As Donald Trump's inauguration approaches, people around the world are struggling to understand the inhabitants of the newest Trump Tower, the one at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington DC. With freewheeling leadership, uncertainty about the enduring guidance of presidential statements and less ideological coherence than in previous cabinets, the processes by which decisions are reached will be vital. 

On January 20 2017, President Hillary Clinton or President Donald Trump will inherit Barack Obama’s legacy, just as Mr Obama still uses George W Bush’s tenure as a reference for his own. In broad strokes, Mr Obama’s foreign policy has reflected a swing of the pendulum away from what he perceived as his predecessor’s aggressive activism and long wars.

Donald Trump attacks the longstanding Republican promotion of trade as an engine of growth. The Republican presidential nominee asserts that trade produces winners and losers, that a country should always send more value abroad than it imports, and that America is thus a trade “loser.” Whether he wins the election or not, Mr. Trump’s protectionist views are forcing elected leaders—especially in the Republican Party—to decide whether to continue championing free trade or give up on opening markets.

At critical moments over the past century, the United States has acted boldly and creatively to secure Europe’s peace and prosperity. After the fighting of two devastating wars across Europe, America’s Marshall Plan spent $120 billion (in current dollars) over four years to spark Western Europe’s economic recovery and political integration. In 1949 the U.S., Canada, and Western European states invented NATO as a trans-Atlantic shield. In 1989 President George H.W. Bush moved rapidly yet deftly to unify Germany within NATO and the European Community, setting the cornerstones of a Europe “whole and free.”

In an uncertain world, America's future security depends on both upgrading military capabilities and expanding economic opportunities. The Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade accord among 12 countries accounting for almost 40% of the global economy, draws together these two strands of strategy. But TPP has been widely criticized by Republican and Democratic presidential candidates alike and faces an uphill battle in Congress.

After seven years of extraordinary governmental stimulus, the world needs a shift from exceptional monetary policies to private sector-led growth. The US Federal Reserve’s increase in interest rates sounded the clarion call. China’s market tribulations highlight deepening global uncertainties and the need for new approaches. Three possible ways to generate growth stand out for 2016.

Secretary of State John Kerry’s new diplomatic process for dealing with Syria’s harrowing civil war involves convening a series of talks in Vienna. The effort is probably well-intentioned. But I cannot conceive of what he expects to accomplish.

President Xi Jinping’s visit to Washington this month could be as consequential for the world economy as then-vice premier Deng Xiaoping’s American tour of 1979.

My first professor of diplomatic history directed the class to study the back of the one-dollar bill. His aim was not to suggest the commercial motivations of American foreign policy, but instead to help us find the Great Seal of the United States, which is conveniently printed on the back of the dollar.