Dara Massicot, Aaron David Miller, Andrew S. Weiss
{
"authors": [
"Aaron David Miller"
],
"type": "commentary",
"blog": "Emissary",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "americanStatecraft",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "ASP",
"programs": [
"American Statecraft"
],
"regions": [
"United States",
"Iran"
],
"topics": [
"Domestic Politics",
"Foreign Policy",
"Military"
]
}Trump delivers the State of the Union address on February 24, 2026. (Photo by Kenny Holston/pool/Getty Images)
Trump’s State of the Union Was as Light on Foreign Policy as He Is on Strategy
The speech addressed Iran but said little about Ukraine, China, Gaza, or other global sources of tension.
Most State of the Union addresses don’t focus on foreign policy. After all, it’s not voters’ main preoccupation. And the U.S. Constitution talks about “a more perfect union,” not a more perfect world. President Donald Trump’s lengthy speech on Tuesday night was no exception. Still, the final twenty minutes of his address largely focused on praising American heroes’ actions abroad and acted as a kind of world tour victory lap for Trump.
In a way, the foreign policy discussion shouldn’t be surprising. At home, Trump has been battered by low approval ratings, the Supreme Court’s rejection of his tariffs, and the killings of America citizens by federal agents in Minneapolis. So it’s quite natural Trump would look to an arena where he could operate with few constraints and act unilaterally.
Congress goes in and out of session, as does the Supreme Court. But the presidency is the always-on Energizer Bunny of the U.S. political system, with the Constitution’s imprimatur to act—and act boldly. On Tuesday night, Trump leaned into this notion, especially as it relates to his overseas actions.
Trump touted his military successes against Iran’s nuclear sites in June and President Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela, as well as the strikes on alleged drug-running boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific. In an unusual move, he awarded two military pilots—one from the Venezuela raid, and one from the Korean War—the Medal of Honor. Trump referred to his determination to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon but in an interesting twist dropped much of the threatening language about the massive military buildup in the region. Indeed, no president has ever announced real-time military operations in a State of the Union address. Trump only briefly laid out a case for possible military action against Iran, pointing to the regime and its proxies’ global terror, the repression of its citizens, and its quest for a nuclear weapon.
At the same time, Trump presented himself as a peacemaker, claiming credit for ending no fewer than eight conflicts, including the ceasefire between Israel and Iran. He only briefly mentioned Ukraine, despite that Tuesday marked the beginning of the fifth year of that war. He also seemed to suggest a preference for a negotiated deal with Iran, however unlikely that appears. There was very little on China, even less on the Western Hemisphere, and nothing on North Korea.
Still, one might be forgiven for feeling that Trump’s assertions on foreign policy lacked depth and seriousness. State of the Union addresses aren’t for strategy—they tick off accomplishments and a vision for the coming months.
Trump clearly and deservedly claimed credit for bringing home the remaining Israeli hostages and bringing Maduro to justice and perhaps over time opening up the Venezuelan economy. But on so much else, the president’s foreign policy remains a work in progress. What will be the legacy of policies that cater to strongmen? Or those that undercut U.S. allies? What about those that undermine America’s soft power by taking a wrecking ball to USAID and Voice of America?
Indeed, when you look at the wars between Russia and Ukraine, Israel and Hamas, and Israel and Iran—the three conflicts Trump has deployed his son-in-law and his best friend to negotiate—you see just how far from the finish line Trump is on any of them. Nor—a year into his second and final term—is it clear that Trump has the right strategy to manage, let alone resolve, them.
About the Author
Senior Fellow, American Statecraft Program
Aaron David Miller is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, focusing on U.S. foreign policy.
- Is the Russia-Ukraine War Vibe Shift Real?Q&A
- Carnegie’s Summer Beach ReadsCommentary
- +8
Sophia Besch, Eric Ciaramella, Steve Feldstein, …
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Emissary
- The Two Key Takeaways From Xi’s Egypt VisitCommentary
Amid celebrations of bilateral ties was a deeper focus on stability in the Middle East.
Amr Hamzawy
- Is the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Performance Art or Meaningful Collaboration?Commentary
Xi, Putin, and other regional leaders are back-slapping in Bishkek, but the SCO has yet to answer the most serious questions about continental Asia's economic future.
Evan A. Feigenbaum
- The Achilles’ Heel of the Shield of the AmericasCommentary
By focusing only on hard security, the Shield ignores the conditions that fuel cartel power.
Alejandro Martin Rodriguez, Kayly Ober
- The Iran War Has Sparked a Domestic Crisis in KenyaCommentary
The conflict has sent economic and political shock waves through a country with no representation at the negotiating table—and Kenya is not alone.
Georgia Schaefer-Brown, Jane Munga
- Inside the Global Race to Erode a Battery Manufacturing MonopolyCommentary
Over the past decade, China has moved from marginal player to major producer of all things batteries. The United States, Europe, and others are aiming to balance the market.
Milo McBride