The U.S. president’s mid-may trip Middle East found a region unlike the one he tamed in his first term. His encore performance, though bold, reveals a region slipping from the grasp of his once-potent diplomatic playbook. GCC states are increasingly asserting themselves as they look for harmony.

With U.S. encouragement, Northeast Asia has seen unprecedented cooperation between Japan and South Korea in recent years. But rising economic frictions, domestic political changes in Japan and especially South Korea, and evolving U.S. global priorities could impede or even reverse recent gains.

Following months of political turmoil, South Korea's upcoming presidential election could lead to a shift in the country's approach to the U.S.-China rivalry, with candidates' stances influencing South Korea's policies on defense, trade, and diplomatic relations with both powers. While Lee Jae-myung may seek closer ties with China, potentially boosting trade and cultural exchanges, his rival is expected to strengthen South Korea's alignment with the U.S., especially on security and technology-related matters.

Since his return to the White House, Donald Trump has attempted to reduce the U.S. focus on Europe in order to shift resources to the Indo-Pacific. But geopolitical rivalry can neither resolve America’s own problems nor the challenges facing the world.

The early decades of the 21st Century have already seen a rapid shifting of global power, and today one could view the world’s relationships flowing through a four-way struggle for balance and dominance between the U.S., China, the EU, and Russia.

China and Russia have different narratives in describing the anti-fascist victory‌ that ended World War II. Both nations made immense sacrifices that fundamentally shaped postwar reconstruction and reshaped global governance. So why do they continue to grapple?

The tariffs will not spell the end of alliances between the United States and Japan or South Korea, but they are likely to promote a strategic awakening in both countries and accelerate the integration process in East Asia.

The Indo-Pacific Strategy of Trump 2.0 remains unclear, although consensus has been reached on major power competition. If a new Indo-Pacific Strategy now emerges to build U.S. advantages against China, it will be designed to serve core MAGA goals.

The U.S.-Russia contest over Ukraine ‌shows both the persistence of classic power politics and the clash of competing worldviews‌ at a time when the international system is undergoing ‌a seismic process of reordering. The Ukraine war and its potential settlement ‌are upending traditional major-power dynamics‌.

The future of the region should be decided by the countries there, not by external actors. Strategic autonomy, an idea frequently raised by some Arab countries in recent years, shows they’re waking up to reality. There should be no illusions about the future.