Who influences Trump and how can Ukraine adapt to the new US policy?

The return of Donald Trump to the White House has once again brought the slogan America First to the center of American politics. But the difference from 2017 is immediately noticeable. His foreign policy now grows not from state institutions. The foundation is a network of loyalists that over the years has turned into a separate ecosystem of influence. Within it are its own decision-makers, its own centers, and its own mediators.

This is no longer the “Trump administration.” This is the Trump circle, where ideology replaces bureaucracy.

New Centers of Influence

Next to Trump appears something that was not there in 2016: a network of right-conservative think tanks. The most notable is the Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI), which has become something of a hub for the “second Trump era.” CPI not only generates ideas. It cultivates personnel who then occupy real positions in the apparatus.

Within this architecture, Russell Vought stands out — now the director of the White House Budget Office, one of the key ideologists of Project 2025. The project envisions expanding presidential powers and replacing thousands of career officials with political appointees. Essentially — restructuring the state apparatus based on loyalty.

During the 2024 campaign, there was a leak, and Trump distanced himself from Project 2025. But the situation changed. By the fall of 2025, many authors of the project joined his transition team. At the rhetorical level — distancing. At the personnel level — involvement.

Donor Ecosystem

The new funding model of MAGA Inc. is hardly concealed. Major sponsors are several influential families, energy magnates, groups expecting deregulation and the return of a “friendly” agenda.

A trend is emerging: the largest White House projects are supported by corporate money, almost directly. Lawyers are already discussing the risks of pay-to-play — when political decisions become a function of the donor architecture. In the Trump era, this ceases to be an abstraction.

Media Empire of Influence

Trump has long operated in a mode of constant media navigation. His main ideological platform is Tucker Carlson. The unofficial voice of American nationalism, amplified by its own audience and a chain of content redistribution through the conservative ecosystem.

Alongside is an entire infrastructure: podcasts, bloggers, YouTube channels, local media. They form an informational background where NATO is viewed as a “every man for himself” system, and international aid to Ukraine as an optional action. These are not random theses: they create an informational ground on which the White House can change course without resistance from its base.

Activist Movements and Cracks within MAGA

Turning Point USA has become a platform that mobilizes youth. Here, anti-NATO rhetoric is presented as a “new American identity,” and Ukraine is often described as an external burden that the US is “not obliged to pay for.”

And yet, the movement is not monolithic. After the scandal surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein case, activists within MAGA emerged demanding more transparency from Trump. The network has become more influential, but also more conflicted. This complicates its management — and creates unpredictable pressure zones.

Narrow Circle

Key decisions are formed in a circle where professional diplomats are almost not admitted.

Negotiations with Russia are conducted not by state structures, but by Trump’s personal intermediaries: Jared Kushner and businessman Steve Witkoff.
The resignation of US Special Representative Keith Kellogg became symptomatic. He publicly expressed disagreement with the course of “softening” the line towards the Kremlin. After his departure, the configuration became even more closed.

This highlights one detail: diplomacy is once again personalized. Not the State Department, but the entourage — those whom the president trusts.

Republican DeepState

This is a new formula already used by American political scientists. Part of the Republican Party, for the first time in many years, enters into a coalition with Democrats — only on issues concerning Ukraine.

The latest episodes around Trump’s peace plan showed that the White House does not have automatic support. If the line is too soft towards Moscow, criticism becomes bipartisan.

Research confirms: US foreign policy is not reduced to the personal position of the president, and on issues concerning Ukraine, the party forms unstable but real counterforces.

What This Means for Ukraine

Ukraine can no longer limit itself to a direct channel with the White House. The new American context requires working in several directions at once:
— with Congress of different factions,
— with think tank structures,
— with the media environment,
— with major donors,
— with businesses that influence administration decisions.

The circle of Trump’s influence in 2025 is disordered, fragmented, but this is precisely what creates a window of opportunity, because there is no single center that controls everything.

We continue to publish detailed explanations of the dynamics of influence, key players, and risks for Ukraine on NAnews — News of Israel | Nikk.Agency, where analytical materials are collected on how the new Washington line shapes the global order and why it is vital for Ukraine to work not with one, but with several levels of American politics.