I sat down with Froman again recently to take stock of this remarkable period that has upended so many of the structures and assumptions that have defined modern American power. Few institutions are more closely associated with analyzing (and sometimes influencing) those shifts than the Council on Foreign Relations, a forum where for more than a century policymakers, scholars, business leaders, and journalists have wrestled with America’s changing role in the world.
(This conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity. Disclosure: I am a CFR member.)
Since then, it seems fair to say there have been some additional weeks that might compete! How do you think about this now?
Even before the current war with Iran began, you had Vice President Vance’s speech in Munich in 2025, which began a year-long discussion about the Transatlantic relationship. You had April 2, “Liberation Day,” and the announcement of worldwide tariffs, which fundamentally upended, in many respects, the global trading system.
And you’ve had the conflicts with Denmark over the future of Greenland, which probably in retrospect had the most meaningful impact on the Transatlantic relationship of any of these events. Those effects are still reverberating.
What are you seeing emerge as the theory of the case for the Trump Administration’s foreign policy?
On the economic side, some advisors have worked to explain how tariffs or a weakening dollar will have a positive benefit on the U.S. economy. On the Transatlantic side, you’ve seen Secretary Rubio and others talk about a kind of tough love toward Europe—on the one hand underscoring our shared interests and on the other hand making it absolutely clear that the burden will need to shift more toward Europeans themselves.
The Council on Foreign Relations played important roles in the architecture of the post-war rules-based international system. Is that system gone? Are there still rules?
But that doesn’t mean there are no rules. Rather than anarchy, we’re likely to see “coalitions of the willing” come together around common interests and develop their own sets of rules.
So fewer rules, or different rules?
Meanwhile, the Trump Administration has convened ministerials on critical minerals and proposed initiatives like the “Board of Peace.” So we’re seeing older institutions supplemented or partially replaced by new approaches.
We talked a year ago about “polyamory” in today’s international relations or multi-alignment.
It’s inherently more transactional, which is consistent with President Trump’s view of the world. And it may be more focused on common interests than common values.
The Administration has emphasized leveraging the private sector where possible. That includes talking with oil companies about investing in Venezuela, encouraging investors to support Gaza reconstruction, and reauthorizing the International Development Finance Corporation, which seems to be one of the major institutions that the administration is comfortable with.
A few rapid-fire questions. What has surprised you most over the last year?
But most partners, they may not have been happy about it, but they responded by negotiating.
I worry about the immediate operational challenge of reopening the Strait of Hormuz, as well as the larger strategic question of whether the United States still has the political capital and goodwill necessary to assemble a coalition in a moment of crisis. The response of our allies to the request for helping the U.S. secure the strait raises the stakes not only for this conflict, but for how we think about alliance management more broadly.
What is the role of American soft power in the aftermath of all the cuts and changes?
So we're going to need new ways of exercising soft power. It's important that we do, because some of the actions that the administration has taken has had the effect of diminishing trust, and we need to be able to get other countries to follow our lead when it's critically important to our interests. Trust takes a long time to build, and can be dissipated very quickly. That means we're going to have to find some new tools, or reinvest in some of the ones that we have cut.
I’m hopeful on research, innovation, and talent attraction. These align with the President’s own economic goals, so funding may eventually be restored.
The agreement on releasing hostages in Gaza and returning remains, prisoner exchanges, and increased humanitarian aid was a significant accomplishment. I am hopeful about reaching phase two or three of those agreements, but we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that the first phase was important.
(To receive weekly emails of conversations with the world’s top CEOs and decisionmakers, sign up for the Leadership Brief here.)
Hence then, the article about cfr president michael froman on how trump is rewriting the world order was published today ( ) and is available on Time ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( CFR President Michael Froman on How Trump Is Rewriting the World Order )
Also on site :