Abstract
Since Trump’s Administration took office, this elusory question has haunted most issues in the international law. So far, the Trump Administration has been in office for a little over forty-four months, a tumultuous period that has disrupted international law and international politics. Another looming question is whether the Trump Administration’s many initiatives will permanently change the nature of America’s foreign policy? In particular, this paper will discuss Trump’s foreign policy, since his emerging philosophy seems to be a general rejection of the Obama approach: not “engage-translate-leverage,” but rather, “disengage black hole-hard power.” Wherever possible, the Trump instinct seems to be to disengage-unilateralism or, as he calls it, “America First.” The United States of America and Trump are sturdy actors in the making and unmaking of international law. But the basic idea underlying international law is that international law is no longer just for nation-states or national governments. What Jeremy Bentham once called “inter-national law”, the law between and among sovereign nations, has evolved into a hybrid body of international and domestic law developed by a large number of public and private transnational actors.
Highlights
If the globe encompasses the entire world as we know it and we apply Eastonian systems analysis as a basis of understanding, all political components necessarily interact with one another to some extent
In one of Trump’s early speeches with foreign policy content, while abroad in Saudi Arabia, the president contributed a factor that would be integrated into a fuller policy, the term, “Principled Realism.”(1) Early on in the presidential campaign, Trump focused his opposition to the newly emergent global economic system with a promise to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and to either renegotiate, or if necessary, withdraw from NAFTA, and remove the United States from an international energy compact, i.e. the Paris Agreement
The Trump administration added to its position, justifying a unilateralist approach over the long-standing WTO orientation that the Uruguay Round Agreements were designed in such a way as to offend American sovereignty.(2) The extent to which the United States has sought to engage with other industrial nations and the developing world with a focus on carbon emissions and a deteriorating environment has been to say that controversial below
Summary
If the globe encompasses the entire world as we know it and we apply Eastonian systems analysis as a basis of understanding, all political components necessarily interact with one another to some extent. In one of Trump’s early speeches with foreign policy content, while abroad in Saudi Arabia, the president contributed a factor that would be integrated into a fuller policy, the term, “Principled Realism.”(1) Early on in the presidential campaign, Trump focused his opposition to the newly emergent global economic system with a promise to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and to either renegotiate, or if necessary, withdraw from NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement), and remove the United States from an international energy compact, i.e. the Paris Agreement. The Trump administration added to its position, justifying a unilateralist approach over the long-standing WTO orientation that the Uruguay Round Agreements were designed in such a way as to offend American sovereignty.(2) The extent to which the United States has sought to engage with other industrial nations and the developing world with a focus on carbon emissions and a deteriorating environment has been to say that controversial below.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
