Trump loses at the ballot box, but he remains powerful (and unpredictable) in foreign policy

The president of the United States, Donald Trump, is already a lame duck, the term used in Washington political jargon for leaders who cannot be reelected. If he were another president, one might expect him, after his party’s defeat in the midterm elections, to focus increasingly on foreign policy and try to achieve some ambitious peace deal or reconciliation initiative: a way to shore up his legacy and to receive from overseas a respect and pomp that are dwindling at home.The Republican, however, is anything but an ordinary leader. The question now is whether he will try to end any of the ongoing conflicts — in Ukraine, Iran or elsewhere — and again stake a claim to a Nobel Peace Prize; open new ones in places such as Cuba; or simply devote his time to the architectural projects that seem to give him so much pleasure.His immediate predecessor, Democrat Joe Biden, tried unsuccessfully to secure a truce in Gaza. Barack Obama closed a nuclear deal with Iran and began normalizing relations with Cuba (Trump blew up both achievements in his first term). George W. Bush wanted — but was unable to — close the Pandora’s box he opened by invading Iraq.So far, Trump has offered contradictory clues. Sometimes, as he did last Thursday in the Oval Office, he says peace in Ukraine is just around the corner and that an agreement over European participation is imminent. On other occasions, he threatens to resume large-scale combat operations against Iran. He would not be the first president who — freed from having to think about the ballot box again — launches a military offensive, as Bush Jr. did when he ordered a new surge in Iraq with barely a year left in his term.The early signs are not encouraging. The first White House departure announced was chief of staff Susie Wiles. She will be replaced by one of Trump’s most radical advisors and one of the Democrats’ most hated figures: Stephen Miller, the architect of the hardline immigration policy of both Trump administrations.Miller’s ultra-nationalist ideas fit like a glove with Trump’s worldview, in which the United States dictates terms through negotiation or coercion — the former for friendly nations, the latter for more recalcitrant governments — while respecting the sphere of influence of other major powers and reducing the rest of the world to mere vassals who follow directives without a right to dissent.Meeting with Russian envoyOther signs are also discouraging. Last Thursday, Trump received the Kremlin representative Kirill Dmitriev in the Oval Office. He did not do the same with the Ukrainian representatives who had traveled to the presidential residence to participate in the same event with first lady Melania Trump. “I can’t tell you what I discussed [with Dmitriev]. But I’m just telling you, it’s going to be a big agreement,” Trump said. “It’s going to involve more than Ukraine, and I could even say it might involve all of Europe. Everyone’s gonna be thrilled.” New indirect negotiations between Ukraine and Russia are scheduled this week in Abu Dhabi under the mediation of Trump’s two personal envoys: his son-in-law Jared Kushner and his friend and advisor Steve Witkoff.Another clue could come in the middle of this month, when Trump travels to Shenzhen, China, to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, where an unusual three-way meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin could take place. In December, he will play the host, welcoming representatives of the world’s largest economies for the annual G-20 summit in Doral, Florida. Putin has been invited but has not yet confirmed whether he will attend.A new factorStarting in January a new factor will enter the equation: a new legislature will begin with an overwhelming Democratic majority in the Senate and the House of Representatives, one that already threatens to open extensive investigations into the rapid enrichment of the Trump family while the Republican has been in office. And the president — who over the past two years has tried to retaliate against his supposed enemies by launching domestic legal inquiries and by imposing tariffs and ostracism abroad — may opt for similar measures without Congress, in principle, being able to interfere in the day-to-day conduct of presidential foreign policy. Democrats can, however, limit his funds through their legislative power to approve budgets.Majda Ruge, of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), sees it as “unlikely that a Democratic Congress will constrain Trump’s foreign policy, because it does not have a veto-proof majority.” Trump, she adds, “largely ignored his own Republican majority and will not feel constrained by a Democratic one.” The expert also recalls that Trump will still be able to take actions regarding the alliance with Europeans, for example: “He retains broad presidential powers over tariffs, troop withdrawals, alliances, and military interventions.”“There are plenty of ways Trump could act out,” write professors Daniel Drezner and Elizabeth Saunders of Tufts and Columbia universities, respectively, in Foreign Affairs. “Issuing fresh threats against Canada, launching new attacks on U.S. alliances, or colluding with Russia or China at the expense of Ukraine or Taiwan. But to turn those threats into policy would require serious effort, such as repositioning U.S. troops or painstakingly negotiating with other great powers.”There could also be some change in relations with Israel. In his post-election analysis on social media, Vice President J. D. Vance attributed voter discontent, in part, to this administration’s intense support for its ally. The criticisms do not come only from the Democratic Party’s more progressive wing: many in the MAGA movement also believe Israel deceptively dragged the U.S. into the war in Iran, despite the president’s promises not to intervene overseas. In a surprising move, and without speaking further on the matter, Trump announced on election day the cancellation starting next year of the annual $3.8 billion in aid Washington sends its partner under an agreement that is not scheduled to expire until 2028.Two key locations are Iran and Cuba, regarding which Trump has both issued a barrage of threats and adopted a conciliatory stance, while appearing to rule out taking any kind of radical action in the immediate future. Last Thursday, he said in the Oval Office that the conflict with the Islamic Republic cannot even be considered a war. But after Vance blamed the conflict for the election defeat, Trump has also admitted that it has driven up commodity prices — a factor that played a key role in the Democratic sweep. And for weeks now, fears have been mounting that Washington and Israel might resume their attacks in an attempt to force Iran to surrender.According to William Weschler of the Atlantic Council, that roadmap may advance more slowly now, given the scale of the Republican defeat. “The concern is that Trump may end up facing his worst nightmare: being remembered in history as a loser, and for something he set in motion.”In this expert’s view, negotiations should be resumed and the president “must recognize that a diplomatic agreement will necessarily resemble the previous memorandum of understanding, which critics argued seriously harmed American interests.” But after a pause forced by the midterms results that allows room for negotiation, it is possible that the fear of being seen as a loser will trigger an increase in “the risk of major combat operations again. If not immediately, then in the coming months.”Trump might also consider some kind of action to try to bring about regime change in Cuba, as he promised earlier this year. It also remains to be seen what happens in Venezuela and whether the dialogue process — following the return of opposition leader María Corina Machado — will ultimately lead to elections next year, or whether interim President Delcy Rodríguez will remain in power indefinitely with Trump’s backing.Or he could simply do nothing. He could turn his attention entirely to construction projects at the White House and in Washington — projects to which he has devoted so much effort and time in recent months while disaster loomed over the Republican candidates. “There is a chance that he could spend his last two years in office issuing pardons, trying to prosecute political enemies on the side, and erecting monuments to himself. Given the alternatives, inaction on foreign policy may well be the best-case scenario for Trump’s lame-duck years,” write Drezner and Saunders.Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition