Podcast Summary

America First and the Future of Eurasian Geopolitics

Speaker: Dr. Raja Mohan
Host: Professor Peter Trubowitz, LSE Phelan United States Centre
Date: November 26, 2025
Podcast: LSE Public Lectures and Events

Overview

This episode features Dr. Raja Mohan, a leading authority on Indian and Eurasian geopolitics, discussing the implications of the "America First" doctrine for the future of Eurasia—especially Europe and Asia—and the global order. The talk explores the ideological origins, domestic contradictions, and foreign policy consequences of the Trump-era "America First" approach and examines Eurasia's growing geopolitical and geo-economic significance in a period of U.S. retrenchment and uncertainty.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Context and Stakes of "America First"

[03:53] Dr. Mohan sets the stage by explaining that U.S. foreign policy, especially during and after Trump, is undergoing a dramatic rethink, with major implications for Eurasia.

• Distance brings clarity: Non-Western actors often view U.S. shifts more objectively, focusing on adaptation rather than influence.
• Trump's polarizing impact means debates are often personalized in America/Europe, but outside powers must respond pragmatically.

"For those of us who are outside the transatlantic world, we... have to adapt to what America does because America is the number one power."
— Raja Mohan [04:29]

2. America First: Ideology and Contradictions

[13:36] Mohan details historical roots and four main themes of "America First":

• Repudiation of Globalization:
  Trump claims globalization has hollowed American industry, empowered rivals, and hurt the middle class.

  "You need more economic nationalism, more tariffs, more reshoring... to restore America to its old glory." [14:45]

• Nations as Communities, Not Markets:
  Emphasis on sovereignty and community over mere economic efficiency; elevates the interests of "places like Ohio" over global capital.

• Rethinking American Leadership:
  Breaks with the postwar liberal notion that the U.S. must always lead or "pay any price."

  "Trump is saying now there's no obligation here to actually pay any price, bear any burden." [18:15]

• Rebellion Against (Western) Liberalism:
  MAGA is not only anti-liberal internationalist but also in opposition to liberalism at home, setting up intra-Western disputes over values like free speech and civilizational identity.

Contradictions within America First

[22:00] Mohan identifies four key contradictions:

• Restraint vs Power: Rhetoric denounces "endless wars," but military spending and threats remain high—assertion of power, not simple retrenchment.

• Non-Intervention vs Selective Intervention:
  Middle East sees claims of withdrawal, while Latin America and elsewhere see interventionist moves continue (e.g., Venezuela, Nigeria).

• Focus on Domestic vs Foreign Hyperactivity:
  Despite pledges to prioritize the homeland, there is "hyperactive foreign policy"—summitry, peacemaking, sanctions.

• Critique of Empire vs Imperial Practice:
  Even as MAGA critiques U.S. empire, use of sanctions, threats, and economic coercion persist.

"Are we seeing empire light? Are we seeing retrenchment from empire?"
— Raja Mohan [28:40]

3. The Re-Emergence and Importance of Eurasia

[30:00] Mohan traces the concept and contemporary significance:

• Historical Views:
  The Mackinder "Heartland" theory, Russian Eurasianism, and Brzezinski's "grand chessboard"—the idea that preventing domination of Eurasia by a single power has long guided U.S. strategy.

• Modern Integration:
  China's Belt and Road, deepening Sino-Russian ties, Asian involvement in European wars (e.g., weapons to Ukraine), and US-encouraged Indo-Pacific strategies demonstrate that Europe and Asia are linked as never before.

"The rise of Asia has already produced conditions under which, in the heart of Europe, there's a war, and Asians have a role in it."
— Raja Mohan [37:15]

4. America First Meets Eurasia: Five Possible Outcomes

[39:00] Mohan outlines five scenarios or consequences for Eurasian geopolitics under American retrenchment:

1. Reverse Kissinger:
   Use Russia to balance China; debate within U.S. circles but with uncertain results.

2. Spheres of Influence:
   Temptation to let Russia/China carve out zones of dominance; reality resists—European and Asian states are unlikely to accept such subordination.

3. Allied Hedging:
   Ambiguous U.S. signals force allies (Europe, Japan, India) to pursue strategic autonomy while still relying on the U.S.—"please the master and develop alternatives."

4. Rules-Based International Order at Stake:
   If Russia keeps Ukrainian territory, precedent undermines prohibition on territorial conquest (with knock-on effects for Asia, e.g., Taiwan).

5. Rearmament and Nuclear Anxiety:
   Europe and Asia are ramping up defense spending; US extends nuclear tech to allies (AUKUS, possible South Korea); European states reconsider nuclear postures.

"The principal question... is deterring Russia from further aggression, deterring China from being adventurous."
— Raja Mohan [42:34]

5. Transition to Multi-polar, Geo-Economic Order

[43:00] The post-1991 unipolar, liberal order gives way to complex, multi-polar geopolitics:

• No assured global "nightwatchman;" states must provide more for their own security.
• Eurasia's cross-cutting linkages—Europe and Asia—are strengthening out of necessity.

Q&A Highlights

Pluralism, Retrenchment, and Expansion

[41:46, 45:40]
Trubowitz and Mohan discuss the contradiction of U.S. retrenchment and simultaneous expansion of power (renegotiating the order in U.S. favor):

• Domestic backlash against costs of empire is real, but U.S. elite/global interests persist.
• The real test: Can the U.S. rationalize its priorities without destroying the postwar order?

"You need to distribute the burden... rather than the American taxpayer forever paying for European and Asian security."
— Raja Mohan [48:04]

The Rules-Based Order and the Ukraine War

[49:29]
Gideon Rachman: Is the argument about Ukraine’s territorial integrity finally resonating in India?

• Indian policy is shaped by realism and self-interest, and despite Western arguments, "hypocritical silence" or non-alignment does less to undermine Europe than direct U.S. retrenchment.
• India’s historic positions (e.g., Kashmir) mean it should, in principle, oppose conquest by force—yet realpolitik dominates.

U.S. Arms Sales, Spheres of Influence, and Technology Transfer

[52:08]
Trump's America is far more transactional—willing to sell arms, disinterested in traditional non-proliferation concerns, and keen on economic/commercial ties regardless of past restrictions.

• Willingness to sell F-35s to Saudis, nuclear subs to South Korea, etc.
• The "commerce first" logic often trumps (pun intended) values-driven policies.

Limits and Reach of Eurasian Integration

[55:33]
Question: Will Eurasian integration be limited by the values of liberal democracies?

• Economic and security imperatives, not shared liberal values, are driving integration.
• Western powers, especially Europeans, are increasingly pragmatic (e.g., diversification of partnerships in Asia).

Indo-Pacific vs. Eurasia

[73:14]

• Eurasia (land) and Indo-Pacific (sea "waters of Eurasia") are complementary concepts; both are central to today’s strategic thinking.

Smaller States and Hedging

[60:10]
As U.S. presence recedes, small and medium powers must either rearm, develop asymmetric strategies, or (in the weakest cases) bandwagon with China (or other regional powers).

"Asia, everybody's a nationalist... People will have to find a way."
— Raja Mohan [60:57]

China’s Methods: Taiwan, Infrastructure, and Africa

[76:12]

• On Taiwan: China likely prefers salami tactics and pressure, not outright war.
• On river/water projects: China’s strength in engineering and dominance means neighbors have little recourse.
• On Africa and Latin America: China’s engagement is pragmatic and self-interested, but faults in U.S./European strategy mean China's influence keeps expanding.

India’s Position in a "Multi-Aligned" World

[82:01]

• For India, multi-alignment is more rhetorical than operational; in practice, economic and strategic ties with the West dominate, due to security issues with China and trade orientation.

Notable Quotes

• On the new Eurasia:
  "Doing more with each other is one way of hedging against American retrenchment." [43:47]
• On U.S. foreign policy contradictions:
  "How these contradictions play out... will have a lot of bearing on the Trump presidency itself." [28:40]
• On rules-based order:
  "If the Ukraine peace deal goes through... the core principle... that you don't acquire territory by use of force—it's not very clear whether that will actually survive." [40:59]

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 03:53 – 13:36: Introduction and context—"America First" in historical and global terms.
• 13:36 – 22:00: The four themes of "America First."
• 22:00 – 30:00: Ideological contradictions and real-world policy deviations.
• 30:00 – 39:00: The meaning and politics of Eurasia (historical and today).
• 39:00 – 43:00: Five plausible strategic outcomes as "America First" meets Eurasian realities.
• 45:40 – 49:29: Discussion and audience questions on U.S. contradictions, retrenchment, and global order.
• 49:29 – 82:01: Q&A covering India’s position, U.S. arms sales, Eurasian integration, Indo-Pacific, China’s role in Africa/Latin America, smaller states’ strategies, and more.

Conclusion

Dr. Raja Mohan’s lecture navigates the profound uncertainties and transformations provoked by America's strategic turn inward. Eurasia, geologically united but historically divided, may see deeper integration and rivalry as familiar American guarantees wane. The future of Eurasian geopolitics rests on how states—large and small—adapt: balancing hedging, rearmament, and new networks in the face of resurgent China, assertive Russia, and a less reliable America.