'America First' didn't just return — it has always been there

On Monday, Donald Trump was inaugurated as the 47th President of the United States.

Media coverage of the event revealed deep divisions: Conservative pundits hailed what they called a "revolution of common sense" and the beginning of a new "golden age" for the country, while liberal journalists were much more critical, sounding the alarm over the second administration’s rapid policy shifts. These concerns included actions on illegal immigration, climate change, trade, tariffs and efforts to purge the so-called deep state.

Much of the Japanese media’s reaction was also negative. An editorial in the liberal Asahi Shimbun, often critical of the U.S., argued that "Japan must expand the scope of its autonomous diplomacy to promote a security and free trade system that does not rely solely on the U.S.," calling for a change in Japan-U.S. relations and a renewal of Tokyo’s foreign strategy.

Even the conservative Sankei Shimbun, which places greater importance on the Japan-U.S. alliance, asserted that “the world will become more uncertain under the ‘unpredictable’ Mr. Trump,” urging Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba to visit the U.S. as soon as possible and hold talks with the new U.S. president.

Furthermore, the Nikkei, a daily economic newspaper, argued that “Japan should continue to work to stop the further expansion of protectionism. ... We must not lower the flag of the free trade system that has brought prosperity to our country.”

All these articles seem to assume that Trump’s reelection has further divided the U.S. into Trump supporters and his opponents. Yet after watching the inauguration ceremony, I am growing more and more skeptical of such conventional views.

The mass media are writing and characterizing the reelection of Trump as a return to the policy of "America First.” That said, in my 27 years of experience as a diplomat, U.S. foreign policy has always been “America First,” and no matter who the president is, U.S. diplomacy has never been about “America Second,” period.

Although there seems to be a widening gulf between Trump supporters and anti-Trumpers, this doesn’t explain why the foreign policy strategies of the Trump and Biden administrations show more continuity than expected.

Furthermore, if the two sides are mutually incompatible and fundamentally different, it doesn’t explain why the Trump camp was able to expand its support base in the 2024 elections compared to 2020.

Trump stated at the end of his inaugural speech, “America will be respected again and admired again. ... We will be prosperous. We will be proud. We will be strong and we will win like never before. We will not be conquered. We will not be intimidated. We will not be broken. And we will not fail,” which for many non-Americans sounds exactly like something all-Americans can agree on.

When considering all of the above, it becomes apparent that the narrative suggesting a growing division between Trump supporters and anti-Trumpers in the U.S. is overly simplistic.

My current hypothesis is that the Trump phenomenon and movement, and the forces opposing it, are not fundamentally incompatible, but rather are like the two sides of the same coin, reflecting the difference between the “public facade” and the “true feelings” of ordinary Americans — both of which are deeply rooted in American culture.

Based on my personal observations, when Americans are prosperous, they tend to emphasize universal values like freedom and democracy. However, when they face challenges and difficult times, their true sentiments — what could be described as "America First" — come to the forefront.

This is the essence of what America is in my opinion. And if my ideas are true, then the Trump administration is no different from previous administrations and remains as inherently American as ever. Therefore, America's allies can and must engage with the unpredictable nature of a Trump administration without being swayed by the rhetoric and drama that invariably follows the president.

If that’s the case, how should we approach the second Trump administration in more concrete terms? It’s hard to believe that Trump’s personality and preferences will suddenly change.

However, there is some hope for other governments and officials. A closer look at the high-ranking appointees in both the first and second Trump administrations reveals some interesting trends and characteristics. These officials can be broadly categorized into three groups.

The first group consists of Trump loyalists. They’re not necessarily the best and the brightest. The second group may include the best and the brightest, but deep down, they despise the president. The third group is made up of opportunists in a positive sense — individuals with great ability and enough personal savvy to make the best use of the Trump administration.

In the first Trump administration, there were many individuals in the second category, but almost all of them had a falling out with Trump and eventually left the administration.

Perhaps as a result of this, Trump’s second administration, or Trump 2.0, largely excluded this group and instead filled key positions with loyalists. However, since the first group of loyalists will not compromise on their own unless Trump agrees, outsiders looking to work with the administration should rely on those in the third category — the opportunists with great ability and personal savvy.

Fortunately, former Sen. Marco Rubio, for example, a leading figure in the third category, was appointed secretary of state in the new administration. On his first full day on the job, Rubio met with top diplomats from "the Quad" grouping (comprising Japan, the United States, Australia and India) in Washington.

As Trump shifts America’s foreign policy priorities away from Europe and the Middle East to better focus on deterring an ambitious China, these diplomatic developments are of the utmost importance.

In the Indo-Pacific region, as concerns grow over the deterioration of U.S.-China relations, Beijing is shifting back to a “smile diplomacy” approach, moving away from its previously unpopular “Wolf Warrior” diplomacy. China appears to be attempting to create divisions between the U.S. and its allies, including Japan, whenever it perceives no prospects for progress in its relations with the U.S.

So far, the start of the second Trump administration's Indo-Pacific policy has been more successful than expected. What the future holds, however, remains to be seen.