothing like 100%. (NATO documents show the US contributing 63% of the NATO defense budget in 2024, for example.) The US also contributed approximately 16% of the NATO organizational budget in 2025, down from approximately 23% at the beginning of Trump’s first term.

Trump also misunderstood or misrepresented how member nations contribute to NATO. NATO member nations agree to a target contribution of 2% of the nation’s domestic product, but the agreement does not create “bills” or money owed to the US as Trump claimed during his first term.

Trump’s denigration of NATO aligns with Vladimir Putin’s representation of the organization as an existential threat to Russia. Putin has portrayed the war in Ukraine as being waged against NATO and “the West.” From Russia’s point of view a fragmented NATO might reduce Europe’s defense capabilities and make member states more vulnerable to Russian economic or military pressure.

More generally, as the US withdraws from international agreements, such as the Paris Agreement on climate change, the Iran nuclear agreement, or defunds the US Agency for International Development (USAID), Russian and China may step in to fill the void.

While withdrawing from broad international agreements, however, Trump has recently invoked the “Donroe Doctrine,” an instance of his compulsive renaming, in this case of the “Monroe Doctrine.” The Monroe Doctrine, articulated in 1823 by then-President James Monroe, discouraged European colonization of areas in the western hemisphere in exchange for the US not engaging in European wars or other regional matters. What has also been called the “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine has been used to justify military actions in Venezuela and elsewhere in the Caribbean, while calling into question US relations with Europe. The document aligns with some European far-right policy positions at a time when rightist parties have become the leading political opposition to the parties in power in France, Germany, and other traditional European allies. And the siloed model of international influence largely mirrors the Russian vision of a “multipolar” world, replacing post-World War II US hegemony with more of a siloed international order, in particular recognizing Russia’s “privileged interests” in post-Soviet eastern Europe, particularly Ukraine, Georgia, and Belarus.

Trump administration economic policies have benefited Russia, as well. Although Trump claimed his tariff policies were intended to benefit US industries and punish foreign exporters, evidence shows that the burden has been borne largely by US firms and consumers. Nonetheless, in October the IMF’s chief economist, Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas told the BBC that, although the impact of the tariffs were “not as bad as expected,” “The effect of the tariff shock is there. It is negative for global outlook. It is weighing down on investment and consumption decisions, there is trade policy uncertainty….” Trade conflict between the US and its traditional allies of course benefits … Russia (and China), as the economic cohesion of the west is weakened. During his Russia visit in May of last year, Chinese President Xi Jinping told the Kremlin that, in the face of Trump’s oscillating tariffs on China, his nation stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Russia against US “hegemonic bullying.”

Domestically, Trump’s divisive rhetoric, attacking so-called “elites,” “the Deep State,” the judiciary, and “mainstream media” to a great extent mirrors Russian “hybrid warfare,” exacerbating internal divisions in western democracies to make them less effective globally. 

In September 2024 the Justice Department accused two Russians of helping to funnel $10 million to Tenet Media, a social media outlet connected to a company in Tennessee that engaged conservative media personalities Benny Johnson, Tim Pool, and Dave Rubin to spread Russia-friendly messages. The influencers, who were not themselves indicted, portrayed themselves as victims, although the indictment “details various efforts by the company’s sponsors to sow specific narratives, some of which appeared in the content they posted.” The following month US intelligence officials also identified Russia as behind false claims against Democratic candidates Tim Walz and Kamala Harris spread via Internet. 

Once elected, the Trump administration proceeded to “dismantl[e] the American government’s efforts to combat foreign disinformation,” clearly seen in the lead-up to the September 2025 parliamentary elections in Moldova. The US drastically reduced funds available to Moldova to combat Russian influence just as Russia launched an “intense campaign” to influence voters. Russian-created fake media included posts, videos, and complete websites whose content spread on TikTok, Telegram, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, aided by artificial intelligence.

Russian President Putin argued in June that increases in defense spending by NATO nations would “hurt them socially and economically.” Notably he did not include the US in his condemnation, giving Trump credit for easing tensions with Russia. On February 13, 2025 Trump described the US as wasting money on nuclear bombs when our nuclear arsenal can already “destroy the world 50 times over.” The next week Defense Secretary Hegseth called for cuts in the defense budget of $50 billion over the next year. It soon became clear, however, that the administration did not have true net cuts in mind, but rather re-allocation of funds to Trump-favored projects like missile defense and the militarization of borders.

When Trump announced his tariffs in April 2025 he crowed that “jobs and factories will come roaring back,” that his taxes on imports would open foreign markets and overcome trade barriers, leading to lower prices for Americans. Yet on Monday, December 8, Trump announced a $12 billion rescue program for farmers, who have suffered from the effects of the tariffs – especially China’s retaliation, halting purchases of US farm goods including soybeans. As the New York Times’ David Sanger put it, “Beijing is quickly learning how to thrive even in a world in which the United States becomes a tougher place to do business.” The day Trump announced his tariffs, China reported a record trade surplus.

Meanwhile, inflation continued upward in September, reaching approximately a 3% annual rate – roughly what it was at the end of the Biden administration. (The recently released December number was 2.7%.)

With regard to the war in Ukraine, Trump has fairly consistently spread Russian disinformation. In February 2025 after meeting with Russian officials in Saudi Arabia – a meeting from which Ukraine was excluded – Trump blamed the conflict on Kyiv. Trump accused Ukraine of starting the war, saying that they could have avoided conflict if they had made concessions to Russia before it sent in troops in 2022. Writing on The Bulwark website in February 2025, disinformation expert Nina Jankowicz described Trump as “openly colluding with Vladimir Putin in both narrative and action.” Trump, wrote Jankowicz, lied about Ukrainian President Zelensky’s support inside Ukraine, calling him a “dictator” whose popular support was “very low.” In fact, Jankowicz noted, Zelensky won the 2019 election with over 73% of the vote, and still enjoys nearly 60% of popular support – both numbers that “Trump himself could never reach,” Jankowicz quipped.

Trump’s repetition of Russian disinformation is not a mistake; it’s a clear signal that he is aligning the United States with Putin and other autocrats around the world. Along with the illegal dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development and the freeze of America’s foreign aid programs—both objects of longstanding Russian ire—as well as the ingratiation of wealthy technology executives with the administration, Trump is making clear that the United States and its influence can be bought….

In 2023, during the early days of the presidential campaign, it was RFK Jr., now Trump’s Secretary of Health and Human Services, who was “Russia’s Favorite Candidate,” according to Newsweek. Kyle Walter of information intelligence firm Logically.ai characterized Kennedy at the time as “pretty much directly sharing Russian propaganda,” particularly regarding the conflict in Ukraine. "I do think that in terms of propaganda, disinformation, [and] state media generally, there's been a lot of amplification of RFK recently just because he's pretty much sharing explicit Russian narratives," Walter said. For example, in July 2023 Kennedy posted on X  (formerly Twitter) “Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian youth have already died because America's foreign policy establishment manipulated their country into war to fulfill vain + futile geopolitical fantasy.” Kennedy’s comment was retweeted a few days later by the Russian embassy in South Africa.

In August 2024 Vanity Fair reported that Trump allies Roger Stone and Tucker Carlson, among others, had grown concerned about Trump’s lack of support among a cohort of Republicans who opposed vaccines. Stone and Carlson were concerned enough that they lobbied Trump to publicly distance himself from what might arguably be one of his actual achievement: Operation Warp Speed, the joint initiative that produced the COVID-19 vaccine in nine months. When Trump resisted, Carlson teamed up with Don Jr. to convince RFK Jr. to withdraw from the presidential race and endorse Trump, in exchange for what was initially described as “unrealistic expectations” that Kennedy might serve as Secretary of HHS. Kennedy was appointed honorary co-chair of Trump’s transition committee, working with former Democratic representative Tulsi Gabbard. Less than two weeks after winning the 2024 election, of course, Trump announced that RFK Jr. would indeed serve as his HHS Secretary.

As Secretary, RFK Jr. removed all 17 members of the government Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) – a committee within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that provides recommendations regarding the administration of vaccines to adults and children. He then appointed eight new members including: Martin Kulldorff, Ph. D., who co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration, which criticized public health measures taken during the COVID-19 epidemic including lockdowns; Robert Malone, M.D., who, among other dubious claims, suggested that the ongoing measles epidemic was the result of medical error.

Under RFK Jr. the CDC also revised its childhood vaccine schedule, removing longstanding recommendations for COVID, influenza, rotavirus, meningitis, hepatitis A and hepatitis B vaccines. At the Davos economic conference earlier this month, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, Ph. D., also called out Trump administration efforts to reduce university funding, noting competition with China for health-related innovations. ““We have a meteoric rise of Chinese innovation,” Bourla said. “They are producing serious innovation, serious science.”

RFK Jr. also: reduced funding and ended contracts for 22 mRNA vaccine projects; forced out CDC director Susan Monarez; discontinued a policy that rewarded hospitals for reporting staff vaccination rates. Kennedy also launched a campaign that emphasized the effect on health outcomes of the processing of foods, rather than nutritional value. And he announced studies on the causes of autism, including asserting without evidence that there was a connection between autism and acetaminophen (Tylenol), and promising further research on the debunked claim of links between vaccines and autism.

Writing for the website ScienceBasedMedicine.org, oncologist David Gorski of Wayne State University has labeled Kennedy’s Make American Healthy Again (MAHA) “The New Lysenkoism.” Lysenko was a Soviet agronomist who championed the notion that organisms can transmit to their offspring physical changes that the parents acquire during their lifetime, commonly referred to as Lamarckism. Lysenko eventually came to Stalin’s attention and in 1940 became head of genetics for the Soviet Academy of Sciences, a position he held until 1965. According to MIT’s Loren R. Graham, Lysenko’s theories were “dismissed by most of his peers,” but his political influence was such that “he managed to have many of his peers killed,” with the result that his views prevailed in the Soviet academy for decades.

David Gorski compares the forced resignations of scientists at HHS, including the FDA’s Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Peter Marks, to Lysenko’s purge of “the ideologically impure or suspect.” Gorski calls Marks “largely responsible” for Operation Warp Speed (rapid development of the COVID-19 vaccine. See above.) In Marks’ letter of resignation he wrote “… [I]t has become clear that truth and transparency are not desired by the Secretary, but rather he wishes subservient confirmation of his misinformation and lies.”

A rehabilitation of Lysenko in Russia began in 2009, when Putin was Prime Minister (the constitution at the time barring him from being president for more than two consecutive terms). The revival continued in 2014 and 2015 as scientists at the Russian Academy of Sciences and Moscow University defended Lysenko’s theories. And in 2014, in the early years of Putin’s eventual third term as president, the nationalized Federal Agency on the Press and Communications subsidized publication of a book containing many of Lysenko’s arguments, claiming to expose a worldwide ideological war on biology. Russian nationalist groups are now pushing to adopt a 2012 pro-Lysenko biology textbook in grade schools. This, writes David Gorski is “What happens when an ideological scientific crank becomes very powerful…. RFK Jr. wants to force scientists into not studying what he doesn’t want them to study and into studying what he does. Very Lysenkoist of him!”

On Thursday, March 20, 2025 Trump signed an executive order setting into motion his plan to dismantle of the Department of Education. The intent was that programs previously handled by the Education Department would be farmed out to other departments: student loans to the Small Business Administration, programs for students with disabilities by the Health and Human Services Department, etc. Trump previously advocated for turning over the functions of the Education Department to the states. Dismantling of the Education Department is part of the infamous Project 2025, a Heritage Foundation project that envisions a stunted federal government manned by party loyalists – in other words something very like what the second Trump administration has become.

The Brookings Institution’s report on cuts to the Education Department described them as “weaken[ing] the United States’ global competitive edge,” which it found inconsistent with the notion of “America First.”  As the report states, the Education Department budget is something like only 4% of the total – a benchmark that China, for example, has recently exceeded. In Brookings' estimation, cutting the Education Department budget will “stifle the U.S. economy and force businesses to recruit more foreign workers.” At them same time foreign students and scholars are opting out of US schools and conferences citing concerns about dealing with US immigration enforcement. A recent survey by technical staffing firm Specialist Staffing Group found that nearly a third of tech professionals reported being open to relocation (i.e. away from the US). In January 2025 Elon Musk posted on social media regarding the shortage of skilled engineers: "If you force the world's best talent to play for the other side, America will LOSE.”

During Trump’s first term, university enrollment of international students dropped 15%. Meanwhile the number of international students looking to study in countries such as China, Canada, and the UK, is increasing, according to Brookings. States weathered uncertainty in 2025 regarding education, as federal funds became unavailable or uncertain. “Schools need more funding and support, not less. Preventing kids from learning better prevents them from doing better when they become adults…,” the Brookings report said.

Finally, returning to foreign affairs, political science professors Daniel Drezner and Elizabeth Saunders wrote recently in Foreign Affairs magazine that Trump has “accelerated and even embraced” the end of the post-1945 world order. Although “Trump did not inherit a peaceful international environment,” they wrote, “no global war had erupted.” The US still had its network of allies, a reliable diplomatic “apparatus,” and arguably the leading scientific infrastructure in the world. 

In one year, however, Trump has undone most of those advantages, gutting or surrendering them despite their value to the United States in its competition for great-power dominance….

Trump’s gutting of foreign aid and the infrastructure of U.S. scientific and technological dominance, his dangerous confrontation with stalwart European allies, and, most damaging of all, his use of the military and federal security forces to consolidate his domestic authority will, in the long run, undermine American power. Estranged allies are already reaching out to China and one another to hedge against an erratic United States. Whether these actions succeed or not, they weaken the United States and make China relatively more attractive for smaller powers seeking security. In Trump’s zero-sum global order, it is the United States that will eventually pay the price.