Foreign Policy

Summary of Impacts

Project 2025 recommends reducing environmental regulations on business which will lead to higher emissions and environmental harm. It suggests withdrawing from international environmental agreements which will lead to the breakdown of global efforts to fight climate change. It aims to cut funding for research into climate change and renewable energy, weakening future technological innovation.

Key Quotes

“Remove the U.S. from any association with U.N. and other efforts to push sustainable-development schemes connected to food production”
(Bakst 325)

“Revisit the designation of PFAS chemicals as ‘hazardous substances'”
(Gunasekara Page 463)

“Make the design, development, and deployment of new nuclear warheads a top priority.”
(McNamee 430)

Impacts on Foreign Policy

Project 2025 might change how the U.S. deals with other countries by focusing more on its own needs and interests, which is called the “America First” approach. This approach could make the U.S. less involved with international organizations and agreements, making it more isolated from the rest of the world. For instance, the U.S. might renegotiate trade deals or pull out of them, leading to higher tariffs and trade barriers. This could disrupt global trade and possibly start trade wars with other countries.

The plan also suggests that the U.S. should reduce its participation in international organizations like the United Nations. By doing this, the country might miss out on important global cooperation on issues such as climate change, peacekeeping, and human rights.

With less U.S. involvement, there could be gaps in global efforts to tackle these big challenges, making it harder to solve them effectively.

Project 2025 also talks about spending more on the military and less on diplomacy. This means the U.S. could have a more aggressive foreign policy, using tariffs and sanctions more often to get what it wants from other countries. While this might work in the short term, it could harm long-term relationships and build mistrust. It might also mean working with authoritarian governments if it benefits U.S. interests, which could hurt global efforts to promote democracy and human rights. All these changes could make the world more unstable and strain U.S. alliances.

Quotes from the Mandate

Page numbers refer to the Mandate for Leadership PDF

“Ensure that Internet companies no longer have carte blanche to censor protected speech… [and] empower consumers to choose their own content filters and fact checkers, if any.” (Independent Regulatory Agencies, Federal Communications Commission, Page 881)

Project 2025 argues for scrapping the FCC’s current approach to Section 230, which shields social media providers from legal liability related to user content. It also allows them to remove objectionable materials (in good faith). For example, social media companies currently have the legal right to censor violence, inappropriate imagery, copyright violations, hate speech, and misinformation.
Project 2025 wants to ensure that “antidiscrimination provisions” are applied to social media, especially with respect to “core political viewpoints.” They reference a Texas court case (Netchoice, LLC v. Paxton) which held that, since social media platforms are “common carriers,” they must provide equal access to everyone, essentially turning social media into a public square instead of a private company.
This policy will make it very difficult to find truthful information online, especially when combined with their other policies forbidding Dept. of Homeland Security and the FBIfrom combatting misinformation. Since conservative circles tend to be exposed to more unreliable news, it is likely that this policy will exacerbate the problem and make political discourse (and solutions) even more difficult.

“Cap and phase down the H-2A visa program. Congress should immediately cap this program at its current levels and establish a schedule for its gradual and predictable phasedown over the subsequent 10 to 20 years, producing the necessary incentives for the industry to invest in raising productivity, including through capital investment in agricultural equipment, and increasing employment for Americans in the agricultural sector.” (General Welfare, Dept. of Labor, Page 643)

The requirements for an H-2A visa explicitly state that employers must demonstrate that there are not enough available, qualified U.S. workers for the positions (and that hiring them won’t adversely affected wages or working conditions).
This policy could lead to labor shortages in the agricultural sector, potentially harming the industry and increasing costs for consumers. Additionally, it is harmful to immigrants, particularly those who rely on the H-2A visa program for temporary agricultural work. By capping and phasing down the program, it limits the opportunities for these workers, many of whom come from economically disadvantaged backgrounds.

“Reject ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and indicate a willingness to conduct nuclear tests in response to adversary nuclear developments if necessary. This will require that NNSA be directed to move to immediate test readiness to give the Administration maximum flexibility in responding to adversary actions.” (General Welfare, Dept. of Energy, Page 431)

The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty is aimed at banning nuclear weapons test explosions and any other nuclear explosions, both for civilian and military purposes, in all environments. It was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1996. However, it has not entered into force because a number of nations (including the U.S.) have not ratified it.
This policy is harmful as it increases the likelihood of nuclear testing, which poses significant health risks due to radiation exposure. Communities near testing sites, often including marginalized groups such as Native American reservations, could suffer from increased cancer rates and other health issues. Additionally, it escalates global nuclear tensions, potentially leading to international conflicts that will impact all of us.

“Of the utmost urgency is immediately ending the CISA’s counter-mis/disinformation efforts. The federal government cannot be the arbiter of truth.” (Common Defense, Dept. of Homeland Security, Page 187)

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency plays a crucial part in reducing the risk of foreign influence operations. Stopping these efforts would allow the flow of dis/misinformation unchecked. Foreign actors are already creating chaos, confusion, and division in our nation – removing all efforts to combat these disinformation campaigns would only exacerbate the problem.

“Immediately roll back Biden’s order, reinstate the Trump-era Energy Dominance Agenda, rescind Secretarial Order 3398, and review all regulations, orders, guidance documents, policies, and similar agency actions made in compliance with that order.” (General Welfare, Dept. of Interior, Page 553-554)

SO 3398 shifts the U.S. toward science-based decision-making, environmental protection, and addressing climate change concerns within the Department of the Interior. Project 2025’s proposed policy is advocating for scrapping those changes in favor of those put forth by Trump’s administration: more oil and coal production with less oversight.
This policy would allow for mining on forest lands, reducing national parks, limiting watersheds, allowing America to become dependent on foreign oil resources, expedite new permits on land leases, and change how infrastructure projects are approved.

“Restart the China Initiative” (General Welfare, Dept. of Justice, Page 588)

The China Initiative was an effort to prosecute perceived Chinese spies in American research and industry, with the aim of combating economic espionage. The program targeted scientific researchers and academics affiliated with China, but no one was ultimately convicted or charged with spying (although there were other less severe convictions).
Criticism of the initiative is abundant (critics claim it is ineffective, inconsistent, and racially biased). For a comprehensive analysis of cases and their outcomes, see this article from MIT Technology Review.