Donald Trump’s foreign policy has never been accused of subtlety. But his so-called “Core 5” (C5) proposal—an alleged attempt to replace the G7 with a new power club comprising the US, China, Russia, India and Japan—takes strategic recklessness to an entirely new level. It is not a blueprint for a new world order; it is a half-baked geopolitical fantasy, stitched together by ego, impatience with allies, and a chronic misunderstanding of global realities. According to reports by Defence One and Politico, the idea appears in an extended, unpublished version of Trump’s National Security Strategy. The White House, predictably, denies its existence. But denial has long been the default posture of administrations caught floating trial balloons that burst on contact with reality. At first glance, the idea sounds bold—five major powers, representing nearly 3.5 billion people, sitting at one table. But scratch beneath the surface and the proposal collapses under the weight of its own contradictions. What exactly binds China, India, Russia, Japan and the US together—beyond Trump’s desire to chair the meeting? For India, the answer is simple: nothing. New Delhi’s inclusion in this hypothetical grouping is being read by some as a diplomatic upgrade. In truth, it would be a strategic downgrade. India would be asked to sit alongside two countries—China and Pakistan’s chief patron—actively hostile to its territorial integrity, security interests and civilisational identity. Beijing continues to violate agreements along the Line of Actual Control, while Moscow deepens its axis with China. Expecting India, particularly under Narendra Modi, to treat this as a neutral forum is either naïve or deliberately disingenuous. The absurdity becomes sharper when viewed alongside Washington’s other actions. While floating the C5 idea, the Trump administration has continued arming Pakistan with advanced F-16s, ostensibly for counterterrorism. The joke writes itself. Pakistan, a globally acknowledged breeding ground for terror groups, is being armed “to fight terror” while India is invited into a club that includes Beijing, the chief enabler of Pakistan’s diplomatic cover at the UN. If irony were a weapon, this policy would already be classified.
Then there is the European angle—or rather, the deliberate exclusion of it. The C5 proposal is less about global cooperation and more about punishing Europe for refusing to follow Washington unquestioningly. The reported draft NSS allegedly frames Europe as a civilisation in decline and encourages engagement with EU “dissenters” like Hungary, Poland and Italy, even flirting with the idea of further fragmentation after Brexit. This is not strategy; it is strategic vandalism. Replacing the G7 with a leader-centric, ad-hoc power cartel would undermine decades of institutional diplomacy. Worse, it would normalise the idea that alliances are disposable and values negotiable, depending on who flatters the US President best. The reported worldview underpinning the C5—that America should abandon the idea of global leadership and focus only on narrow self-interest—may appeal to Trump’s base, but it is dangerously shortsighted. Great powers do not retreat from multilateralism without consequences; they merely create vacuums others are eager to fill. Even from Washington’s perspective, the C5 is unworkable. China has no incentive to legitimise US leadership in a new forum. Russia prefers disruption over structure. Japan remains deeply aligned with the West. That leaves India—expected, it seems, to play the role of moral fig leaf in a deeply cynical arrangement. Seasoned Indian diplomats are right to dismiss the C5 as laughable. It is not a serious proposal; it is a symptom of Trump’s discomfort with institutions he cannot dominate. India does not need validation from improvised power clubs. It needs strategic autonomy, credible partnerships, and forums where rules—not personalities—matter. Trump’s Core 5 is not a masterstroke. It is a reminder that when foreign policy is driven by impulse rather than insight, the result is not a new order—but a mess others are left to clean up.
