Does the United States have a vocation as superpower?

As an American who embraces my country’s foundational principles of a constitutional republic, the early months of Donald Trump’s second term have been deeply trying. Following an authoritarian playbook, Trump’s rapid-fire actions have undermined the legitimacy of democratic norms and institutions in the United States. They have also damaged the reputation and image of my country and its people throughout the world.

By rejecting the key tenets of the U.S. system of governance, Trump is showing that he lacks the vocation to lead a superpower that defends national interests. Promoting core values is more than a liberal fantasy. It is the bedrock of U.S. global influence. The U.S. is destroying the main sources of its power in the world.

Not surprisingly, Trump’s disdain for liberal values and his aggressive posture on the global stage have revived references to The Ugly American, a 1958 political novel about U.S. policy in Southeast Asia. The book sharply critiques arrogant U.S. officials and diplomats who had contempt for foreign languages and customs, which alienated local populations.

No where has the dissipation of goodwill towards the United States been more dramatic than Canada, where Trump’s absurd tariffs and insults have ignited nationalist passions. Canada’s The Globe and Mail has featured titles such as “The Return of the Ugly American.”

Writing in The Atlantic, journalist Anne Applebaum suggested that “ugly American” may be too benign and that we are in fact witnessing a new type, the “brutal American” — not only arrogant, but cruel. Trump and vice-president J. D. Vance’s humiliation of president Volodymyr Zelenskiy in the White House on February 28 marked a low point — at least so far.

Anti-Americanism has a long and unhappy history in Latin America. When I lived and studied in Colombia a half century ago, I perceived a strong anti-American current, derived not only from U.S. involvement in multiple coups in the region, but also from the Vietnam War and racial injustice in the United States. In the 2000s, the Iraq war inspired an anti-U.S. sentiment in Latin America, as did U.S. policy towards Israel and Gaza more recently. The truth is that the U.S. image has been eroding for some time, not only in many parts of the world, but in the United States itself, where many Americans have lost confidence in their institutions and leaders.

Trump has shrewdly exploited, and benefited from, the crisis in confidence of many Americans. While past administrations failed to give democracy and the human rights the importance they deserved — examples of hypocrisy abound — Trump has taken an extreme stance, with a nasty edge, centered on “America First” and his own, personal interests.

Trump’s radical departure from traditional methods has already had far-reaching consequences.

Under the direction of Elon Musk and the DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) the administration has indiscriminately slashed the government bureaucracy. It is hard to see how the cuts contribute to “America First.” The human costs have been enormous. And an atmosphere of uncertainty and fear has taken hold.

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has been dismembered, removing one of the main instruments of “soft power” the U.S. was able to deploy throughout the world. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy, who was greatly influenced by The Ugly American, created USAID. Kennedy proposed a new approach, focused on fostering cultural sensitivity, directly engaging at the grassroots level, and assisting the poor and disadvantaged.

The idea of projecting a more sympathetic face of U.S. diplomacy was also aimed at strengthening U.S. national security. This meant countering communism and, in Latin America, the Cuban Revolution. Kennedy, a staunch anti-communist, wanted to show that reform, not revolution, was the answer. Today, as the United States seeks to counter China’s spreading influence and deployment of its own “soft power” in Latin America, the dismantling of U.S. foreign assistance is self-defeating. The stereotypical American portrayed in the 1958 novel has a name and a face.

In addition to destroying U.S. foreign assistance, the other radical and unexpected element in Trump’s second term is his appetite to expand U.S. territory, which harks back to the 19th century. His pledge to retake control of the Panama Canal — highlighted in Trump’s inaugural address and repeated in his first speech before Congress — became more ominous when he recently ordered the U.S. military to develop options.

This is not, however, a revival of the 1823 Monroe Doctrine, which has become a shorthand to keep out external actors — in this case, China — from Latin America. But Trump’s ambitions go beyond Latin America. He also wants to seize Greenland, turn Gaza into a beach resort, and make Canada the 51st state.

One can search in vain for a “Trump doctrine.” After all, “doctrine” implies some coherence that is inconsistent with Trump’s impulsiveness and erratic decision-making. It is possible, though, to discern some patterns about how Trump tends to deal with big, strong countries like Russia and China — in contrast to small, weaker countries in, say, Central America. He is driven by power and money, rewarding loyalty and punishing those who refuse to accede to his demands.

What is most striking about Trump’s return to power is the rupture in the transatlantic alliance. Trump’s break with European powers was most shockingly reflected in Vance’s speech at the Munich Conference in February. Vance told Europe that its main weakness is internal, stemming from a lack of democratic values. He used the platform to meddle in domestic politics and support far right movements in Europe. For the rest of his term Trump will likely treat Europe with the indifference that has marked the U.S. approach to Latin America.

After Trump’s first week in office, some suggested that Latin America would be a foreign policy priority — for good or ill. They pointed to the surprising salience of the Panama Canal issue, the confrontation with Colombian president Gustavo Petro, the threat of tariffs on Mexico (and Canada), and Marco Rubio being the first latino secretary of state taking his first foreign trip to Central America and the Dominican Republic.

By now, however, it is clear that U.S. Latin American policy under Trump is following a familiar pattern. In priority rankings, the region is pretty much where it usually is. The high-stakes wars in Ukraine and Gaza, and China globally, take precedence.

No one believes Trump’s hardball tactics, bullying and humiliation of other leaders will stop. Most regional governments will try to avoid a fight with Trump. But his predatory approach will exact an enormous cost in U.S. credibility and reliability — in Latin America and globally — not befitting a serious superpower.