What IR Theory Predicts About Trump 2.0

From Foreign Policy:
"The key issue is the impact that Trump’s imposition of tariffs, his
withdrawal from the World Health Organization, and his other recent
initiatives are going to have on American lives. And part of the answer
to that question depends on how the rest of the world reacts to Trump’s
heavy-handed attempts to browbeat and bully them—starting with some of
our closest allies.
..
As I see it, what we have here is a clash of rival theories about how
the world works. The first is my old friend balance-of-power/threat
theory; the second is the theory of collective goods. Both perspectives
tell you important things about how the world works; the question is
which one provides the clearest insights into what is likely to happen
now.
..
As balance-of-threat theory predicts, some leaders in these countries
are already advocating concerted efforts to resist Trump’s dangerous
agenda. Last week, former Canadian Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland
(who hopes to replace Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as leader of the
Liberal Party) called for a summit meeting of Mexico, Panama, Canada,
and the European Union to develop joint responses to Trump’s tariffs and
sovereignty threats. When Canadian hockey fans boo the playing of “The
Star-Spangled Banner”—as they did this weekend—you know something is
seriously amiss. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates,
Qatar, the Palestinian Authority, and the Arab League issued a joint
statement flatly rejecting Trump’s proposal to ethnically cleanse
Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank. Such efforts are bound to
increase if Trump continues down his current path, and some countries
are going to look for help from Beijing, if only to gain more leverage
against Washington.
In short, one of the more enduring and powerful theories of world
politics suggests that Trump’s radical approach to foreign policy is
going to backfire. He may win a few concessions in the short term, but
the long-term results will be greater global resistance and new
opportunities for America’s rivals.
..
Nobody doubts that the United States has a mailed fist, but we are about
to discover what happens when the velvet glove is removed. As realists
have warned for decades, and as a parade of past aggressors reminds us,
states that use big-stick diplomacy to browbeat and punish others
eventually overcome any initial reluctance to balance and the obstacles
to collective action and end up with fewer friends, more enemies, and
far less influence. I wouldn’t have thought it possible for the United
States to permanently alienate its closest neighbors and many
long-standing partners, but that is precisely where we are now headed."