Trump Shattered the Rules

The Game Trump Understands

While the world mocked Donald Trump’s bold statements about buying Greenland and challenging Panama’s control over the Panama Canal, he walked away with tangible results in Canada, Mexico, and Panama. His method – often described as chaotic and unpredictable – has proven remarkably effective. In record time, he pressured superpowers to adjust their policies, neighbors to alter their trade agreements, and an entire global order to tremble at its foundations.

When "Greenland is not for sale," the key is to cast your line and hope for a bite. Who needs diplomacy when you have confidence? (Image generated by Grok, created by xAI.)

But while his results are undeniable, journalists, politicians, and the public have struggled to keep up. Traditional media has been reduced to panic-driven analyses and half-baked explanations that are outdated the moment they’re published. In many ways, journalists have become the clowns many accuse them of being in this political game, more focused on covering scandals than grasping the bigger picture.

And this is where the core issue lies: Why can’t people – and the media – see the bigger picture? Trump’s actions aren’t just about one man; they’re about a world undergoing dramatic change. Superpowers are engaging in a new game of power, where resources, territories, and the trade routes of the future economy are the most critical pieces. Greenland, the Panama Canal, and America’s neighbors are not random targets – they’re carefully chosen pieces in a broader strategic puzzle.

This post isn’t just about what Trump has done. It’s about why he does it – and why it makes sense in a world that has entered a new era of geopolitical competition. And it’s about how we, distracted by headlines and tabloid analyses, risk missing the real changes that are reshaping global politics.

What Trump Actually Achieved

The Panama Canal

Donald Trump shocked the world when he declared that the U.S. should “take back” the Panama Canal. While many dismissed it as rhetorical bravado, it quickly became clear that he had a defined strategy in mind. The Panama Canal, one of the world’s most critical trade routes, has long been under Panama’s control. On top of that, China had established a significant economic presence in the region through its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

Trump’s pressure was relentless. By threatening Panama with economic sanctions and reduced trade, he forced the country’s leadership to reconsider its ties with China. The result? Panama withdrew from China’s Belt and Road Initiative and strengthened its cooperation with the U.S. This development secured American dominance over the canal without the need for military intervention. It was achieved through a combination of economic and political pressure – proof that Trump’s methods can deliver swift and concrete results.

Canada and Mexico

The tariff threats Trump aimed at Canada and Mexico drew heavy criticism from experts and politicians, who viewed them as reckless attacks on the U.S.’s closest trading partners. Yet in practice, the threats proved to be hard-hitting negotiation tools that produced quick results – though not without resistance.

Mexico
Trump demanded decisive action against drug trafficking and illegal immigration, threatening to impose 25% tariffs on all Mexican goods – a measure that could have cost Mexico over $86 billion annually. Fearing economic collapse, Mexico mobilized over 15,000 National Guard troops to its southern border with Guatemala to prevent migrants from heading north. At the same time, they deployed 10,500 troops along their northern border with the U.S. to reduce the flow of illegal crossings.

Canada
Canada faced immense pressure when Trump threatened to impose 25% tariffs on all Canadian goods and 10% on energy exports – measures targeting over $450 billion in trade. These threats posed an existential risk to Canada’s automotive industry, energy sector, and agriculture, all heavily reliant on the U.S. market.

In response, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced a $1.3 billion border reinforcement plan, which included:

• Deploying 10,000 border guards and personnel.
• Investing in helicopters, advanced technology, and surveillance equipment.
• Establishing a joint Canada-U.S. task force to combat organized crime, drug trafficking, and money laundering.
• Classifying Mexican drug cartels as terrorist organizations.
• Appointing a “Fentanyl Czar” to lead efforts against the opioid crisis, supported by $200 million in additional funding.

These measures earned Canada a temporary reprieve as Trump agreed to delay the tariffs for 30 days to evaluate Canada’s progress. However, Washington’s message was clear: Canada had to comply with U.S. demands to avoid economic disaster.

The Result

In both Canada and Mexico, Trump got what he wanted. Both nations had to adapt to his demands, and the tariff threats proved to be powerful leverage. At the same time, he sent a clear message that the U.S.’s neighbors could no longer take their relationship with Washington for granted – everything had to be earned anew.

By leveraging economic pressure and unpredictable rhetoric, Trump achieved rapid results that traditional diplomatic methods would have taken years to deliver. He reinforced America’s position in the region and ensured that both Mexico and Canada prioritized U.S. interests over their own.

A Strategy Rooted in Unpredictability

One of Trump’s most effective tactics has been his ability to create uncertainty about whether he will actually follow through on his threats. This puts opponents in an impossible position, often forcing them to concede to avoid catastrophic consequences. A clear example of this was his conflict with Colombia over the deportation of Colombian citizens from the U.S.

The situation arose when Colombian authorities refused to allow two U.S. military planes to land with deported Colombians. Trump responded immediately by threatening a 25% tariff on all Colombian goods, with a potential increase to 50% after one week. For Colombia, which is heavily reliant on exports to the U.S. – especially coffee and oil – this would have been economically devastating.

Initially, Colombia threatened retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods, but they capitulated within hours. Colombian President Gustavo Petro quickly reversed his stance and offered his presidential plane to return deported citizens from the U.S. According to available information, including posts on X (formerly Twitter), it took less than an hour from Trump’s announcement for Petro to declare that the plane would be used.

The speed of the response highlights the immense pressure Colombia faced. The tariff threats could have severely impacted the country’s exports, and Petro tried to reframe the reversal as a humanitarian gesture. He emphasized that the deportees would be treated with dignity, but many saw it as a capitulation to Trump’s demands.

The result of this episode was that the tariff threat was put on hold, but the U.S. maintained visa restrictions and heightened customs checks as leverage. While Colombia avoided the most severe consequences, the incident demonstrated how effective Trump’s strategy is. Opponents can never be certain whether he will follow through on his threats, and it is precisely this uncertainty that often gives him the upper hand.

Greenland – The One That Got Away?

Greenland is a prime example of how Trump’s unconventional methods can create significant ripple effects, even when he doesn’t achieve a direct victory. His statement about buying Greenland not only shook Denmark but also put the entire Arctic region on the global map. While Trump (so far) hasn’t managed to secure any concrete gains, it’s worth considering whether he may have achieved something far greater.

His interest in Greenland sparked a new debate on the island about independence. Greenland, long a part of the Danish Realm, has steadily developed a stronger national identity and an increasing desire for self-determination. For many Greenlanders, Trump’s attention served as a reminder of their island’s strategic importance – both geographically and economically. This, in turn, has intensified pressure on Denmark to invest more in the Arctic, including upgrades to defense and infrastructure.

The lingering question remains: Will Greenland one day break away from the Danish Realm and seek a new partner? Many point to the U.S. as a likely candidate, given its strategic interests in the Arctic and Trump’s clear enthusiasm for the island. If this is the case, it could be argued that Trump wasn’t just looking to buy Greenland but was laying the groundwork for a future American presence.

There is also speculation about Trump’s true goals. Was he aiming to expand the Pituffik Space Base – one of America’s most critical military installations in the Arctic – or perhaps even establish a new base on Greenland? For the U.S., Greenland is a key to both surveillance and strategic control over the Arctic. What would it take for Trump to be satisfied? Would Denmark need to further strengthen its military presence on the island to secure its coasts and the regions bordering North America? Or is Trump counting on the commotion he created to push Greenland further from Denmark and closer to the U.S.?

This raises a larger question: Was this Trump’s long-term goal all along? As Denmark fights to retain Greenland through economic investments and political maneuvering, the U.S. may have already planted the seeds for a future alliance with the island. Trump’s methods may not have yielded immediate results here, but the long-term consequences of his actions could prove to be far-reaching.

Journalists – The World’s Funniest Clowns?

Journalists like to present themselves as the guardians of democracy, but in dealing with Trump, many have proven to be little more than a propaganda machine for the established elite’s narrative. It’s a tragicomic spectacle: while they feverishly try to discredit Trump, they end up looking like clowns – trapped in a game they neither understand nor know how to play.

A large part of the media has never been neutral in its coverage of Trump. From day one, many have had one agenda: to demonize him, ridicule everything he does, and protect the old world order he has torn apart. But instead of confronting him with sharp analysis or well-thought-out criticism, they’ve churned out a flood of panicked and misguided attacks. Ironically, this has made Trump’s success even more entertaining – because the harder they hit him, the more they reveal their own incompetence and irrelevance.

Take Greenland as an example. When Trump floated the idea of buying the island, the media exploded with mockery and scorn. Headlines read like satire: “Greenland Is Not for Sale!” and “Trump Has Lost His Mind.” The problem? No one bothered to reflect on why Greenland was of strategic interest or what this said about U.S. focus on the Arctic. By the time journalists snapped out of their moral indignation, Trump’s statement had already highlighted Greenland’s strategic importance on the world stage. The Danish government was forced to invest billions in the Arctic, and Greenland’s internal debate on independence gained momentum. So, who really failed to understand the game?

Another example is Trump’s tariff threats against Mexico. Over a few frantic weeks, Trump created panic in the media by threatening to crush Mexico’s economy if they didn’t take action against illegal immigration and drug smuggling. Journalists fixated on worst-case scenarios of economic disaster for both countries, but before their analyses were even completed, Mexico had already capitulated. They ramped up border controls, intensified efforts to combat fentanyl smuggling, and signed agreements on Trump’s terms.

The biggest problem with today’s journalists is that they operate at a pace that belongs to a different era. Trump plays a modern game – he’s unpredictable, fast, and creates headlines with the press of a button. The media, on the other hand, is slow, fumbling, and desperate to find angles that fit their outdated methods. When things happen too quickly, they can’t dig up their usual weak counterarguments or arrange interviews with “experts” from the elite’s inner circle – experts who are often just as blindsided as the journalists themselves. The result? A narrative that’s constantly lagging behind and a public that turns instead to social media, where information is faster and more direct.

And this might be the most frustrating thing for journalists: Trump has mastered media logic better than they have. He knows how to control the narrative, set the terms of the debate, and create chaos that confuses his opponents. Instead of dealing with the reality he creates, journalists scurry around like headless chickens, desperate to spin the story against him. Ironically, they only end up proving his point: they’re not objective reporters but active players in a game they cannot win.

So yes, many journalists today have become the elite’s propaganda channel. And now that this elite is fumbling and floundering in the face of a new geopolitical power game, it’s no surprise that journalists seem to have lost their grip. Maybe Trump isn’t the problem. Maybe they’re the ones struggling to keep up.

The Bigger Picture – The Collapse of the Old World Order

Trump may be a polarizing figure, but the larger story here isn’t about one man. The world is in the midst of a profound transformation, with old structures and power balances crumbling. The diplomatic mechanisms we’ve known since the end of the Cold War – and even since the aftermath of World War II – no longer work. Great powers are now engaged in a far more ruthless game of power. What Trump is doing – whether one likes it or not – is embracing this new reality instead of denying it.

We live in an era where resources are scarce, and the most critical battles revolve around trade routes, territories, and strategic alliances. The Arctic has suddenly become a geopolitical hotspot, the South China Sea a ticking time bomb, and Africa a new battleground for the great powers’ competition over resources and influence. This is no longer a world where friendly negotiations and diplomacy always yield results. It’s a world of hard ultimatums, threats, and uncompromising strategic calculations.

Trump understands this. Perhaps it’s his background as a businessman – accustomed to tough negotiations – that makes him more comfortable in this new landscape. Or maybe it’s simply his chaotic and impulsive nature that happens to fit perfectly into a chaotic world order. Either way, he has shown that he can use economic pressure, unpredictability, and sheer ruthlessness to achieve results at record speed.

Take the Panama Canal as an example. For the U.S., it’s not just a trade route – it’s about strategic control. If China were to dominate the canal through its Belt and Road Initiative, it would deal a significant blow to U.S. global influence. Trump understood this and went straight to the heart of the issue: economic pressure and hardball threats against Panama. The result? China was pushed out, and the U.S. secured its dominance over the canal. This is geopolitics in the 21st century – fast, ruthless, and effective.

But Trump’s actions are only part of the story. His methods point to a bigger problem: Why haven’t other leaders grasped what’s happening? Why do they cling to outdated models of cooperation and multilateral diplomacy when the game has clearly changed? While China builds artificial islands in the South China Sea and Russia redraws borders in Europe, Western leaders remain bogged down in meetings and reports that no one reads. Trump, on the other hand, skips the formalities and dives straight into the new power game – to the confusion and outrage of political and media elites worldwide.

This is also why Trump divides opinion so sharply. He personifies this new, brutal world order and forces us to make a choice: Do we cling to ideals of dialogue and cooperation, or do we adapt to a reality where threats and power plays deliver faster results?

The real question is whether the world is ready to acknowledge that Trump isn’t an exception but a symptom. A symptom of a world where diplomacy is replaced by transactions, where alliances are no longer built on shared values but on hard interests. This isn’t just about Trump – it’s about a collapsing global order and the formation of a new one.

The media and the public spend too much time analyzing Trump the person and too little time understanding what he actually represents. While they obsess over his language, reckless tweets, and controversial statements, they miss the bigger picture: we are witnessing a world transforming before our eyes.

So, the question is no longer what Trump is doing – it’s why the rest of us are so far behind. Can we adapt to the new world order, or will we keep fighting for a lost past while others take over the game?

A World Adapting to New Rules

We are entering an era where the traditional world order is fracturing, and new rules are forcing their way to the forefront. Trump’s actions – unpredictable and brutal as they may be – have shown us how power politics is conducted in the 21st century: with swift threats, strategic maneuvers, and little regard for old diplomatic conventions. But what he does isn’t an exception – it’s a manifestation of a deeper shift in how the real world operates.

China has already embraced these new rules with its own version of geopolitical power plays, such as the Belt and Road Initiative and strategic alliances in Africa. The EU, on the other hand, often seems trapped in the belief that multilateralism alone will save them – a stance that makes the union vulnerable in a world where the strongest now appear to act without scruples. The question, therefore, is whether Europe and other regions can adapt to a new era where global power balances rest precariously between pragmatic ruthlessness and national interests.

For small states like Greenland, Panama, and Taiwan, the stakes are high. They are caught in the crossfire of great power rivalries, and their futures depend on who can offer them the most attractive – or least destructive – alliance. Greenland may have escaped Trump’s immediate grasp, but the seeds he planted could prove crucial in the future. In the cases of Taiwan, the South China Sea, or Africa, the question becomes how far the great powers are willing to go to secure their interests – and whether the world is prepared to accept the kind of uncompromising actions we are now witnessing.

Ultimately, we must ask ourselves: Is this just the beginning of an era where power politics is conducted the Trump way? What does this mean for a world that still romanticizes ideals of cooperation and diplomacy? Will future leaders find a balance between hard power and collaboration, or will they choose the fastest and most effective route – regardless of the consequences?

Perhaps this isn’t about Trump at all but about how he has spotlighted a world already in flux. The question we all must confront now is: Are we ready to play by the new rules? Or will we end up on the sidelines while others take the lead?