The Irony of 'America First': How Trump's Policies May Have Unintentionally Empowered China

You know, it’s quite something when a policy meant to curb a rival arguably ends up giving them a leg up. And that, in a nutshell, seems to be the rather pointed observation from Nicholas Kristof, a voice many of us have come to trust for his insights on global affairs. He’s essentially laying out a compelling case, suggesting, quite directly, that Donald Trump’s ‘America First’ agenda—for all its bluster and bold promises—might have, perhaps unintentionally, cleared a path for China to expand its global reach and influence, solidifying its position on the world stage when the U.S. looked inward.

Consider, for a moment, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP. Trump pulled the plug on that deal early in his presidency, remember? The idea, ostensibly, was to protect American jobs and industries. But what happened next? Well, a significant void was left in Asian trade architecture, wasn’t it? And honestly, China, ever strategic, wasted little time stepping right into that space, forging closer economic ties and shaping the very rules of trade in a region where the U.S. had previously been a dominant player. It’s almost as if, by withdrawing, we handed them a gift, a chance to really shine.

Then there were the trade wars. Ah, yes, the tariffs, the heated rhetoric, the idea that we could somehow bully China into submission. But, in truth, did it work as intended? Many argue, and Kristof seems to echo this, that these measures often hurt American consumers and businesses as much, if not more, than they genuinely altered China’s long-term economic trajectory. Supply chains scrambled, prices climbed, and for what? China, resilient as ever, adapted, perhaps even found new markets or deepened existing ones, all while the global economy braced for impact.

And it wasn’t just about trade, you could say. Think about America’s standing on the global stage. When the U.S. began to distance itself from international agreements, or when it openly questioned long-standing alliances, what kind of message did that send? It created, for some nations, a sense of uncertainty, a vacuum in leadership. And guess who was ready to fill that vacuum, to offer a stable, if alternative, vision for global cooperation? China, of course. They seized opportunities to project soft power, to invest in infrastructure projects abroad, and to present themselves as a reliable partner in a world suddenly wary of American unpredictability.

It’s a nuanced argument, sure, but a powerful one. The narrative often pushed was one of confronting China head-on, of bringing them to heel. Yet, Kristof posits that the practical outcome was quite different. By retreating from multilateralism and alienating allies, America might have, perhaps inadvertently, diminished its own leverage and inadvertently granted China more room to maneuver, to grow, to become an even more formidable presence. It makes you wonder, doesn’t it, about the true cost of some of those 'America First' decisions.