President-elect Trump is expected to deploy his trademark mix of belligerent threats and friendly relations with some of the world’s dictators as he seeks to break up the deepening partnerships between U.S. adversaries China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.
Whether that coheres into an effective policy — given Trump’s impulsive approach to global relations and contrasting views among his likely advisers — remains an open question.
The president-elect is antagonistic toward European allies and NATO, chastising them as relying too much on the U.S. for military support, and brags about his personal rapport with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping and North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un.
“We’ll have a very good relationship, and there’s reasons for them to want to like us, there’s big reasons,” Trump said during a campaign appearance in Arizona in late October, referring to Putin, Xi and Kim — in the context of dismantling their alliance.
“Look at what these stupid people have done, they’ve allowed Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and others to get together in a group, this is impossible to think,” he said.
This grouping of countries has been described in foreign policy circles as an “axis of aggressors,” “axis of upheaval,” and “CRINK” (China, Russia, Iran, North Korea).
The war in Ukraine has served as an accelerant for these relationships, with Putin turning to Beijing, Pyongyang and Tehran to fund and equip his war machine, and each country, in turn, seeking rewards in return, either economically, militarily or politically.
Foreign policy experts say the CRINK countries are not natural allies and still have plenty of conflicting national interests. But unity in opposing American supremacy on the world stage is a powerful convening force.
“I do think that the relationship between these actors is deeper and more durable than many people believe and such that each of these leaders would probably be willing to pocket concessions from the United States, but not fundamentally alter the extent that they’re cooperating with one another,” said Andrea Kendall-Taylor, senior fellow and director of the Transatlantic Security Program at the Center for a New American Security.
“Trump is approaching each of them bilaterally, and without the strong backing of our allies. Because they are in many ways acting as a collective — and we are more isolated and alone without our allies — then the balance of power really shifts to them,” she added.
Advocates for the U.S. supporting Ukraine’s fight against Russia’s invasion argue it is the best way to confront the deepening relationships between these adversaries.
“CRINK is watching what we do. … It is a threat to all of us, and the best way to confront CRINK is to help Ukraine to achieve victory,” said David Kramer, executive director of the George W. Bush Institute and a former deputy assistant secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs.
And these Ukraine hawks are now trying to convince Trump that the best way to break from Biden’s policy is to ensure Kyiv’s defeat of Moscow.
While President Biden is credited with uniting allies in Europe and from Asia in arming Ukraine and isolating Russia diplomatically and economically, critics say the U.S. has held back giving Kyiv the tools it needs to defeat Russia over fears of escalation with Putin.
“This is an opportunity for the incoming Trump administration to stand in stark contrast to the current Biden administration, which is to help Ukraine to victory. That is something the Biden administration never clearly enunciated. It’s something the Trump administration could help Ukraine achieve,” Kramer said.
He added that the “Europeans can and should do more,” a common refrain among Trump and his supporters.
But Trump has refused on the campaign trail to commit to helping Ukraine achieve a decisive victory over Russia and some of his closest confidants — Tucker Carlson, Elon Musk, Vice President-elect JD Vance and others — have either denigrated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, raised concern over Putin’s nuclear weapons threats, or argued that helping defend Kyiv’s sovereignty is a not a worthy cause.
Musk joined a call between Trump and Zelensky that took place Wednesday. The Ukrainian president wrote on social platform X, which Musk owns, that he had an “excellent” call with Trump and “agreed to maintain close dialogue and advance our cooperation. Strong and unwavering U.S. leadership is vital for the world and for a just peace.”
But Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, an outlier in Europe for his close ties to Putin, has predicted that the U.S. will “pull out of this war” under Trump. Orbán visited Trump at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida in July, and Trump cited the Hungarian leader’s support during his debate with Vice President Harris in September.
“Look, Viktor Orbán said it. He said the most respected, most feared person is Donald Trump,” Trump said at the debate, defending his own standing among world leaders.
Robert O’Brien, who served as Trump’s national security adviser between 2019 and 2021, has described Trump’s unpredictability as a strategy to keep Moscow off balance.
In an article published in Foreign Affairs over the summer, O’Brien described Trump’s preference for a negotiated settlement between Russia and Ukraine as one “that ends the killing and preserves the security of Ukraine.”
He called for Europe to admit Kyiv to the European Union “immediately” and for Europe to finance U.S.-provisions of lethal aid to Ukraine.
This strategy is part of confronting what he described as an “axis of anti-American autocracies,” referring to Russia, China and Iran. The article was published before North Korea began aiding Russia in earnest, sending thousands of troops to join the fight.
Hanging over this global realignment are threats of nuclear weapons use. Putin and Xi control major stockpiles, while Kim and Iran’s leaders have ambitions of becoming nuclear powers and are pressing ahead with nuclear weapons programs.
The U.S. is spending billions on modernizing it’s own nuclear triad as a continued deterrant, spurring fears among arms control advocates of a new nuclear arms race.
Daryl Kimball, executive director of the nonpartisan Arms Control Association, raised alarm that Trump’s supporters — like O’Brien, some Republican senators, and conservative think tanks — are calling for resuming nuclear weapons testing, increasing production and expanding deployment.
“This is what we expect many on the Hill are talking about, many in the Trump administration are going to be thinking about, but there are hard questions they need to ask. And the other part is, does Trump want this?” Kimball asked.
Trump has repeatedly raised alarm over the wars raging in Europe and the Middle East tipping into World War III or nuclear “obliteration.”
Trump, during his first administration, talked about renegotiating the New START treaty governing arms control between the U.S. and Russia to include China — something that Beijing resisted. The treaty expires in 2026.
But Kimball also pointed out that it’s unlikely the U.S. can get far on addressing nuclear threats without consultations or cooperation with key allies, like Europe and NATO when it comes to Russia; South Korea and Japan when it comes to North Korea and China; and Israel when it comes to Iran.
“Trump is not going to have carte blanche to make deals with this rogue dictator or that rogue dictator, there will be some real-world constraints on what he’ll be able to do,” he said. “But exactly what those are and where they wind up applying, yet to be seen.”
