American global influence is eroding at the midpoint of Donald Trump’s second term, not by accident but as a direct consequence of how Washington has handled diplomacy and international crises, according to an analysis published by Hatem Sadek, a professor at Helwan University.
Sadek’s central argument is that Trump’s reliance on aggressive, transactional pressure tactics — rather than the underlying problems he identified — is what’s undermining US power.
He points to the war with Iran as the clearest illustration: a recent US report put the cost of Operation Epic Fury at $33.4 billion over four months, which the report itself labeled “epic losses.” Congress responded by voting to cut off funding until an end to the conflict, a rebuke that came just weeks before the midterm elections.
In addition to the financial implications, he argues that Washington has undermined its soft power by decimating funding for international institutions and aid programs, weakening the United States’ ability to rally others to its values-based policies.
Sweeping tariffs and repeated threats to abandon alliances in Europe, the Middle East and East Asia, he writes, have pushed partner nations toward more cautious, diversified strategies — openings that China and Russia have moved to fill, reflected in BRICS’ growing weight and expanded Chinese and Russian roles in conflicts across Eurasia and Africa.
China faces its own balancing act, the analysis notes: the Iran war drains US military attention from the Indo-Pacific, but Beijing risks fresh sanctions over its trade with Tehran — tensions surfacing just before a scheduled September 24 Trump-Xi summit at the White House.
Some American research institutions have reportedly warned that US precision-guided munitions stockpiles could run out within a week in a major Western Pacific conflict.
Sadek also attributes part of the decline to Trump’s personal style — unpredictable statements that often diverge from official Pentagon and State Department positions, and a widening gap between claimed achievements and unresolved realities on the ground.
The author’s conclusion: Trump correctly diagnosed real imbalances in US foreign policy, but the tools chosen to fix them may be eroding the alliances and credibility that American power depends on.
