The presidency of Donald Trump has fundamentally altered the concept of “trust” in modern governance, replacing a system of stable, value-based expectations with one defined by transaction and unpredictability. This erosion of trust operates on two fronts: internationally, where the bedrock of the transatlantic alliance has been shaken, and domestically, where the legitimacy of the administrative state and the democratic process itself has been called into question.
The Transatlantic Rift: From Values to Transactions
For nearly eighty years, the relationship between the United States and its European allies was “fiduciary”—based on the shared belief that both sides would “do what is right” due to common democratic values. Trump’s “America First” doctrine replaced this with a “predictive” or transactional model. By casting NATO as a “protection racket” and the European Union as a “globalist competitor,” he signaled that American support was no longer a guaranteed commitment but a service for sale.
- Conditional Security: Trump’s rhetoric—most notably his 2024 suggestion that he would encourage adversaries to do “whatever the hell they want” to allies who don’t meet spending targets—shattered the psychological deterrent of Article 5.
- Economic Hostility: The imposition of tariffs on European goods and the characterization of the EU as a foe in trade have forced European leaders to pursue “strategic autonomy,” moving away from reliance on Washington.
- The Unpredictability Factor: Allies rely on stability to plan long-term security. Trump’s sudden shifts—such as demanding the purchase of Greenland or threatening to withdraw from the Panama Canal—created a “low-trust environment” where allies now hedge their bets rather than cooperate fully.
Domestic Erosion: ICE and the Administrative State
Domestically, the crisis of trust is centered on the weaponization of government agencies. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency became a flashpoint for this distrust. Under Trump, ICE’s mission shifted from targeted enforcement to broad, aggressive sweeps that critics argue bypassed due process and targeted “apparent race.”
The use of federal forces in domestic cities and the expansion of “expedited removal” (deportation without a court hearing) created a perception of the government as an instrument of partisan will rather than an impartial enforcer of the law. This has led to a “chilling effect” on public trust, where large segments of the population view federal law enforcement as a threat to civil liberties rather than a guarantor of public safety.
The Foundation of Democracy: Faith in Elections
Perhaps the most enduring damage to trust has been the systematic delegitimization of the electoral process. By consistently claiming that the 2020 election was “stolen” and suggesting that future results might be “fixed,” Trump attacked the very mechanism that allows for the peaceful transfer of power.
- Normalization of Denial: His rhetoric moved election skepticism from the fringes to the mainstream of the Republican party, making “election integrity” a partisan wedge issue.
- Institutional Attacks: By disparaging the Federal Election Commission and the judiciary when they ruled against his claims, he weakened public faith in the “referees” of democracy.
- The Resulting Polarization: This has created a fractured reality where a significant portion of the electorate no longer believes in the validity of the democratic outcome, leading to a “crisis of legitimacy” that makes governance nearly impossible.
The legacy of these shifts is a world and a nation operating in a “low-trust” equilibrium. Whether in the halls of NATO or at the American ballot box, the assumption of good faith has been replaced by a cautious, often cynical, transactionalism.