The writer is an economist,
anchor, analyst and
the President of the All Pakistan Private Schools Federation
president@Pakistanprivateschools.com
A second Donald J. Trump’s presidential term would mark a return to an era of unpredictable foreign policy, characterised by chaotic decision-making and a departure from traditional diplomatic norms. His “America First” approach would continue to prioritize national interests over international cooperation, leading to a shift away from President Biden’s alliance-building and internationalist approach. This change in direction would likely lead to increased tensions with China, a reevaluation of NATO and other alliances, and a more isolationist stance on the global stage. The victory and return of Donald Trump to the White House in 2025 could introduce profound shifts in global politics, significantly affecting Pakistan. Trump’s foreign policy, grounded in “America First” principles, emphasizes direct gains over cooperative global frameworks. This realignment impacts U.S.-Pakistan relations, influencing Pakistan’s diplomacy, economic stability, and regional security strategy. Pakistan, positioned as a critical geopolitical player between South Asia and the Middle East, faces unique challenges as it balances relations with the U.S., China, and neighbouring nations. This delves deeply into the potential impacts on Pakistan’s geopolitical strategy, economic stability, security apparatus, and domestic policies under a renewed Trump administration. As we explore the Trump administration’s potential influence on U.S.-Pakistan relations, the discussion covers Pakistan’s historical context with the U.S., regional alliances, potential strategies for adapting to shifting dynamics, and the implications for Pakistan’s broader foreign policy objectives. The Trump administration’s first term (2017-2021) brought significant changes to this relationship, marked by a transactional approach. Pakistan experienced funding cuts, diplomatic pressure, and demands to address terrorism more aggressively. This period redefined U.S.-Pakistan relations, with Trump emphasizing Pakistan’s perceived failures in counter-terrorism. Trump’s re-election could intensify these dynamics, requiring Pakistan to reconsider its strategic objectives, especially regarding its partnerships with China and other regional players. The U.S.-China rivalry is expected to be a cornerstone of Trump’s foreign policy, compelling Pakistan to navigate carefully between these two powers. Pakistan’s relationship with China, notably through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), provides substantial economic and infrastructural support crucial for Pakistan’s growth. However, Trump’s stance against China could pressure Pakistan to limit its engagement with Beijing, especially if sanctions or restrictions target countries involved in Belt and Road Initiative projects. This pressure places Pakistan in a dilemma. While the U.S. remains a vital trade partner and source of development aid, China offers infrastructure investments and strategic support that the U.S. does not provide. A Trump administration may view Pakistan’s alignment with China as contrary to American interests, leading to economic or diplomatic repercussions. To mitigate this, Pakistan might pursue a nuanced diplomatic approach, engaging with other global players like Turkey, Russia, and the European Union, to diversify its partnerships and reduce over-reliance on either the U.S. or China. Moreover, India’s role as a U.S. ally complicates the equation. Trump’s administration could continue fostering a strong U.S.-India relationship, potentially isolating Pakistan. This shift may necessitate a recalibration of Pakistan’s security strategy, especially as India benefits from advanced U.S. defence technology and intelligence sharing. Pakistan’s efforts to maintain its strategic autonomy would involve not only balancing relations with global powers but also strengthening ties with regional players to counterbalance India’s influence in South Asia. Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy could impact Pakistan’s security apparatus, particularly regarding counterterrorism cooperation. Trump previously criticized Pakistan for its perceived shortcomings in addressing terrorism, leading to funding cuts and the suspension of military aid. His administration may impose stricter demands for cooperation, potentially including conditions that infringe upon Pakistan’s sovereignty. In response, Pakistan would need to maintain a delicate balance, addressing U.S. counterterrorism requirements without compromising its domestic security priorities. The withdrawal of U.S. support could compel Pakistan to rely further on China for defence technology, training, and funding, which may provoke further U.S. distrust. An increased reliance on Chinese military hardware could deepen Pakistan’s military ties with China, potentially transforming the region’s security dynamics and increasing Pakistan’s strategic distance from the U.S.
On Trump’s assumes office again, his foreign policy would likely return to an “America First” approach, prioritizing American interests and immediate economic and security gains. This could mean a significant reduction in foreign aid to Pakistan, with funds directed solely toward specific security initiatives rather than long-term development projects.
Trump’s Middle Eastern policy, which includes strong support for Israel and confrontation with Iran, could create significant challenges for Pakistan. Trump’s previous administration pushed for normalization between Israel and certain Arab states, an initiative that could re-emerge if he returns to office. The reason Ms. Harris lost is that she has lost the support of Arab Americans and young voters who believe the Biden administration failed to use its leverage to limit Israel’s bombing campaign in Gaza following last year’s Oct. 7 attacks by Hamas. Most estimates put the loss of life from the Israeli military action at more than 90,000, including Hamas terrorists. There are few more complex issues on the diplomatic agenda than how to balance Israel’s self-defence with the creation of a new dynamic in the Middle East and alleviate the humanitarian crises worsened by multiple wars. Mr. Trump has largely steered clear of both the political and moral complexities. His strongest argument has centred on the optics of the bombing campaign. In April he said Israel was “absolutely losing the PR war,” and added, “Let’s get back to peace and stop killing people. And that’s a very simple statement. But he has offered no cease-fire plan and no ideas for winning the release of hostages held by Hamas. Trump’s approach to the Middle East has been defined by strong support for Israel and Saudi Arabia and a confrontational stance toward Iran. Trump calls Israel a “cherished ally.” As president, Trump backed away from previous bipartisan consensus by saying he wasn’t interested in a separate Palestinian state. Pakistan’s historic stance on the Palestine issue aligns it with many Muslim-majority countries, but U.S. pressure could challenge this position, potentially straining relations with Washington if Pakistan resists normalization. Simultaneously, Trump’s confrontational approach toward Iran, especially through sanctions and diplomatic isolation, could have spillover effects on Pakistan. As a neighbouring country with strong economic and cultural ties to Iran, Pakistan would face challenges if forced to choose between aligning with U.S.-Saudi interests or preserving its relations with Tehran. Escalated U.S.-Iran tensions could also destabilize Pakistan’s western border, leading to increased security risks and economic disruptions. Pakistan’s alliance with Saudi Arabia further complicates this situation. Saudi influence over Pakistan, primarily through economic aid, remittances, and investment, provides significant leverage in Pakistan’s regional alignment. However, over-dependence on Saudi support could limit Pakistan’s policy options, particularly if Saudi and U.S. interests align against Iran. Navigating this complex web of alliances requires Pakistan to adopt a balanced stance that maintains its regional partnerships without alienating key allies, a difficult task given the polarized landscape in the Middle East. Trump’s hardline immigration policies, particularly those affecting Muslim-majority countries, could have substantial domestic repercussions for Pakistan. Pakistani citizens, especially students, workers, and professionals, may face restrictions when seeking opportunities in the U.S. Reduced immigration pathways could limit educational and career prospects for Pakistani nationals, affecting families that rely on remittances from expatriates in the U.S. and Gulf states. Immigration restrictions could also lead to public discontent and increased anti-U.S. sentiment within Pakistan. Trump’s policies, perceived as discriminatory, may foster nationalistic rhetoric among political factions, making it difficult for the Pakistani government to maintain cooperative relations with the U.S. The strain on cultural and educational exchanges could limit Pakistan’s human capital development, as fewer citizens gain exposure to Western education and professional training. Consequently, Pakistan may shift its focus to alternative destinations like Europe, the Gulf, or East Asia, yet these options may lack the same economic opportunities and growth prospects available in the U.S. Donald Trump’s stance on Ukraine has been inconsistent. Initially, he portrayed himself as Ukraine’s defender, providing weaponry like Javelin anti-tank weapons, which President Barack Obama had refused to supply. However, during his 2016 campaign, Trump complained that the United States should not prioritize Ukraine over European neighbours like Germany. As president, Trump withheld security assistance to Ukraine and asked President Volodymyr Zelensky to implicate Joe Biden in Ukraine-related scandals. After Russia’s attack of Ukraine in February 2022, Trump initially praised Putin’s move as genius and savvy but later backtracked due to widespread condemnation. Trump now claims that the war could have been prevented with the right deal, implying that Ukraine should have ceded territory to Russia. He claims he could end the war “in 24 hours” but lacks a clear plan. Trump has also overstated the depletion of American arms stockpiles and contradicted himself by portraying himself as Ukraine’s defender while threatening to cut off military aid. Donald Trump’s strategy for China is to impose tariffs, which he believes will address the country’s growing economic, military, and technological power. China’s leader has pledged to make China the world’s number one power by 2049, and the country is already the fastest-growing nuclear power. However, Trump’s approach has been criticized for being too simplistic and not addressing the broader security challenges posed by China. Additionally, Trump’s foreign policy team has been credited with focusing on superpower conflict and restricting China’s access to key technologies, but Trump himself has often undermined these efforts. Furthermore, Trump has pledged to expand domestic fossil fuel production, withdraw from global climate efforts, and remove regulations on fossil fuel production, which has raised concerns about the environmental impact of his policies. As president, Donald Trump boosted defence spending and established the Space Force to counter space competition. He shifted the national security and defence strategy to focus on great-power competition with China and Russia, which caused tension among European allies due to his threat to abandon the NATO alliance. Trump has long been critical of NATO, calling it dead in 2020 and threatening to withdraw from the alliance. He opposes NATO’s collective defence clause, which requires member countries to defend one another in case of an attack and has accused NATO countries of taking advantage of the US by not meeting the required 2% GDP spending on defence.
Donald Trump’s approach to trade is centred on the belief that the global trading system is unfair to U.S. interests, leading to significant trade deficits, declining U.S. manufacturing, and the offshoring of American jobs. To address this, Trump has pledged to impose tariffs on most imports, matching higher tariffs imposed by other countries on U.S. products, and additional tariffs on countries seeking an alternative to the U.S. dollar. He has renegotiated NAFTA, which he considered “one of the worst trade deals ever made,” and replaced it with the 2018 United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. However, he now proposes a 100 percent tariff on cars imported from Mexico and plans to renegotiate the 2018 trade deal to address concerns about Chinese vehicles. If re-elected, Trump has vowed to end the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) and has already withdrawn the United States from its predecessor, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP). He also renegotiated a trade deal with South Korea, withdrew from trade talks with the European Union, and imposed tariffs on steel and aluminium imports. Trump has imposed tariffs on $360 billion worth of Chinese goods and plans to raise these tariffs and prohibit U.S. investment in China and Chinese purchases of U.S. assets. He also plans to “phase out” imports of Chinese-made electronics, steel, and pharmaceuticals and seek to terminate privileges China gained when it joined the World Trade Organization in 2000. After Trump’s victory, some people in Pakistan believe it could have a positive impact on Imran Khan and the relations between the US and Pakistan. However, this assumption may not be entirely accurate, as it is based on the realities of US foreign policy. When Trump assumes office again, his foreign policy would likely return to an “America First” approach, prioritizing American interests and immediate economic and security gains. This could mean a significant reduction in foreign aid to Pakistan, with funds directed solely toward specific security initiatives rather than long-term development projects. Trump’s first term saw a significant decline in US-China ties, and a second term could mean an intensified effort to contain Chinese influence globally. This stance could place additional strain on Pakistan, whose strategic relationship with Beijing could face US scrutiny. Trump’s presidency would likely place Pakistan in a challenging position, where Islamabad must balance its longstanding relationship with the US against the pressures arising from its ties with China. As US support becomes more conditional and transactional, Pakistan may need to lean more heavily on China for economic and strategic support if American aid and investment diminish. Trump has shown a clear preference for India as a strategic counterweight to China, which may deepen if he returns to office. The US may prioritize its broader Indo-Pacific strategy over addressing South Asian security dynamics, risking a diplomatic rift if Pakistan perceives a pro-India bias that brushes aside its security interests. Trump has previously expressed concerns regarding nuclear security in South Asia, and his administration could impose more stringent conditions on US aid and support for Pakistan. Increased scrutiny of Pakistan’s nuclear assets may be part of his foreign policy, with new demands for transparency and cooperation. Should US-Pakistan relations become selectively engaged, Islamabad may be pushed to prioritize Washington’s security interests over its broader. For Pakistan, the stakes under a Trump administration would be high, as maintaining strong US diplomatic and economic ties is vital for balanced foreign relations.