Your view is not often seen in the American Conservative circles, but I strongly agree with your viewpoints. Your views are very important for people outside of the US. If anyone thinks a changing US will mean a better and more peaceful world, please read Nel's article and think again. Now please allow me to comment more on the American side.
(1) Why "A Familiar Strategy in a Changing World"? Because even if national politics change for whatever reason, even for multiple nations, the global geography does not change. National borders do not change (more later) and most importantly, natural resources and weather do not change. Syria was short of food, and it is still short of food after a regime change. Syria needed Russia in the past, and Syria still needs Russia now. From the viewpoint of the new Syrian government: Israel is still there and has occupied more land and gotten closer to Damascus. Americans still control the oil fields. The Kurds still control the northern agriculture area, and regions around Allepo have been practically annexed by Turkey. Jolani cannot get effective help from Israel or the West. And now that Turkey has grabbed Allepo, Jolani cannot even get help from Turkey. Assuming Jolani is a true Syrian nationalist and wants to rebuild Syria, then he has no choice but to beg Russia. The USA has changed to a new President with a different set of policies, but oil still flows from the ME and Russia. Russia still holds a huge amount of mineral reserves and strong nuclear deterrence. If anything changes at all inside Russia, it is Russia is now in a better economic and military condition than in 2022. China is still in a quagmire but it has improved the extent of getting more autarky.
(2) While diplomacy is an extension of domestic policies, domestic policies are usually an extension of foreign policies as well. The latter direction is particularly obvious in the four years of the US Biden admin due to its globalist affiliation. The USA is a capitalist country, perhaps more so than UK. Capitalists by definition are NOT nationalists as capital goes everywhere, and capitalists are loyal to the money. Trump is still a politician and all his team, including JD Vance, still have to consider what about 2028. So they will be subject to lobbyists' bombardment nonstop. Although the Trump team's focus is cleaning up US domestic situations (far from easy), their diplomatic policies cannot switch too quickly because their voters still demanding many of the same things like blind support for Israel and even American Expansionism (annexing Canada and Greenland, and perhaps the Panama Canal zone.) As an extension, keeping Europe down, Russian weak, and Chinese in chaos will make complete sense from a US nationalist point of view.
(3) Even if Trump and his entire team are all angels re-incarnated, they face the same geography and natural resource problems in the US. While the USA still has the largest rare-earth reserves of rare earth (and many other minerals) in the world, these mines are not in a ready-to-develop state. Many such mines don't have suitable roads or power supplies, let alone refineries or downstream ecosystems. Shale fracking is a dead-end (the American people will see the headlight of the coming train fairly soon,) and incompatible with low-oil prices. The US infrastructures have not gone through the necessary transformations (like building more railroads and improving energy efficiency) to deal with high oil prices, let alone oil scarcity. What can a US President do when he has got 55% support? The US President will bow to popular pressure and loot oil from overseas. At best, POTUS can lead the people through the difficult transition, but no US president can achieve that without a foreign war. Note that American First means non-American last.
(4) Trump team's major policy changes, domestic or international, will not go easy. Chinese history is full of failed examples of major reforms. The only one I considered successful happened around 338 BC, when a minister obtained the trust of Qin kingdom and built the foundation for Qin to unify China into a single political entity for the first time in Chinese history. All failures can be attributed to the incumbent bureaucrats.
Now if we apply the same paradigm to Europe, then the situation is worse than that of the US. I think the future of Europe is to maintain an elegant boutique and provide refined products to the world in exchange for energy and natural resources. But this strategy implies careful coordination and cooperation. A single unified EU government in theory can serve this purpose. However, the reality is all bureaucracies grow stale. If the European countries can maintain sovereignty and try to accommodate each other, individual bureaucracies can go stale, die, and be reborn without dragging everybody down. A single EU bureaucracy going stale drags the entire Europe down. When Dr. Sun Yat-Sen talked about nationalism, he considered the highest state of nationalism to be peaceful coexistence and willingness to help other nations just like we individuals are willing to help others. That ideal seems to be fairly far away from the current American Conservatives or the MAGA crowd.
Your view is not often seen in the American Conservative circles, but I strongly agree with your viewpoints. Your views are very important for people outside of the US. If anyone thinks a changing US will mean a better and more peaceful world, please read Nel's article and think again. Now please allow me to comment more on the American side.
(1) Why "A Familiar Strategy in a Changing World"? Because even if national politics change for whatever reason, even for multiple nations, the global geography does not change. National borders do not change (more later) and most importantly, natural resources and weather do not change. Syria was short of food, and it is still short of food after a regime change. Syria needed Russia in the past, and Syria still needs Russia now. From the viewpoint of the new Syrian government: Israel is still there and has occupied more land and gotten closer to Damascus. Americans still control the oil fields. The Kurds still control the northern agriculture area, and regions around Allepo have been practically annexed by Turkey. Jolani cannot get effective help from Israel or the West. And now that Turkey has grabbed Allepo, Jolani cannot even get help from Turkey. Assuming Jolani is a true Syrian nationalist and wants to rebuild Syria, then he has no choice but to beg Russia. The USA has changed to a new President with a different set of policies, but oil still flows from the ME and Russia. Russia still holds a huge amount of mineral reserves and strong nuclear deterrence. If anything changes at all inside Russia, it is Russia is now in a better economic and military condition than in 2022. China is still in a quagmire but it has improved the extent of getting more autarky.
(2) While diplomacy is an extension of domestic policies, domestic policies are usually an extension of foreign policies as well. The latter direction is particularly obvious in the four years of the US Biden admin due to its globalist affiliation. The USA is a capitalist country, perhaps more so than UK. Capitalists by definition are NOT nationalists as capital goes everywhere, and capitalists are loyal to the money. Trump is still a politician and all his team, including JD Vance, still have to consider what about 2028. So they will be subject to lobbyists' bombardment nonstop. Although the Trump team's focus is cleaning up US domestic situations (far from easy), their diplomatic policies cannot switch too quickly because their voters still demanding many of the same things like blind support for Israel and even American Expansionism (annexing Canada and Greenland, and perhaps the Panama Canal zone.) As an extension, keeping Europe down, Russian weak, and Chinese in chaos will make complete sense from a US nationalist point of view.
(3) Even if Trump and his entire team are all angels re-incarnated, they face the same geography and natural resource problems in the US. While the USA still has the largest rare-earth reserves of rare earth (and many other minerals) in the world, these mines are not in a ready-to-develop state. Many such mines don't have suitable roads or power supplies, let alone refineries or downstream ecosystems. Shale fracking is a dead-end (the American people will see the headlight of the coming train fairly soon,) and incompatible with low-oil prices. The US infrastructures have not gone through the necessary transformations (like building more railroads and improving energy efficiency) to deal with high oil prices, let alone oil scarcity. What can a US President do when he has got 55% support? The US President will bow to popular pressure and loot oil from overseas. At best, POTUS can lead the people through the difficult transition, but no US president can achieve that without a foreign war. Note that American First means non-American last.
(4) Trump team's major policy changes, domestic or international, will not go easy. Chinese history is full of failed examples of major reforms. The only one I considered successful happened around 338 BC, when a minister obtained the trust of Qin kingdom and built the foundation for Qin to unify China into a single political entity for the first time in Chinese history. All failures can be attributed to the incumbent bureaucrats.
Now if we apply the same paradigm to Europe, then the situation is worse than that of the US. I think the future of Europe is to maintain an elegant boutique and provide refined products to the world in exchange for energy and natural resources. But this strategy implies careful coordination and cooperation. A single unified EU government in theory can serve this purpose. However, the reality is all bureaucracies grow stale. If the European countries can maintain sovereignty and try to accommodate each other, individual bureaucracies can go stale, die, and be reborn without dragging everybody down. A single EU bureaucracy going stale drags the entire Europe down. When Dr. Sun Yat-Sen talked about nationalism, he considered the highest state of nationalism to be peaceful coexistence and willingness to help other nations just like we individuals are willing to help others. That ideal seems to be fairly far away from the current American Conservatives or the MAGA crowd.