Will Trump really end wars?
One of the deciding factors for Trump’s victory over Kamala was his supposed anti-war stance. But can he actually end wars, or will the end he promises lead to something worse?
Donald J Trump, the man who loves to make headlines, has created history once again by becoming the first convicted felon to become the US president. With Trump at the helm of the US, the world braces itself for an uncertain next four years.
One of the major concerns for the world is whether Trump can stop ongoing wars. Trump, the supposed leader of the free world, has inherited a burning world, and he has proclaimed to 'end wars.' And some people do believe him. In fact, one of the deciding factors for his victory was his supposed anti-war stance.
But there are questions that loom large: How much of his anti-war stance is sincere, and how much of it is simply rhetoric? Can he really end wars, or will he end up tipping the balance in a particular direction, further destabilising a volatile world?
If history is any precedence
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
First, it is true that Trump didn't start any new wars, but there were some imminent escalations. Early in his presidency, he escalated tensions with nuclear-armed North Korea, calling Kim Jong-un "Little Rocket Man" and threatening "fire and fury."
Later, Trump ordered the assassination of Iran's top general, Qasem Soleimani, through a drone strike, a move that risked igniting a war with Iran. Iran's reluctance to retaliate saved the day.
Moreover, Trump escalated every military intervention he inherited.
Airstrikes increased in Syria, Somalia and Afghanistan. Afghan civilian casualties from US airstrikes rose by 330% under his watch. We may not talk about Somalia, but there, deaths from US airstrikes under Trump exceeded those during the Bush and Obama years combined.
Under his watch, the Yemen War intensified, and the world has conveniently forgotten about the genocide there.
In addition to escalating conflicts, Trump's pardoning of US soldiers convicted of war crimes in Iraq and his rhetoric endorsing the invasion of Iraq demonstrate a dangerous disregard for the consequences of US military actions.
As these examples show, Trump's record reveals extensive support for military expansion and disregard for civilian life, contradicting claims that he stands apart from past presidents on issues of war and peace. So, there's no particular guarantee that he will 'end wars.'
During his campaign, his foreign policy approach has sparked widespread debate, particularly regarding his stance on ongoing conflicts in Europe and the Middle East.
Should Ukraine be worried?
Trump's approach to the ongoing Ukraine conflict could drastically alter the dynamics of the war. He may prioritise diplomatic negotiations rather than military support for Kyiv. Trump has touted his ability to end the war in "24 hours," proposing a peace deal that would likely involve concessions to Russia.
This plan, as highlighted by his running mate JD Vance, suggests that Trump might advocate for Ukraine to cede Russian-occupied regions, including Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea while agreeing to a demilitarised zone.
While Trump's approach could technically 'halt' active conflict, it would come at a significant cost to Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Such a deal would likely lead to a "frozen conflict" rather than a true resolution, and it might create doubts in the minds of the US's European allies about Trump's commitment to Nato.
It could leave Ukraine vulnerable and might embolden Russian aggression, especially if the peace terms fail to secure Ukraine's aspirations to join Nato. Trump's potential stance, which opposes additional military aid to Ukraine, contrasts sharply with President Joe Biden's robust support, which has included substantial financial and military assistance. But, at the same time, it should be noted how unpopular Biden's support for Ukraine became in his later years.
In this sense, while Trump may not start a new war in Europe, his approach could destabilise the region by encouraging further Russian incursions. It may end up creating a perpetual war in Eastern Europe.
The Middle East problem
In the Middle East, Trump's alignment with Israel and his pivot away from Palestinian issues indicate a regional strategy that could either maintain the status quo or deepen conflicts, depending on the specifics of his second-term approach. Given that Trump's own close supporters include men like Tucker Carlson, an Israel-skeptic, it might be interesting to see how it will go in the future. But so far, Benjamin Netanyahu and his ilk are glad.
In his first term, Trump unilaterally moved the US embassy to Jerusalem, effectively endorsing Israel's claims to the contested city. This move broke decades of bipartisan foreign policy tradition and inflamed tensions with Palestine and the broader Arab world. It sows the seed of today's war.
Trump's legacy in the Middle East is marked by his frequent arms deals with Saudi Arabia and his role in the Yemen conflict, where US-supplied weapons were used in attacks that led to humanitarian crises. He repeatedly bypassed Congress to sell precision-guided bombs to Saudi Arabia, fueling the violence in Yemen. Despite his anti-war claims, Trump's policies have been described as supporting "war profiteering" by authorising arms sales while keeping the US military footprint limited.
For a future Trump administration, the question remains whether he would escalate military intervention or continue relying on proxies, as he did with Saudi Arabia in Yemen. Trump's deep-rooted alliances with authoritarian leaders like Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman suggest a likely continuation of arms sales and regional support rather than diplomatic resolutions. Trump's enduring alliances with such leaders, despite incidents like the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, indicate that his regional approach may not pivot toward de-escalation or peace efforts.
One of the more pressing concerns for the Middle East is Trump's posture toward Iran. His first term saw the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, which significantly escalated tensions between Washington and Tehran. Though a full-scale war did not emerge from the fallout, Iranian restraint was largely credited for avoiding a broader conflict.
Trump's withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal also damaged diplomatic channels, increasing Iran's uranium enrichment and heightening concerns about nuclear proliferation. Trump's return to office could see the re-imposition of hardline policies that escalate tensions with Iran further.
Statements from former Trump officials suggest that Trump might contemplate strikes on Iranian soil, a decision that could ignite a wider conflict in the Middle East. The administration's previous designation of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organisation was another step that increased hostilities. If Trump reverts to similar policies, the chance of conflict with Iran could grow, especially given his support for Israel's aggressive ambitions.
Trump's relationship with Israel was characterised by unwavering support, as he backed Netanyahu's government through substantial aid and policy changes. As recently as his 2024 campaign, Trump has pledged unwavering support for Israel, even stating he would "set back" pro-Palestine solidarity efforts in the US by decades if elected.
Netanyahu is exuberant. He congratulated Trump, calling his victory "history's greatest comeback!" Netanyahu hopes for "a powerful recommitment" to the US-Israel alliance.
And why not? The man he once called "Israel's best friend" is returning to the White House.
Trump also said during the campaign that he would support what he described as Israel's "right to win its war on terror." It is concerning to see the Israeli hawks rejoicing his victory.
Israel is insisting on control of the crossing at Rafah on the border with Egypt and maintaining control of the Netzarim Corridor, bisecting northern and southern Gaza. Trump may accept these terms in exchange for a ceasefire.
Many fear that Trump will endorse Netanyahu's free hand regarding the possibility of the return of settlements to the Gaza Strip and even the displacement of large numbers of Palestinians outside it.
However, Jehad Malaka, a researcher in international relations at the Gaza-based research organisation, the Palestinian Planning Centre told Al Jazeera that he does not believe that Trump would endorse the forced removal of Gaza Palestinians from the entire enclave and hopes that perhaps the new president may bring a swifter, albeit harrowing, end to the war.
If the so-called peace comes with an annexation of the West Bank and the Israeli settlement of Gaza, then it is hardly any solution at all.
Israel's most ultranationalist ministers were among the first to congratulate Trump on his success, with National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich openly celebrating on social media.
Ben Gvir wrote "God Bless Trump" in response to his election win. Many fear that Trump may basically give Netanyahu whatever he wants — in particular, a green light to not only continue the war in Gaza and Lebanon but even to escalate the fight against Iran itself.
Therefore, the likelihood of Trump advocating for a peaceful solution in the Middle East remains doubtful.
So far, Trump's foreign policy remains a paradox: while he markets himself as an anti-war candidate, his policies reflect a readiness to intensify conflicts, even if indirectly.
As Trump appeals to both isolationist and hawkish elements within his base, the question of peace under his leadership remains uncertain, whether it's in Europe or the Middle East.
