---

For many Americans, the debate over Donald Trump's foreign policy boiled down to how to afford another week. According to the Chicago Council's pre-election survey, 86 percent saw the Iran war as driving up living costs; 81 percent said the same about tariffs. Voters did not have to follow every diplomatic controversy to understand that decisions made in Washington, D.C., complicated their lives.

That explained the Democrats' overwhelming victory in the midterms. Republicans will lose control of Congress in January 2027, depriving Trump of a Congress he could easily rely on. The consequences will be felt far beyond the United States, but losing control of Congress does not deprive the President of his constitutional powers.

Costs were just part of the picture. According to an AP Voter Poll, almost seven out of ten voters believed that Congress did too little to restrain the power of the presidency. Corruption was also an important issue. Voters were unhappy not only with Trump's policies but also with the way he governed.

Democratic success among young voters, Hispanics and moderates challenged the idea that Trump's 2024 win had fundamentally changed the American political landscape. The coalition that won the election could split up in the next one. Voters gave him a second chance, not an unlimited mandate.

Democrats should now consider how to exercise their power. Committee chairmanships will allow Democrats to investigate the President's actions, while control of Congress will strengthen their position in spending negotiations. In the Senate, Democrats can reject nominations to the courts, cabinet and diplomatic posts. If used properly, these powers will complicate Trump's attempts to conceal wrongdoing.

However, Democrats will not control the government. Without Republican support, Democrats cannot override a presidential veto. Moreover, most legislation will need some Republican support in the Senate to pass, since most bills require 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. Democrats should expose Trump's actions while trying to achieve something he will not block.

Investigations will not make healthcare less expensive or reduce costs for any family. Democrats should choose which battles to fight and which improvements to deliver, alongside investigating Trump. Two years of constant televised confrontation without visible results outside Washington will give voters plenty of reasons to become disappointed again.

Discussion about 2028 has already started. Trump cannot become President for a third time under the Constitution. JD Vance, Trump's Vice President, blamed the Iran war for the Republicans' defeat, suggesting an attempt to separate his future political career from the administration's record.

Such separation will be very difficult. Vance will need Trump's support, but he will also have to convince voters who rejected the administration in the election that he would govern differently. Vance cannot claim to have been a passive witness to the administration as Vice President. He will have to explain when and how he disagreed with the President.

Democrats will have their own candidates too. Governors Josh Shapiro, JB Pritzker and Wes Moore will have an opportunity to become better known across the nation. Governing a state allows them to offer something more substantial than campaign slogans – a record that voters can examine. Healthcare, education and state management will determine whether that record is enough to advance their political careers.

However, winning a gubernatorial race does not guarantee victory in the presidential election in the same state. Midterm turnout usually differs from turnout in presidential elections. Moreover, according to the AP Voter Poll, only about half of voters had a positive view of the Democrats. Some voted Democratic only to stop Trump, rather than out of support for the party. Democrats must find ways to win their support.

Abroad, the temptation to interpret the result as a signal of US retrenchment will be strong. It is too early for such an interpretation. With growing domestic opposition, Trump may try to conclude a diplomatic deal that he could later present as a personal success. He may also become more aggressive if he believes foreign leaders perceive him as weak. Foreign governments should be prepared for either possibility.

Iran will be the first test. Investigations and restrictions on war financing could push Trump towards concluding an agreement. However, Congress cannot negotiate an agreement on the President's behalf. Disputes over financing could become arguments over responsibility for American troops. Americans' patience will not last long when families bear the costs of the war without understanding the objectives of the fighting.

It is not necessary to interpret this as a signal that the United States wants to retreat from the world. According to the Chicago Council survey, 58 percent wanted active US participation in world affairs. That preference leaves room for a foreign policy based on engagement, but it also requires greater scrutiny of the costs of military engagements. Fewer expensive wars, more stable trade relations and more secure supply chains would provide stronger reasons to support US engagement in foreign affairs.

European and Ukrainian governments will find more supportive partners in Congress when it comes to providing aid and blocking concessions to Russia. European governments should make use of that opportunity without overlooking their own capabilities. Any legislative action may still require Republican support, and the White House will continue to play a major diplomatic role. Europe's security needs a stronger foundation than the hope that the next US election will correct the outcome of the previous one.

Beijing will probably see this as an opportunity to negotiate a better deal. Pressure to reduce costs could make Trump more willing to discuss trade agreements. Democrats will probably push harder on Taiwan, human rights and Chinese investments. Chinese and other Asian governments will have to pay greater attention to consultations on some issues while accepting greater uncertainty on others.

Israel will face tougher scrutiny over military assistance and its treatment of Palestinians. In the rest of the Middle East, governments that have relied heavily on access to Trump should develop additional contacts in other parts of Washington. Agreements with the President become more vulnerable without support from other parts of the US government.

Trade policy requires caution. A Democratic majority does not necessarily mean the cancellation of tariffs introduced under powers delegated to the President. Exporters should not expect Democrats' concerns about American workers' living standards to translate into enthusiasm for increasing imports. More stable regulations would be a reasonable goal. Exporters should not count on quick relief.

Bangladesh will face direct consequences from events in Washington. The United States remains one of our main trading partners. Changes in the American economy and trade policy influence factory orders, employment and foreign exchange earnings. 

Bangladesh should continue negotiations with the administration while developing contacts with congressional trade committees and American importers. These efforts should proceed in parallel. It would be wrong to expect Democrats to resolve our trade problems, since their voters also want protection from economic insecurity.

Stronger congressional support could help sustain assistance to the Rohingya and maritime cooperation in the Bay of Bengal. However, elections do not guarantee the restoration of aid. Bangladesh will have to make a convincing case consistently to both parties.

Progress in protecting labour rights, ensuring responsible governance and safeguarding minority rights can be part of that case. These are not concessions intended to please Washington. They matter for Bangladesh and give its diplomats a stronger foundation for seeking support.

Bangladesh should develop a foreign policy capable of withstanding changes in the presidency and congressional majority. This means working with both US political parties, expanding partnerships elsewhere and avoiding the construction of foreign policy around individual personalities.

Democrats will have to prove that accountable government can improve people's lives. Republicans will have to decide whether loyalty to Trump offers them a political future. The election has opened up possibilities for greater restraint. The dependability of American power will depend on what happens after the election.

Zillur Rahman is a political analyst, President of the Centre for Governance Studies (CGS) and Founding Board Chair of CGS USA. He hosts Tritiyo Matra on Channel i and writes on geopolitics, strategic affairs and governance. Follow him on X: @zillur.

This article was published on the Daily Star
Views in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect CGS policy.