Donald Trump has completed his first year of his second term as President of the United States (US). During this period, he has made controversial, unconventional, and unlawful statements regarding both US domestic politics and foreign policy, signed off on policies, and implemented some of these elements. For example, despite violating the US Constitution, he has stated that he wants a third term as president and that the necessary steps will be taken to achieve this. His approach, attitude, and rhetoric towards immigrants can also be interpreted as violating US law. The killing of an American citizen by the highly controversial ICE and Trump’s interpretation of the case as legitimate self-defense is noteworthy and has caused major debates in the American public. In American foreign policy, he has also signed off on and made statements about highly controversial policies that question the international order and the UN system on which it is based, as well as international law, shaking them to their foundations.
Examples of international law, international cooperation, collective consciousness, and behavior being excluded and violated exist not only in this first year of Trump’s second term, but also in his first term. He withdrew the US from the Paris Agreement, one of the greatest achievements in the fight against the climate crisis. He also withdrew the US from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (Iran Nuclear Deal), signed during Barack Obama’s term, which enforced international law and diplomacy in resolving issues with Iran. In the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, it has adopted a pro-Israel, unilateral stance, pursuing and implementing policies that violate relevant customs, international law, and UN Security Council (UNSC) resolutions. Recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights are the most prominent examples in this context. With its “peace plan,” dubbed the “Deal of the Century,” it has adopted a fait accompli stance, aiming to integrate Israel into the region and exclude Iran, rather than resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict by solely considering Israel’s views. This approach has been realized through the Abraham Accords.
In his second term, his unconventional, law-breaking actions and statements have become more frequent and are drawing more attention and causing more disruption because they are directly linked to the essence of the system. Reminiscent of the “L’etat c’est moi” approach, Trump’s unlawful, rule-defying rhetoric, attitudes, and policies regarding US domestic politics are mirrored in international politics and reflected in practice through unusual examples and cases. Trump himself has stated that he does not recognize international law and that the only thing that can stop him is his own conscience. Palestine, Ukraine, Nigeria, Somalia, Iran, Greenland, Venezuela, and the Republic of South Africa are examples that prove this approach.
In Palestine, Israel’s attacks in Gaza continue despite the ceasefire, and Palestinians living under extremely difficult conditions are losing their lives. Despite Israel’s actions amounting to genocide, the Trump administration continues to support Tel Aviv, violating international law and ethical values. It has failed to take action against settlement policies such as the highly controversial E1 plan, which would fundamentally undermine the existence of the Palestinian state. By bypassing the UN, it has established a Peace Council focused specifically on the reconstruction of Gaza, and despite the presence of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, it has not included any Palestinian names. As mentioned above, Trump does not comply with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338. He acts outside the norms established by the UN. He has violated the decisions and norms regarding Jerusalem, one of the final status issues to be addressed in the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations. His stance of disregarding international law on the Palestinian issue is also directed at the International Criminal Court (ICC), which has intervened on the grounds that Israel has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. It concerns the arrest warrant for Netanyahu. He is imposing various sanctions on the judges of the ICC. He is also exerting pressure to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, to which Israel is currently a party.
It has also taken some highly controversial steps in the Russia-Ukraine War. It has stated that Ukraine’s Donbass and Crimea regions are now de facto under Russian sovereignty. However, Ukraine and European countries demand that these regions, which they claim are under Russian annexation, be returned to Ukraine. According to Moscow, however, Donbass and Crimea declared their independence by exercising their right to self-determination and subsequently chose to join Russia. Therefore, contrary to the majority of the international community, including Turkey, and deviating from the US line, Russia’s acceptance of Donbass and Crimea as Russian territory once again highlights the controversial nature of self-determination, while revealing the acceptance of violations of the principles of territorial integrity, inviolability of borders, the sovereign equality of states, external and internal sovereignty, and the prohibition of the use of force.
In the case of Nigeria, Trump shared with the global public that Christians in the country were subjected to attacks by the terrorist organization Boko Haram as well as pressure from the regime, that the regime was unable to protect Christians, and that American military intervention in Nigeria could occur at any moment. In doing so, he violated the principles of sovereign equality, external and internal sovereignty, and the prohibition on threatening the use of force. Ultimately, the Abuja Government sent a request to the US, and the US was able to conduct military operations in Nigeria.
Trump, who criticized Somalia, Somali society, and the diaspora in a manner contrary to diplomatic norms, has also decided to intervene militarily in Somalia with his decision. In his speech at Davos, he claimed that Somalia could not be recognized as a country/state.
Another country whose internal affairs he interfered with was the Republic of South Africa (RSA). Similar to Nigeria, he claimed that Christians in the RSA were being marginalized by the government and subjected to genocide, and suggested that sanctions would be imposed if this situation did not change. The most vocal example of a violation of international law was the US intervention in Venezuela. President Nicolas Maduro and his wife were abducted from their homes and brought to the US to be tried in a New York court. This example of a violation of sovereignty was also a violation of the prohibition on the use of force, in other words, a violation of Article 2/4 of the UN Charter.
Greenland continues to serve as an example of Trump threatening to violate international law and disregarding it. Trump, who argues that Greenland, which is part of the Kingdom of Denmark, should be under US sovereignty primarily for American security, natural resources, and international security, has violated the prohibition in question, which has the nature of a jus cogens norm, by threatening to use force to that end. This demonstrates that external sovereignty, territorial integrity, the inviolability of borders, and the right to self-determination could be violated in the case of Greenland.
Finally, Iran is in Trump’s crosshairs. He has attempted to turn anti-regime protests in favor of the US and has addressed the Iranian people, urging them to continue the protests. He has also made harsh statements, including the option of using force against Iran.
The examples mentioned above are interpreted as signs heralding a new order, a new international system. The Trump administration, which stated in its National Security Strategy, released in late 2025, that it would reinterpret the Monroe Doctrine, has intervened in different regions of the world instead of adopting an isolationist approach. As stated above, it pursues a policy that disregards international law, not only disregarding it but also violating it. Among the most prominent violations are the fundamental principles of international law: the sovereign equality of states, respect for external and internal sovereignty, respect for territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders, and the prohibition of the use of force and the threat of force.
Treaties, which are among the most important outcomes and sources of international law, and legal mechanisms have also been targeted by Trump. In particular, he has withdrawn his country from important treaties on combating the climate crisis and from important organizations such as the World Health Organization. In other words, he not only violates international law but can also impose sanctions on international law.
As a result, Donald Trump, who ranks among the most controversial presidents in US history, continues his “war” against international law. While Trump demonstrated considerable distance from international law during his first term, he has shaken it to its core during his second term by violating its fundamental principles. The examples of Palestine and Venezuela show that Trump can easily disregard international law, while scenarios involving Nigeria, possibly Greenland, and Iran suggest that the US’s expansionism and its unconventional, non-normative, and ultimately unlawful stance will continue to threaten international law and the international community. For example, a possible intervention in Iran—based on the intervention in Venezuela—could occur without even being legitimized by controversial elements such as the Responsibility to Protect.
It is not just international law; the world order established after World War II, symbolized by the UN and based on international law, is under threat from the US’s stance, behavior, rhetoric, and policies, and can be interpreted as heralding a new order/disorder. Canadian and French leaders have stated that a new world order is beginning to take shape in the current period, where the sine qua non principles of international law, including sovereignty and territorial integrity, can be easily violated and threatened. The rule- and norm-based order and its greatest achievement, the UN, have been seriously shaken by Trump’s audacious steps. This has led to an increase in interpretations of international law as the law of the powerful, and the existence of international law has been debated more than ever before. In his widely acclaimed speech in Davos in January 2026, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney called the new order “Value-Based Realism.” On the one hand, values such as human rights and the rule of law will be protected, while on the other hand, a pragmatic approach will be adopted.
It is believed that international law will continue to play an important role in the new order, albeit to a lesser extent than before. The development of international law, the development of international criminal law, and the transformation of the use of force from a right to a prohibition, jus cogens norma, did not occur independently of the international community. In other words, developments in international politics led to the emergence of international law and its development in terms of subject matter and actors. During this period when UN reform is being considered, it is thought that the activities and cases of the ICC and the International Court of Justice should be monitored more closely. The critical interpretations of the academic world, mostly from Southern countries, known as Third World Approaches to International Law, may gain more traction.
