President Donald Trump has disrupted the decades-long accepted status quo of U.S. foreign policy, bringing about positive change in U.S.-foreign relations. But while any change can be uncomfortable, Trump's drastic cut of irrelevant foreign aid and his laissez-faire sovereigntist approach to foreign policy has sent many "experts" rushing to fetch the smelling salts.
Context for Trump's actions is needed.
I first realized the importance of actively protecting both U.S. national sovereignty and the sovereignty of other countries during the Obama administration. At that time, I was a professional in international development in Africa and the Middle East. I was shocked to uncover through my research that the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) spent billions of taxpayer dollars funding Leftist NGOs to promote "sexual orientation and gender identity" (SOGI) ideologies, abortion, and other programs that interfered in foreign elections and politics. And most Americans had no idea.
This was the agenda of the Deep State and liberal Left, not of the American people. Yet, anti-American sentiment was growing worldwide.
Later, as I built an international affairs department as vice president of a Washington, D.C. policy organization, I was frequently approached by members of parliament from Central Europe, ambassadors from South America, religious leaders from Africa, and United Nations (UN) delegates from all over the world, asking for help against these so-called U.S. foreign "aid" programs. They were often afraid to refuse programs that (in their own words) trampled on their sovereignty, cultural beliefs, and religious freedom, simply because U.S. money would also be withheld.
During President Trump's first term, I took proof of these programs to the U.S. Congress, the White House, and the State Department. For example, a USAID-UN joint initiative for school children taught LGBT principles – like the program "Purple My School" (the color of transgenders) within the broader initiatives "Being LGBT in Asia" and "Being LGBT in Eastern Europe." I also obtained USAID curriculum that encouraged trainees to measure their gender or sexual identity "feelings" on a daily scale, complete with pictures of transgenders. These were only a couple of examples.
Although many Congress members agreed that these programs (no matter their position on LGBTQ activism) had no business in U.S. foreign aid, few had the courage or will to stop the funding.
During this time, I also learned from collaboration with the Hungarian embassy in D.C. that the leadership of the European Union had little regard for the sovereignty of conservative-based nations, particularly the family-based, traditional countries of Central Europe.
A picture of modern-day colonialism emerged: Western governments and organizations still believe that power and wealth grant them ultimate decision-making authority over smaller, poorer, and less developed countries. All in the name of "aid and assistance."
However, when I visited Hungary later, in 2019, to speak at the Demographic Summit, I learned that no matter how hard they are pushed, Hungarians will never relinquish their national identity or the ability to make their own decisions. In fact, I wrote a book about this, titled "Last Warning to the West: Hungary's Triumph Over Communism and the Woke Agenda," published by the Center for Fundamental Rights in Budapest.
During research for the book, I interviewed a young Hungarian law student whose words to me summed up Hungarian national identity and resonated with me as an American. He said, "Fighting for our sovereignty is our identity."
His simple words described how Hungarians overcame a thousand years of war, occupation, and oppression – from Mongols, Ottoman Turks, Habsburgs, German Nazis, and Soviet Russians – to remain Hungarian firmly. His words also described how Hungarians still fight today against the biased political elite of the European Union, who will not recognize Hungary's right to refuse to support the ongoing, costly Russia-Ukraine war, radical gender ideologies, mass unchecked immigration, and foreign political and election interference.
In fact, for refusing EU pressure, Hungary has received public and unjust labels of "authoritarian" and "democratic backsliding" and sanctions of billions of dollars for so-called violations of the "rule of law." What a load of bunk.
President Trump, in his first administration, emphasized the importance of respecting others' national identity at the 2018 UN General Assembly. He said, "Each of us here today is the emissary of a distinct culture, a rich history, and a people bound together by ties of memory, tradition, and the values that make our homelands like nowhere else on earth. ... I honour the right of every nation in this room to pursue its customs, beliefs, and traditions."
To their credit, I worked with the first Trump administration to create a more focused and sovereignist approach to foreign policy and aid. But for USAID, it was too little, too late. USAID's corrupt framework remained when former President Joe Biden took office, and his USAID was like the Obama administration's on steroids — including funding Hamas and transgender ballroom dancing in Peru. What a disgrace.
I was also astonished by the overt antagonism shown by the Biden administration towards the 1,000-year-old nation-state of Hungary. Former U.S. Ambassador to Hungary David Pressman, like EU politicians, routinely tried to humiliate Hungarians for making sovereign decisions, especially their position on the "big three" of war, gender, and migration.
Samantha Powers, then chief of USAID, arrogantly vowed to protect her version of "rule of law" in Hungary, based on radical leftist concepts. Since Powers mainly met with liberal opposition in Hungary, including LGBT rights activists, her moves were considered preparatory for "a color revolution" by the Hungarian government and conservative media.
Anti-American sentiment in Hungary, our NATO ally, may have reached an all-time high.
It was clear that in his first term, President Trump understood the importance of protecting national sovereignty; however, he now recognizes the urgency of this issue.
Recently, in Saudi Arabia, he outlined a very different approach to foreign policy and aid, criticizing decades of reckless Western intervention. He said that the "so-called nation-builders wrecked far more nations than they built," and that the interventionalists, neocons, and liberal nonprofits intervened in "complex societies that they didn't even understand themselves." On the other hand, he applauded the prosperity of the high-tech, industrial "modern Middle East" built by the people of the region themselves, who are developing "sovereign countries" and pursuing their "own unique visions" in their way. He also noted that their success did not come from rejecting their heritage, but rather from embracing their national traditions.
And he is right.
President Trump has addressed a decades-long problem in U.S. foreign relations, where overzealousness, ignorance, and arrogance often cause the U.S. to push beyond healthy boundaries, disregarding our partners' heritage, culture, and experiences. Don't misunderstand—we are proud to be American. We must defend our heritage. But we can be partners — even leaders — without being unbendable, unteachable, or uncompromising. We do not need to be involved in every war, conflict, and situation.
Thankfully, today, Trump's foreign policy focuses on what is important: defending America, supporting our allies, and promoting "the fundamental interest of stability, prosperity, and peace." These should always be the goals of U.S. foreign policy, not reckless interference in foreign domestic affairs or taking on problems that are not our own.
Trump's "Peace Through Strength" coupled with his "Peace Through Prosperity" is a realistic approach to foreign policy. It promotes strong American leadership, but is rooted in mutually beneficial economic relationships, serving as the foundation for negotiating international peace and stability. The Abraham Accords of the first Trump administration are clear proof that mutual economic interest can overcome even strong ideological differences.
For example, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which refused to recognize Israel as a sovereign state, did, however, acknowledge the wisdom of joining a trade agreement with Israel—and to its great advantage. In 2020, before the Accords, Israel-UAE bilateral trade was $180 million; by 2021, it had exceeded $1 billion.
Now, however, the Trump administration is criticised for being more interested in making money than promoting foundational American values. But this is objectively not true.
President Trump had no problem confronting South African President Cyril Ramaphosa about the reported genocide of Boer farmers. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly rebuked the German government's politically-motivated oppression of opposition party Alternative für Deutschland, saying it was "tyranny in disguise." U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance's speech in Munich made quite a stir when he called out the self-centered politicians orchestrating the decline of free speech in Europe and the use of lawfare against political opponents.
And true to his word, President Trump uncovered USAID's corruption and (to quote Prime Minister Viktor Orbán of Hungary) the "covert agents, shadow institutions, money laundering machinery, and the funding of politics and politicians in foreign countries." As Orban stated, "The whole Soros Empire is standing naked before us."
After years of frustration from the lack of response I received from U.S. leadership about the corruption of USAID, the Trump administration (in only a few months) reduced the mammoth machine to about 18% of its former funding and put what was left under the authority of the State Department. They also removed DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion), otherwise known as extreme "wokeism," from the U.S. Department of Defense, which directly affects relations with foreign partners in U.S. security cooperation.
These changes are all to the U.S. advantage: promoting national sovereignty through U.S. foreign policy improves our public diplomacy and image around the world, works to maintain the respect of our allies and adversaries, and guards U.S. taxpayers by making sure that foreign policy reflects the will of the people, not an extreme Leftist political ideology.
And while the sovereignty of other nations is important to this administration, thankfully, in direct contrast to Joe Biden, so is the sovereignty of the United States. This is why President Trump, in his first 100 days, reduced illegal border crossings nationwide by 93%, demands fair trade for the U.S, and asks that Europe share more of its responsibility for NATO.
The U.S. now has leadership that is philosophically aligned with conservative nations, promoting and embracing the importance of a sovereign nation-state. The question to consider now is "How can the U.S. continue to support the sovereignty of our allies?"
The strength of President Trump's pro-sovereignty position itself gives support. The cooperation of the Brussels and American elite has become less relevant. The funding of liberal nonprofits by the "transatlantic Deep State" is being dismantled by our administration and that of (for example) Hungary, Slovakia, and Georgia.
But more is needed to solidify future success.
First, President Trump's policies, which drastically changed the direction of U.S. foreign aid, should become part of U.S. law. Funding with U.S. foreign aid should be defined more narrowly within the Foreign Assistance Act and others, and implemented with clear oversight, transparency, and accountability measures (like program monitoring and evaluation), with emphasis on humanitarian assistance and economic development.
Second, the sentiments expressed by Rubio and Vance, reflecting the traditionally shared U.S.-European principles of free speech and citizen-led governments, must become official U.S foreign policy and backed by strong implementation. For example, Rubio's words to the German government, calling for a "reverse course" regarding the AfD, are a positive example that could be instituted more broadly and consistently.
And third, the U.S. must proactively endorse and support our allies, being emphatic to reinforce successes wherever they achieve a significant victory— in the ballot box, the courthouse, or on the world stage. The globalist Left is never afraid of celebrating and synchronizing activities, and neither should we be afraid.
Today, our strength lies in valuing our differences while actively embracing the common values that unite us. A notable example is the 250-year-long connection between Hungarians and Americans. The "Father of the U.S. Calvary", Michael Kováts, was a Hungarian who trained the Continental Army in Hungarian hussar tactics. Kováts also courageously fought for and gave his own life in the service of American independence during the Revolutionary War. He is buried and memorialized in the U.S. at The Citadel military academy.
The Post-Cold War status quo is no more. A new era of sovereigntist nationalism grounded in liberty, prosperity, and peace has been forged by President Donald Trump, and his patriotic allies are rallying to his banner.
Dr. Shea Bradley-Farrell spoke about the sovereigntist turn of U.S. foreign policy under the Trump administration at the first international conference of Hungary's Sovereignty Protection Office "Fight for National Sovereignty" in Budapest, June 24, 2025.
