American Statecraft Program

Has Trump ushered in a new era of foreign policymaking, or beneath the bluster, is it business as usual? In our latest newsletter, we asked @CarnegieEndow scholars: What sets Trump's foreign policy apart this term? See more – and subscribe for our latest foreign policy analysis! – in the Next Generation Statecraft newsletter (link below).

Will Germany make good on the promise of the Zeitenwende or drift back toward a more cautious defense policy? @SophiaBesch tells @CChivvis that Germany's strategic shift is here to stay. Full podcast episode: youtube.com/watch?v=BCNfKM…

Washington needs to be doing much more hard-nosed thinking about what a realistic future for U.S.-Germany relations looks like. Germany is undeniably a pivotal state and U.S. relations with it can't be sidelined without serious consequences. But old shibboleths will have to be chucked to make the relationship productive again for both sides. Great to have @SophiaBesch on Pivotal States to think through what we need to do NOW to build the intellectual foundations for the future relationship.

🎧 NEW on the Pivotal States podcast: The war with Iran, Trump’s claims on Greenland, and possible U.S. troop withdrawals have all put U.S.-German relations under strain. Has trust been irreparably broken? @SophiaBesch joins @CChivvis to discuss⤵️ youtube.com/watch?v=BCNfKM…

🆕What can the United States do with the power it has? Our Future of American Power projectexamines the sources and trajectory of U.S. influence. In the first paper of the series, @NickKitchen1 tackles how to measure national power in the first place: carnegieendowment.org/research/2026/…

As Trump meets with Xi in Beijing this week, U.S.-China relations are at the center of global attention. What lessons can be drawn from Biden's China strategy? @CChivvis & @mrworldwide1701 offer insights on how America can manage the relationship: carnegieendowment.org/research/2026/…

.@carnegieendow @ceipstatecraft Want the best analysis of the upcoming Trump-Xi summit? Tune into my conversation with @DSORennie May 12 10-1045 EDT Register here: carnegieendowment.org/events/2026/05…

.@carnegieendow @ceipstatecraft Want 45 minutes of the best analysis of next week's Trump-Xi summit? Tune into my conversation @DSORennie Tuesday May 12 10-1045 EDT. Register here: carnegieendowment.org/events/2026/05…

.@carnegieendow @ceipstatecraft @DSORennie is the best China analyst in biz. Join us May 12 10-1045 EDT to discuss upcoming Trump-Xi summit. Register here: carnegieendowment.org/events/2026/05…

What’s the best way to assess a nation’s power? Quantitative rankings can be misleading, says @NickKitchen1. See the first paper in @CEIPStatecraft's Future of American Power project for what analysts can turn to instead: carnegieendowment.org/research/2026/…

.@CarnegieEndow @ceipstatecraft @foreignpolicy with the inestimable @DanKurtzer Trump wanted an historic transformation; what he may end up with is just another round with benefits - for Iran. foreignpolicy.com/2026/05/01/tru…

What can the U.S. actually do with the power it has? @CEIPStatecraft’s new Future of American Power project assesses both the quantity and quality of American power. We broke down some key indicators – and put them in comparison to China.

"If allies want American protection, they are in competition with each other." @stephenwertheim at the @QuincyInst:

President Trump’s foreign policy reflects a profoundly broken decisionmaking process. But it’s not too late for the next president to turn things around. @aarondmiller2 and @DanKurtzer explain: carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2026/…

The Iran war is strengthening U.S. adversaries and straining its allies, @CChivvis argued at @HamiltonSoc. Full debate: youtube.com/watch?v=Iu3wrz…

I have a new piece out in @lawfare unpacking Trump's recent Section 232 actions on metals and on pharmaceuticals: 1. Courts have been deferential to the Executive Branch on Section 232 issues since the Supreme Court upheld the President's authority to impose tariffs under the statute in 1976. In recent years courts have upheld the President's authority to modify tariffs outside of the original statutory timetable. Courts have also made clear that they will be deferential to the President's determinations about whether imports of a specific investigated product impair or threaten to impair U.S. national security. 2. That said, I think some of the products that Trump has classified at subject to his Section 232 metals tariffs as "derivative" of metals products could be vulnerable to legal challenge. Legislative history suggests that when Congress amended Section 232's predecessor statute to allow the President to regulate the import not just of an investigated product, but also of "derivatives," Congress meant "products almost entirely made of the underlying material." In particular, Congress seemed to have been thinking about petroleum--e.g., if 232 was going to regulate oil imports, Congress wanted the President to be able to regulate imports of refined oil products and not just crude. During Trump's first term, derivatives generally had to be made up of at least 2/3rds the underlying metal, and derivatives were generally things like metal pipe, wire, or screws. Today, the threshold is 15%, and derivatives include A/C units, ovens, heavy equipment, etc. The Trump Administration's current approach to metals derivatives seems to posit that a "derivative" product is one that "contains" the underlying metal. But Congress used the word "derivatives," not simply "any product that contains a material that has been investigated." Neither common-sense understandings of the word "derivative" nor legislative history suggests that this is the best read of the statute. 3. The interesting part of Trump's new pharma tariffs is how he is using them to promote deals with his Administration: drug companies get a lower (and potentially 0) rate if they (a) have a deal to onshore production, and (b) agree to "MFN pricing," which generally means lowering prices and selling on TrumpRx. Section 232 almost certainly authorizes the Administration to strike deals for tariff exemptions in exchange for onshoring. And I am 100% in favor of lower drug prices. But I do wonder if "lowering prices and selling on TrumpRx" is sufficiently connected to U.S. national security to fit in Section 232. 4. Trump is a heavy user of Section 232, with many investigations still ongoing. Indeed, his two administrations are now responsible for well over half of all Section 232 investigations undertaken since Commerce started administering the statute in 1980.

.@carnegieendow @CEIPStatecraft Trump's national security decision making is broken. It's too late for this President. But here's what next one needs to do to fix it. With the inestimable @DanKurtzer carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2026/…

The war in Iran is deeply unpopular, but that won't be enough to stop the next war in the Middle East. Preventing future conflicts will require a serious intellectual and political search into the conditions that lead to unwise wars. @stephenwertheim at the @QuincyInst:

More Americans need to connect the hubris behind unwise wars with the hubris behind the larger strategy of "peace through strength"

NATO has a clearer purpose today than it has in decades, says @stephenwertheim. But it’s less clear why the United States should remain the alliance’s leading security provider. @Miller_Center