As the world braces for a new era of leadership, shocking plans are brewing behind closed doors. From reclaiming territories to reshaping alliances, the incoming leader's ambitions are no...

Some are anxiously awaiting January 20, when Donald Trump will be inaugurated as President of the United States. Others are rubbing their hands in anticipation of a new world order (or disorder) orchestrated by the new/old leader of the most powerful country on the planet. Some are stocking up on popcorn to watch the thrilling global events unfold live and in real-time.

What exactly is Trump's MAGA and how is it perceived now? Yes, it still stands for Make America Great Again. But how? It has become clear to everyone that Trump will pursue his slogan without resorting to national isolationism. Instead, he has adopted expansionism. For now, it's purely verbal. However, Trump's status is not yet one that allows for real action. But once the president-elect becomes the full-fledged head of the White House...

During a grand press conference at Mar-a-Lago this week, the newly elected U.S. president attempted to unveil his updated vision of MAGA, which he plans to implement as soon as he returns to the Oval Office. A new/old revelation is that the first issue to address is Greenland. The president-elect has already sent his son, Donald Trump Jr., to the icy island to investigate the situation on the ground and ask the locals: “So, do you want to become real Americans?” Of course, he expects to hear a positive response.

And, of course, the Panama Canal needs to be returned under U.S. control. It was that naive Jimmy Carter, God rest his soul, who once gave all rights to the structure to the Panamanians. Who does that? This injustice needs to be corrected.

So, according to Trump, the issue of the canal is currently “under discussion.” When a reporter asked if he could assure the world that he would not use “military or economic coercion” to bring the Panama Canal and Greenland under Washington's control, Trump firmly replied: “No!”.

And let’s not forget about Canada. The newly elected president reiterated his hope of turning the northern neighbor into the 51st American state. This sounds like complete nonsense. To turn a country larger than the United States into a state? A country that has proven its complete self-sufficiency time and again and consistently ranks among the happiest countries in the world, leaving the U.S. far behind in this list? Utterly absurd.

Or perhaps Trump hopes to take advantage of the temporary government crisis in Canada, following Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's announcement of resignation? But this crisis is neither the first nor the last there. After all, crises occur much more frequently in the U.S. and tend to be much deeper. But that doesn’t mean, for instance, that Great Britain has the right to reclaim a rebellious colony.

“There is no chance that Canada will become part of the United States,” Trudeau stated in response to Trump's claims. And he is supported in this by both liberal party members and conservative opponents. Canada will never become an American state, no matter how much Trump pressures or blackmails it.

And then there’s Mexico. Trump has unexpectedly decided to tackle not only the problem of illegal migrants crossing into the U.S. through the Mexican border. He suddenly felt the urge to address the toponymic issue: the Gulf of Mexico needs to be immediately renamed the Gulf of America. Why, and for whom? It's unclear.

Despite the fact that many of the newly elected president's foreign policy promises seem incompatible with his long-standing assertion that “first and foremost, domestic affairs,” Trump repeatedly claimed during the press conference that all these actions are in the interest of national security and economic prosperity. Is quarreling with the closest neighbors in the interest of national security? Really? Not to mention the dubious nature of such actions for economic prosperity.

Meanwhile, the geopolitical issues that truly deserve attention—the Russian-Ukrainian war and the conflict in the Middle East—are overshadowed by these secondary, almost caricature-like matters.

For instance, Trump promised that if the Israeli hostages held by Hamas are not returned before he re-enters the Oval Office, “hell will break loose in the Middle East.” What does this specifically mean, he was asked by reporters to clarify. But Trump merely repeated: “Hell will explode. I don’t need to say more, but that’s what it is.” So understand it as you wish.

And finally, regarding Ukraine. What is Trump prepared to do to end the war? As of now, it remains unclear. At least he no longer makes claims about a utopian “24 hours” within which he boldly promised to resolve this issue. Now, a different, much more realistic timeframe has emerged—six months. “I hope, six months… I hope much sooner than six months. Listen, Russia is losing a lot of young people, and Ukraine too... This war should never have started,” Trump stated in response to a reporter's question about moderation in the peace process. So is it six months or earlier? Why this specific timeframe? How exactly will it be resolved? What leverage is there over the Russian aggressor (because the levers of influence on Ukraine are already clear)?

There were no answers to all these important questions. The only thing Trump clearly articulated was the culprit of this war. Who is it? Guess three times. Of course—his predecessor Joe Biden. “This is the failure of President Joe Biden,” the president-elect asserted, emphasizing (once again) that if he had been president, Putin would never have invaded Ukraine. But what exactly did Biden do wrong? Did he not provide Ukraine with enough weapons before the invasion? Did he state several times that the U.S. had no intention of defending Ukraine? No, according to Trump, that is not what encouraged Russia to launch a full-scale invasion.

“Biden said: they (the Ukrainians—ed.) should be able to join NATO. Well, for Russia, having someone right on their doorstep—I can understand their feelings about that,” the newly elected U.S. president explained the essence of his grievances against his predecessor. In other words, the example of Finland, which not only aspired to join the North Atlantic Alliance but actually did join, is not illustrative for Trump. Even though the Finnish-Russian border stretches for 1,300 kilometers. While that is a thousand kilometers less than the length of the Ukrainian-Russian border, it is still significant in terms of security.

So what conclusion can be drawn from all of this? None at all. For the simple reason that Trump is not yet a full-fledged president. He can renounce everything he says before January 20 without any pangs of conscience. All these statements should be taken as trial balloons at most and certainly not as a guide to action. Therefore, no one should either be overly hopeful or despair.