By Dr. Dakoda Trithara

As we say goodbye to 2025, the global stage is set for 2026 to be another year where the United States moves away from the post-WWII order it created. From the continued strain of President Trump’s tariffs on the global economy and his escalating bombing campaign in the south Caribbean to the rising complexities of Middle East peace, these key areas will shape international relations in the coming year.

Tariffs and Trade Tensions

In April, Trump held his “Liberation Day” press conference where he announced far-reaching tariffs on nearly all US trading partners, with some rates at 50% or more. These import taxes weren’t a surprise. Candidate Trump openly campaigned on raising import taxes paid by American businesses and consumers, going as far as to say, “To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariff.’”

Such efforts were not solely aimed at geopolitical rivals engaged in activity against US interests, such as China stealing American intellectual property or India buying Russian oil. US allies are also affected by Trump’s broad import taxes, which are working to reshape global trade relations and hurt US consumers. As former Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba said, “The US government’s broad trade restrictions will have a significant impact not only on the economic relationship between Japan and the US, but also on the global economy and the multilateral trading system as a whole.”

While Japan would go on to sign a framework trade agreement with the US that would lower, not eliminate, the country’s threatened tariff rates, other allies have not catered. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has made several remarks about how Trump's tariffs symbolize a fundamental shift away from the liberal trade order that has defined relations between Canada and the U.S. for decades. To keep trade negotiations alive, Carney did scrap Canada’s planned Digital Services Tax that would impact American tech firms, but he has also sought to lessen Canadian dependence on the US by expanding trade and security ties with the European Union.

The US-Mexico-Canada Agreement is set for a mandatory joint review in 2026, and the US Supreme Court will issue its decision regarding Trump’s use of emergency powers to order widespread blanket tariffs, so there is no doubt that protectionist trade policy will continue to be atop the agenda.

Conflict in the Caribbean

In September, the Trump administration announced the US military had bombed and killed alleged drug smugglers in the Caribbean Sea. The bombing campaign is part of a larger regime change effort in Venezuela, a country Trump has exerted maximum pressure on by authorizing CIA operations, moving the largest aircraft carrier in the US military, the USS Gerald R. Ford, to the region, and unilaterally declaring Venezuelan airspace closed. The extrajudicial executions, which by December had killed at least 83 people, are actions justified by Trump as necessary to stopping President Nicolás Maduro and his narco-terrorists from bringing fentanyl into the county.

The problem with that justification is that the vast majority of fentanyl smuggled into the US comes across the land border with Mexico, after transnational criminal organizations in Mexico produce the drug with precursor chemicals obtained from China. The problem with the tactic, particularly second strikes on capsized crew, is that is the textbook definition of carrying out an illegal order to commit law of war violations, as outlined in section 18.3.2.1 of the Department of Defense Law of War Manual.

UN officials and members of Congress have expressed significant criticism regarding the bombings. The criticism centers around the legality and humanitarian impact of these attacks. Volker Türk, the UN human rights chief, described the US strikes on alleged drug boats as “unacceptable," calling on the US to stop the attacks as they constitute violations of international law and have human rights implications.

Bipartisan US senators share similar concerns, with some, such as Senator Rand Paul (R-K), saying Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is either lying or incompetent because of his shifting responses regarding second strikes. While a previous War Powers resolution blocking US forces from engaging in hostiles with Venezuela without congressional approval failed in the Senate, a second resolution will be voted on in December. As tensions escalate and the possibility of deeper military involvement grows, this issue stands as a critical point to watch in 2026, particularly since it could ultimately end with the US in open warfare.

A New Board of Peace

In November, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) passed Resolution 2803 (2025), endorsing the US Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict. The resolution provides the US with a legal mandate to create both an International Stabilization Force (ISF), a multinational armed body that will monitor security in Gaza, and a new governing body called the Board of Peace (BoP) that will oversee the redevelopment and political transition in Gaza until the end of 2027. The resolution bestows international legitimacy and momentum to Trump’s peace plan for the Israel-Gaza war, which is crucial considering reported Israeli violations of the ceasefire and growing White House frustration with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

While we know that Trump will serve as chair, much remains unknown about the BoP. Trump previously touted former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair as a playing a prominent role, though Blair has since been dropped from consideration due to objections by Arab states. With the BoP charged with authority over the ISF, which can “use all necessary measures to carry out its mandate,” it matters greatly who is represented on the BoP.

As Trump looks to move into phase two of his peace plan next year, he will announce the other members which will include “heads of the most important countries.” Presumably, this won't include Israel for conflict-of-interest purposes, and Egypt might also not be a BoP member since it is directly named as collaborative partner of the ISF. This leaves other regional players like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates as possible candidates, all of whom have engaged in Trump’s pay-to-play foreign policy this second term. Soon we shall see if gifting the president a $400 million plane, spending billions on Trump-backed crypto, or pledging to invest $600 billion in the US makes a country important enough to be on the BoP. And who knows, perhaps important business leaders will also find their way to a seat.

Eyes Up

Undoubtedly, there are other issues worth watching in 2026, such as what happens in Ukraine and Sudan. However, the three issues discussed above represent challenges to the liberal order by pushing back against free trade, undermining international law, and leeching off the legitimacy of the UNSC to create a new, unaccountable entity to oversee international peace and security. Eyes up, as 2026 may bring intense tests to global cooperation and peace.

Dr. Dakoda Trithara is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of South Carolina Aiken. He holds a PhD in political science with a concentration in international relations from the University of Calgary. His teaching and research interests focus on digital politics and global governance.

Contact: dakoda.trithara@usca.edu