Trump's Imperialist Expansionism and Military Force

Throughout history, empires have often justified their expansionist desires with benevolent explanations. These justifications frequently took on messianic tones, ranging from the medieval concept of saving souls to the supposedly civilizing and progressive enterprises that justified the colonization of peoples presented as savage.

Historical imperialism typically masked its predatory instincts behind a facade of moral obligation or cultural superiority. This pattern of behavior allowed empires to pursue their strategic and economic interests while maintaining a veneer of legitimacy in the eyes of their own populations and the international community.

However, the current resurgence of imperial and colonizing behavior represents a distinct departure from these historical traditions of justification.

The expansionist policies associated with Donald Trump are noted for lacking the traditional scruples of historical empires. This approach is defined by a cynical willingness to confess interested purposes openly, abandoning the pretense of benevolent motives that characterized previous eras of imperialism.

Confidence in the use of military force serves as the organizing principle for international relations within this framework. It is utilized as a standard instrument of diplomacy rather than a last resort.

The specific characteristics of this geopolitical stance include:

• The brutal exhibition of violence as a primary tool
• The elevation of personal design as the supreme law
• Active intervention in the sovereignty of other nations
• A distinct lack of regard for established legal norms

This approach is described as ferocious, mirroring the aggression of past imperial powers, but distinguished by its open admission of force as the central mechanism of foreign policy.

A central pillar of this foreign policy is the explicit disregard for legality. This disregard extends to both the international institutions designed to maintain global order and the domestic legal structures of the United States.

By rejecting the authority of international law, this approach undermines the framework of global governance that has existed since the mid-20th century. Simultaneously, the erosion of respect for domestic institutions creates a parallel internal vulnerability.

This dual rejection of legal constraints allows for the pursuit of expansionist projects and interventions in foreign sovereign territories without the hindrance of judicial oversight or diplomatic protocol.

The text posits that the European Union can no longer afford to ignore the threat posed by this expansionist ideology. The era of using half-words or diplomatic ambiguity to navigate these tensions is presented as over.

The aggressive nature of the policies championed by Donald Trump requires a more substantive response than vague diplomatic statements. The threat is characterized as direct and consequential to the stability of international relations.

Failure to recognize the severity of this shift in global power dynamics could leave the European Union vulnerable to the coercive diplomacy and military pressure that defines this new imperialist wave.