International relations are expected to undergo great changes under the Donald Trump administration.

The new US leader’s pragmatist view of world affairs, highlighted in his presidential campaign process, will come to the fore, influencing American foreign policy.

It is, in a sense, a more business-like approach than a political one. It instinctively aims to seek self-interest, or “America First.” 

In this vein, the Trump administration will likely design a foreign policy that would distance itself from the global governance. The president seems to think that global governance has damaged the American economy and industry.

Elected under the popular slogan “Make America Great Again,” Trump will be occupied with rebuilding the nation. He believes, in his mind, that a great America will result from less international intervention but further pragmatism.

However, it is doubtful that his domestic-centered pragmatism and reduced engagement in global governance will realize his dream of making America great again, when world peace, security and even economic growth have been operated and guaranteed by the global governance system.

The first challenge to his pragmatist foreign policy would be Russia, or the “Putin Empire.” Trump needs first of all to clearly know the avaricious taste of his Russian counterpart.

Putin annexed the Crimean Peninsula with masked Russian soldiers and occupied the city of Sevastopol. He is strongly suspected of having ordered the hacking of the US presidential elections, the 2016 Democratic National Convention in particular. He has unilaterally been engaged in the Syrian civil war, in flat defiance of the Barack Obama administration’s no intervention policy. Faced with such provocative acts by Putin, Trump seems, nevertheless, to dream of a “bromance” with him. It should be noted for him that President Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats from Washington. In this circumstance, such a bromance will not bear fruit.

The second challenge to Trump’s pragmatism is China’s rise in economic and military powers.

Chinese President Xi Jin-ping aims to further strengthen its economic capacity with the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Composed of 57 member states in the Asia-Pacific region, the China-led bank is envisioned to compete for a role currently played by US-led global financial organizations such as the International Monetary Fund or World Bank. China built the Lioatung aircraft carrier in 2014 and operated it this year in the West Pacific on a reconnaissance mission.

These acts reflect a challenge posed by China to the US-led world order. Moreover, in the 2016 G-20 Summit Conference, China rejected protectionism and advocated free trade. Conversely, the country has been intensifying retaliation against South Korea over its decision to deploy the US-led anti-missile Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system. China has banned chartered fights between Seoul and Beijing and limited trade and business. All this points to difficulties that US pragmatist foreign policy would face.

The third issue is the North Korean nuclear and missile development ambitions. The ambitions have lasted over the past three decades and now the communist state has declared itself a nuclear state. Kim Jong-un test-fired last year two nuclear weapons and launched 20 missiles. It was reported that the North Korean leader would test-fire an intercontinental ballistic missile this year. The Trump administration is, although doubtful, resolved to seek a negotiated solution on the issue. A negotiated solution obviously needs positive Chinese cooperation.

If the Trump administration fails to break off the North Korean nuclear and missile threats, the American presence and influence in Northeast Asia will be put under threat. And if that happens, it would prompt Japan and Taiwan to make their own nuclear weapons and develop missile technology. Nuclear and missile domino effects would have greater room to spread throughout the region, endangering regional peace and security in the end.

In a nutshell, a premature shift from intervention to pragmatism is not a good omen for a promising future of the Trump administration. It is desirable that the Trump administration forges its foreign policy to positively embrace global governance, rather than to keep away from it. 

By Heo Mane (Professor emeritus of Pusan National University)

The writer currently serves as the president of the Korea-EU Forum. The views expressed here are of his own. -- Ed.