GEOPOLITICS | McCausland -The Next 100 Days: Trump’s Nat'l Security Trajectory + CALL TODAY@10:00AM

On April 29, President Donald J. Trump crossed the 100-day threshold of his second term–an arbitrary but symbolically important milestone in American politics. Unlike most of his predecessors, Trump has approached the presidency not as a steward of established norms, but as a disruptor intent on recasting the U.S. role in global affairs. In his second term, this disruptive instinct has only intensified.

Trump’s fiercest detractors and advocates would both agree that the first 100 days of this term have ushered in seismic policy shifts. His sweeping tariff regime, especially the 145% levy on Chinese imports, signals a fundamental reordering of international trade and global economics. Notably, the list of exempted countries – Russia, North Korea, Cuba, and Belarus – provoked speculation about potential geopolitical favoritism. Ukraine, meanwhile, was still hit with a 10% tariff despite its strategic partnership with Washington, further fueling unease among NATO allies who were also hit hard by Trump’s tariffs.

Foreign policy shifts have been equally striking. Trump gutted key soft power institutions, such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and USAID, signaling a pivot away from values-driven diplomacy. On national security, he cast doubt on NATO’s utility and questioned U.S. commitments under Article V – threatening the foundations of the transatlantic alliance.

As we look ahead, the next 100 days will be decisive. Trump has engineered deadlines–some deliberately set, others emergent – that will test his strategy, expose its contradictions, and determine its viability. Below are some of the key items that could set off geopolitical and economic ripple effects in the next 100 days.

The Debt Ceiling and Fiscal Policy

A primary flashpoint in the weeks ahead is the debt ceiling. The so-called “X-date,” when the U.S. Treasury exhausts extraordinary measures to avoid default, looms between mid-July and early October, according to projections by both the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Bipartisan Policy Center. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has implored Congress to pass the Trump-backed tax cuts by July 4, but legislative support even among Republicans is uncertain.

Markets are already pricing in higher credit risk: short-term yields have spiked, and credit default swaps on U.S. debt are widening. A default on the debt – even a technical one – would likely trigger a sell-off in Treasuries and a reallocation toward gold, commodities, and select emerging markets. Trump’s economic team believes budget cuts will boost growth, but their timing amid fiscal brinkmanship adds volatility to an already turbulent bond market.

The Trade War Intensifies

The administration’s tariff strategy has become the cornerstone of its economic policy–and its most globally consequential gamble. Trump’s 90-day pause on certain tariffs, excluding China, is set to expire July 9. At that point, unless negotiations reverse course, steep duties will resume on virtually all major trading partners. The UK is the only country that has thus far negotiated a trade deal with the Trump Administration. But this is largely an outline as opposed to a final agreement, and it requires London to essentially accept the continuation of the 10% baseline tariff. It is not a strong negotiating starting point for other countries that will seek a deal with the White House. 

Meanwhile, the 145% tariff on Chinese goods has effectively frozen bilateral trade, though some Chinese exporters were preparing shipments again after reports that China and the U.S. were meeting in Switzerland. Still, Beijing has retaliated with its own measures, targeting U.S. soybeans, semiconductors, and critical minerals. Despite supply chain realignments to Southeast Asia, corporate America remains exposed to Chinese manufacturing. The likely outcome is a fragmented global trade architecture with capital flowing toward regional supply hubs – India, Mexico, Vietnam – while multinationals bear the cost of decoupling.

Iran Nuclear Talks

Trump’s high-stakes talks with Iran could prove to be the most volatile of the current foreign policy flashpoints. His letter to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei offered negotiations on nuclear limitations in exchange for sanction relief. Yet the same letter threatened possible military action if a deal is not reached by June 24 – a ticking clock now audible in the region and global energy markets.

Early talks in Oman showed diplomatic promise, but three major impasses have emerged:

1.     Uranium enrichment: Iran insists on preserving low-level enrichment for civilian purposes, while the Trump team demands dismantling all centrifuges–a nonstarter for Tehran.

2.     Ballistic missiles: The U.S. wants Iran to include limitations on its ballistic missile program in any agreement. Iran has refused, viewing missiles as vital to its defense posture.

3.     Proxy support: Washington seeks to curtail Iranian support for groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis. But Iran sees these ties as non-negotiable and beyond verification.

Failure to reach an agreement would escalate military tensions across the Gulf, putting global oil supplies–and tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz–at risk. Markets would respond with upward pressure on Brent crude, potentially breaching $100/barrel, while insurance premiums for Middle East cargoes would spike. Tehran has threatened that if attacked, it will respond against American allies in the region (in Saudi Arabia, UAE, etc.), close the Straits of Hormuz, and attack U.S. forces deployed in the region (Iraq and Syria) using proxy forces.

NATO Summit in The Hague

The June 24–25 NATO Summit in The Hague will evaluate and stress the resilience of the alliance like never before. Trump’s prior skepticism toward NATO and his demand that European members hike defense spending to 5% of GDP (more than double the current benchmark) have already generated friction. Only 23 of 32 NATO members now meet the 2% threshold.

Key questions dominate the summit:

●       Will Trump reaffirm Article V guarantees?

●       Will the U.S. announce troop withdrawals or reduce nuclear assets stored in Europe?

●       Will American ballistic missile defense installations in Poland and Romania be scaled back?

Signals by Trump of disengagement from the Alliance would embolden Russia and deepen transatlantic mistrust. His recent threat to possibly use military force to acquire Greenland (a part of Danish territory and a NATO member) is hardly reassuring. European leaders are quietly preparing contingency plans to boost their independent defense capacities, including greater investments in PESCO and the European Defence Fund – which would benefit defense contractors in France, Germany, and Sweden.

On Ukraine, the U.S. has been an outlier. Trump has pushed for Kyiv to cede territory and abandon ambitions for NATO membership. The president has also said that Crimea is sovereign Russian territory – a position rejected by all NATO members. The recent mineral agreement between Washington and Kyiv as well as threats by Trump that he will expand sanctions against Moscow if Putin fails to accept an unconditional 30-day ceasefire are encouraging, but the alliance could still fracture over Ukraine policy. While the administration authorized a $50 million military sale to Ukraine, it remains a token gesture absent larger appropriations. Congressional gridlock over further aid remains likely.

G7 Summit in Canada

Set for 15 June in Canada – a country hit with a 25% tariff – the G7 meeting will likely be confrontational. All G7 countries, save the U.S., face impending trade penalties when the president’s 90-day pause expires. Trump’s America First agenda clashes with the G7's multilateral ethos.

Of particular note, Trump may again call for Russia’s readmittance to the G7, as part of a broader Ukraine settlement. While European members will resist, Trump’s unilateralism and support for Kremlin-friendly concessions could force a confrontation between Washington and the other G7 members.

A failed G7 meeting could trigger currency volatility. Investors may further hedge against dollar risk by shifting exposure to the euro, yen, or gold. Meanwhile, expectations for coordinated global economic policy will further erode, compounding economic uncertainty.

Ceasefire Developments

The Trump administration has a series of ceasefire negotiations in the works, but the effectiveness of these deals is uncertain. Hours after Trump announced a “full and immediate” ceasefire agreement between India and Pakistan, India accused Pakistan of breaking the deal. Tensions remain high and escalation could occur.

Only days earlier, Trump announced that Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen agreed to stop attacking American vessels in the Red Sea, prompting the U.S. to halt its ongoing air campaign. Speaking alongside Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Trump labeled the development as “very positive,” claiming the Houthis had "capitulated."

The deal, mediated by Oman and U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff, stops U.S.-Houthi hostilities in the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandab Strait, but it does not require the Houthis to stop their attacks against Israel. Just days earlier, a Houthi missile strike on Israel injured six and disrupted international flights, sparking an Israeli counterstrike on Yemen’s capital that did massive damage to the international airport.

Conflicting narratives about the deal have since emerged, with a senior Houthi official vowing continued attacks on Israeli-linked ships until the Gaza conflict ends. Since March, the U.S. has launched over 1,000 airstrikes against targets in Yemen at a cost of over $2 billion. The Red Sea remains a critical global trade route, and the cessation of Houthi attacks would relieve international shipping concerns. But even if this agreement holds, it may have a negligible effect on the ongoing war in Gaza that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu says is now intensifying. 

Meanwhile, European leaders have called for a full, unconditional 30-day ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha highlighted recent high-level discussions, including a "constructive" call with Trump and Zelenskyy, as a promising development. Despite a unilateral Russian three-day ceasefire, which Ukraine says was violated over 700 times, Russia continues to conduct deadly strikes and has not yet agreed to a ceasefire. The European leaders' historic joint visit to Kyiv, marked by a ceremony honoring fallen Ukrainians, signals a deepening commitment to Ukraine’s security and future.

Putin may be motivated to pursue peace and even called for direct talks with Ukraine. But he has refused to agree to a ceasefire as a precondition.  Zelensky has responded that he will meet Putin “personally” in Istanbul on 15 May.

The Russian leader will continue to seek major concessions.  He has argued that the so-called Istanbul Protocol (essentially a Ukrainian surrender) is the basis for negotiations.  Putin might also call for a summit with Trump. The Russian president’s overarching goal – more so than seizing control of Ukraine – is to destroy NATO, and he may believe that the best strategy is to insist on direct negotiations with Trump.  

Conclusions

The first 100 days of Mr. Trump’s second term have been perhaps the most tumultuous and consequential in modern American history. The global norms that have underpinned American foreign and security policy since World War II have all been called into question. The next 100 days could be decisive.