International travel has always been sensitive to politics, but rarely has the link been as visible or as immediate as it has been since Donald Trump returned to the White House in January 2025.
What was meant to be a landmark year for global tourism – with the United States celebrating the centenary of Route 66, the 250th anniversary of its independence and co-hosting the FIFA World Cup – has instead become a case study in how political rhetoric, security policy and foreign relations can reshape travel flows far beyond national borders.
Hotels, airlines and destination marketers entered 2026 expecting a surge in inbound travel to the US. Instead, the past year has delivered tariffs against allies, repeated threats to annex Canada, the detention of foreign tourists at US borders, mass deportations and proposals to screen visitors’ social media accounts.
Together, these moves have altered not only how travellers view the US, but how they assess risk across an expanding list of destinations touched by Trump’s foreign policy.
The United States: From Bucket-List Destination to Perceived Risk
For many international travellers, visiting the United States has shifted from an aspirational experience to a decision freighted with political and personal calculation. Industry surveys show nearly half of prospective visitors now say they are less likely to travel to the country under Trump’s leadership.
That shift has had tangible economic consequences. According to the World Travel & Tourism Council, the US was projected to lose $12.5 billion in international visitor spending in 2025 – making it the only country among 184 economies analysed to register a decline.
The reasons go beyond ideology. High-profile cases of tourists being detained at the border, coupled with uncertainty around entry requirements and enforcement practices, have created a perception of unpredictability.
For some travellers, a US trip now feels like a political statement; for others, it represents a financial and logistical gamble. Airlines and tour operators report softer demand from Europe, Latin America and parts of Asia, even as global travel elsewhere continues to rebound.
This erosion of confidence is particularly striking given the scale of events planned in the US. Major anniversaries and the World Cup would typically guarantee packed flights and full hotels. Instead, they are unfolding against a backdrop of caution, with travellers increasingly weighing whether the potential rewards outweigh the perceived risks.
Ripple Effects: When Foreign Policy Shapes Other Destinations
Trump’s influence on travel decisions is no longer confined to the US. In early 2026, American airstrikes in Caracas and the capture of Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, sent shockwaves through the travel industry.
Renewed discussions about acquiring Greenland, alongside threats directed at Cuba, Iran, Colombia and Mexico, have extended uncertainty across multiple regions.
Some travellers are now second-guessing trips to places that, while not directly affected, are caught up in US rhetoric. Prospective visitors to Greenland, for example, say Trump’s language about taking control of the island has made them more cautious, even though no formal travel restrictions are in place.
In Cuba, tour operators report immediate concern following US statements portraying the country as unstable, with travellers delaying or reconsidering bookings.
Elsewhere, the impact has been uneven. Some Latin American operators note that, so far, bookings to Colombia and Mexico have held steady despite sharp warnings from Washington.
This suggests that while political noise matters, travellers also differentiate between rhetoric and on-the-ground realities – at least until official advisories change.
Travel Advice, Insurance and the Business of Uncertainty
For the travel industry, perception quickly becomes policy. Tour operators and travel agents are bound by government advisories, which carry legal and financial weight.
In the UK, for example, companies will not sell trips to destinations flagged as unsafe by the Foreign Office. Once such advice is issued, standard travel insurance typically becomes invalid.
That reality places enormous power in official warnings. As Sean Tipton of the Association of British Travel Agents notes, the line is clear: once governments advise against travel, commercial tourism stops. Independent travellers may still go, but they do so without the safety net of insurance or organised support.
The result is a global travel environment shaped as much by perception and politics as by infrastructure or attractions. Tourism thrives on stability, confidence and predictability – qualities currently in short supply in regions drawn into Trump’s geopolitical orbit.
As 2026 unfolds, the lesson for the travel industry is stark. Political decisions made in Washington are not only redefining America’s image abroad, but influencing how travellers assess risk worldwide. In an interconnected tourism economy, the consequences of that shift are proving far-reaching – and potentially long-lasting.
