'Not Joking': Trump's Third-Term Strategy and 20 Global Precedents

How presidents from Belarus to Venezuela have rewritten the rules to stay in power—and why America might not be immune

The early light of this past spring Sunday found Donald Trump, the forty-fifth President of the United States and its current, forty-seventh occupant, on the telephone with NBC News. With characteristic nonchalance toward constitutional tradition, Trump declared he was "not joking" about pursuing a third presidential term—a proposition that would require dismantling the Twenty-second Amendment.

The statement sent tremors through Washington, where even after years of norm-shattering declarations, this particular ambition struck a nerve. "There are methods which you could do it," Trump remarked, displaying his habitual indifference to institutional constraints.

Trump's contemplation of extending his Presidency beyond constitutional limits is not occurring in a vacuum. Rather, it follows a disturbing global pattern in which democratic guardrails have been systematically dismantled.

I’ve compiled a list of pertinent case studies for your review.

• Peru: Alberto Fujimori suspended the constitution in his "self-coup," then implemented a new one allowing his immediate reëlection. The gambit extended his rule until 2000—seven years beyond his original mandate—before corruption scandals forced him to resign and flee to Japan. He was later arrested, extradited to Peru, and imprisoned for human rights abuses, marking him as the “world’s first democratically elected former president to be found guilty of human rights violations in his own country” (NYT). His daughter Keiko has repeatedly run for president but never succeeded, marking a rare case where dynastic ambitions were thwarted.

• Belarus: Alexander Lukashenko eliminated presidential term limits through a referendum widely condemned for electoral manipulation. He remains firmly in power today, having just been sworn in for a seventh term in March of this year at age 70—extending his continuous rule since 1994 to over three decades. His latest election, which officials claimed he won with nearly 87% of the vote, featured only token challengers who praised his leadership. The inauguration ceremony showcased his defiant stance toward critics, with Lukashenko mockingly declaring "Half of the world is dreaming about our 'dictatorship'" and telling opponents "you have no future." His regime has imprisoned over 1,200 political prisoners, including Nobel Peace Prize laureate Ales Bialiatski, and unleashed a brutal crackdown following the 2020 protests that saw more than 65,000 people arrested. Lukashenko has become increasingly dependent on Vladimir Putin's Russia, allowing Belarus to be used as a staging ground for the Ukraine invasion and hosting Russian tactical nuclear weapons. Without term limits, he has effectively transformed Belarus into a personalized autocracy with no constitutional mechanism for rotation of power.

• Uganda: Yoweri Museveni orchestrated the removal of presidential term limits, later eliminating age restrictions in 2017. At 80 years old, he continues to rule Uganda today, having changed the constitution twice to extend his power well beyond what the original framework permitted. His 38-year rule since 1986 shows no signs of ending, with expectations that he will seek a seventh term in 2026. Though his son, Muhoozi Kainerugaba, has long been viewed as his heir apparent and holds a powerful position as head of the military, Kainerugaba announced in September 2024 that he would not run in the 2026 election, instead endorsing his father—a move that maintains the family's grip on power while deferring succession. Opposition figures, including pop star turned politician Bobi Wine, have accused Museveni of using security forces to jail, intimidate, and torture opponents. Critics have long charged that Museveni is attempting to establish a de facto monarchy, claims the president denies despite the evident dynastic character of his regime.

• Honduras: Manuel Zelaya was removed from office during a constitutional crisis over his proposed referendum that was perceived as an attempt to alter term limits. The Supreme Court later struck down term limits in 2015, allowing Juan Orlando Hernández to serve a second term. This manipulation of term limits had significant consequences: Hernández was later extradited to the United States and is now serving a 45-year prison sentence for drug trafficking. The current president, Xiomara Castro (Zelaya's wife), came to power in 2022, creating a complex dynastic legacy from the original term limit crisis. Recent developments show continued political turbulence, with Castro initially threatening to end the extradition treaty with the United States in 2023 after her brother-in-law (Manuel Zelaya's brother) was caught on video negotiating bribes with drug traffickers. She reversed this decision in February of this year following negotiations with the Trump administration.

• Venezuela: Hugo Chávez leveraged populist rhetoric to eliminate term limits through referendum, ruling until his death in 2013. His hand-picked successor, Nicolás Maduro, continues to rule Venezuela through increasingly authoritarian means. Maduro was sworn in for a controversial third consecutive term in January of this year following a disputed July 2024 election that sparked large-scale protests and thousands of arrests. The United States, European Union, and many neighboring countries refused to recognize the results, instead acknowledging opposition candidate Edmundo González as the rightful president-elect. Election observers and the opposition claim González won with two-thirds of the vote, while Maduro insists he won with 51%, but has provided no evidence. The political crisis has deepened with Maduro's government threatening opposition leaders with arrest and placing a $100,000 bounty on González, who has fled into exile. Meanwhile, opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, who was barred from running, continues to lead protests despite periods in hiding and reported detention. The elimination of term limits in 2009 has enabled the Chavista regime to extend far beyond what would have been possible under the original constitutional framework, contributing to a humanitarian and economic crisis that has driven nearly eight million Venezuelans to flee the country over the past decade.

• Nicaragua: Daniel Ortega, who once fought against the Somoza dictatorship, had his Supreme Court invalidate constitutional term limits in 2009. His consolidation of power has reached unprecedented levels with a January constitutional amendment that officially enshrines his wife, Rosario Murillo, as "co-president" and transfers all legislative, judicial, electoral, and supervisory control to the couple. The reform also extends presidential terms from five to six years, defines Nicaragua as a "revolutionary" socialist state, and includes provisions to strip perceived "traitors" of citizenship—a measure already used against hundreds of critics. The amendment creates a "voluntary police" force that opposition figures describe as a paramilitary group, reminiscent of the masked armed men who suppressed the 2018 protests that left over 300 people dead according to UN estimates. Since then, Ortega's government has shut down more than 5,000 NGOs, jailed hundreds of opponents, and forced thousands into exile. UN human rights expert Reed Brody described these changes as marking "the destruction of the rule of law and fundamental freedoms in Nicaragua" and noted that Ortega and Murillo have "enshrined and solidified their absolute power." The elimination of term limits in 2009 laid the groundwork for what has evolved into what critics describe as a nepotistic dictatorship that bears disturbing similarities to the Somoza dynasty Ortega once fought to overthrow.

• Republic of the Congo: Denis Sassou-Nguesso engineered constitutional changes removing both age and term limits. These amendments enabled him to extend his already lengthy rule, having been in power almost continuously since 1979 (with a brief interruption from 1992-1997). In 2021, he was sworn in for another five-year term after winning 88.4% of the vote in a March election that was boycotted by the main opposition. The constitutional changes have allowed him to remain in office well beyond what the previous constitution permitted, with further amendments potentially keeping him in power until 2031. His decades-long governance has left the country with substantial debt despite significant oil wealth, with much of the revenue directed to repaying Chinese infrastructure loans rather than public services. Sassou-Nguesso has announced plans to diversify the economy away from oil dependence toward agriculture and industry, though concrete results remain limited.

• Rwanda: Paul Kagame's constitutional referendum reset his term counting while shortening presidential terms. He remains in power today, with the new arrangements potentially allowing him to rule until 2034—extending his presidency by at least 20 years beyond what would have been possible under the original post-genocide constitution. Recent allegations have complicated the narrative of Kagame's leadership, including UN reports documenting Rwandan military involvement in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, where Rwanda has maintained a military presence for nearly three decades. UN Group of Experts reports from 2024 indicate that Rwandan troops are integrated with M23 rebels under Rwandan command, controlling mineral-rich areas including the largest coltan mine in the region. These interventions, which Rwanda justifies as protection of Tutsi minorities and pursuit of genocide perpetrators, have contributed to a humanitarian crisis that has displaced nearly 7 million people. Critics point to resource extraction as a primary motivation, with UN investigations dating back to 2001 documenting Rwandan involvement in mineral trafficking. International human rights investigations, including the UN Mapping Report, have also raised serious concerns about human rights abuses committed by Rwandan forces. The constitutional changes that extended Kagame's rule have solidified his control while limiting international accountability for these regional actions.

• Côte d'Ivoire: Alassane Ouattara introduced a constitution enabling his controversial third term, claiming the new constitution reset his term count. He secured that third term in 2020 despite violent protests, winning 94% of the vote after the opposition boycotted the election. Now 83 years old, Ouattara has signaled his intention to seek a fourth term in the October 2025 election, stating in January that he is "in good health and eager to continue serving my country." This potential fourth-term bid contradicts his earlier statements about "generational change in Africa" and raises concerns about political stability in a country with a history of electoral violence. The 2010 presidential election led to 3,000 deaths and 500,000 displaced people when then-President Laurent Gbagbo refused to concede to Ouattara. Political analysts have characterized Ouattara's latest maneuvers as "reckless" and a potential "political heist," with party officials having already declared him their "natural candidate." Regional observers draw parallels to former Senegalese President Macky Sall's failed attempt at a third term and worry about the implications for democratic norms in West Africa, particularly given ECOWAS's stance against military coups in neighboring countries. The 2016 constitutional changes have thus enabled Ouattara to potentially extend his rule by ten years or more beyond what the previous constitution allowed.

• Turkey: Recep Tayyip Erdoğan transformed Turkey's parliamentary system into a presidential one through a referendum that reset term counting. He remains in power today, having effectively extended his leadership beyond the limitations of Turkey's previous constitutional structure. Recent events underscore his growing authoritarianism, with the March arrest of Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu—widely considered Erdoğan's most formidable political rival—sparking some of the largest protests of Erdoğan's two-decade rule. Nearly 2,000 protesters have been detained and international journalists arrested as Erdoğan dismisses the demonstrations as a "show." The 2017 constitutional reforms potentially allow him to remain in office until 2028 or beyond—more than a decade of additional rule that would have been impossible under the parliamentary system.

• Burundi: Following Pierre Nkurunziza's controversial third term that violated the Arusha Accords, a new constitution in 2018 extended presidential terms from five to seven years. Nkurunziza unexpectedly died in 2020 and was succeeded by Évariste Ndayishimiye, who inherited the expanded powers created by the constitutional changes. Despite initial hopes for reform, Ndayishimiye's administration has continued the repression of civic space that began under his predecessor. Four years into his presidency, human rights defenders, journalists, and opposition members still face intimidation, harassment, arbitrary arrests, and unfair prosecution. An August 2024 Amnesty International briefing documented that authorities continue to bring spurious charges like "rebellion" and "threatening internal state security" against critics. While Ndayishimiye released some political prisoners early in his term—coinciding with efforts to reestablish relations with the European Union—several high-profile cases have demonstrated the continued crackdown on dissent. With parliamentary elections scheduled for later this year, international human rights organizations are urging the government to end the repression of civic space and calling on international partners to maintain pressure for genuine reform.

• China: Xi Jinping orchestrated the removal of presidential term limits through a near-unanimous parliamentary vote, abandoning the collective leadership model established by Deng Xiaoping after Mao's era. Xi remains firmly in power today, having secured a precedent-breaking third term in 2022, with no visible succession plan in place. The constitutional amendment, which passed with only two votes against and three abstentions out of 2,964 votes, came after Xi had already consolidated his authority by having his name and ideology ("Xi Jinping Thought") enshrined into the party constitution. At this point, his authoritarian leadership style has created a political environment where opposition has largely disappeared, with dissenters either forced into exile or silenced. Though his control appears secure, underlying vulnerabilities exist, including an aging leadership (his Politburo's average age will exceed 73 by 2027), bureaucratic fragmentation, and potential tensions within the security apparatus. The elimination of term limits represents a fundamental shift in Chinese governance that could have long-term consequences for political stability, particularly as questions about succession remain unaddressed.

• Comoros: Azali Assoumani used a constitutional referendum to dismantle the rotating presidency system designed to balance ethnic tensions among the archipelago's three main islands. The 2018 reforms extended the presidential rotation requirement from every five years to ten years, allowing Assoumani to secure reelection in 2019 and again in 2022—elections that opposition parties rejected as fraudulent. In January 2025, Assoumani sparked controversy during a speech when he stated he would "take a child to put in my place" when leaving office. Opposition figures interpreted this as confirmation he was grooming his son, Nour El Fath (who had already been appointed government secretary general with extensive powers over the cabinet), though the president's office denied this interpretation, claiming he was referring to all Comorians metaphorically as his "children." Assoumani's party won a decisive victory in the 2025 parliamentary elections, which opposition parties either boycotted or rejected as fraudulent. The constitutional changes have undermined a carefully designed power-sharing arrangement in a country that has experienced approximately 20 coups or attempted coups since gaining independence from France in 1975. Assoumani himself first came to power through a coup in 1999 and has since won four elections, effectively extending his rule through constitutional engineering.

• Egypt: Abdel Fattah el-Sisi's constitutional amendments extended presidential terms from four to six years and included tailor-made provisions allowing him an additional term. El-Sisi was sworn in for his third six-year term in April 2024 after winning 89.6% of the vote in a December 2023 election where he faced three virtually unknown opponents. The constitutional changes passed in 2019 not only extended term lengths but also added two years to his second term, strategically positioning him to remain in power until 2030, eight years beyond what would have been possible under the post-Arab Spring constitution. His most credible potential challenger, Ahmed Al-Tantawy, dropped out of the race after failing to secure required signatures, claiming harassment from security agencies against his campaign staff prevented him from reaching the threshold for candidacy. Under el-Sisi's rule, which began after he led the military overthrow of an elected Islamist president in 2013, thousands of government critics have been silenced or jailed while the country faces an economic crisis, with inflation surging above 30% and the Egyptian pound having lost 50% of its value against the dollar in less than two years.

• Togo: Constitutional amendments reinstated term limits but pointedly exempted Faure Gnassingbé from their application. In a dramatic escalation, Gnassingbé signed a new constitution in May 2024 that fundamentally transformed Togo's government from a presidential to a parliamentary system, eliminating direct presidential elections entirely. Under this radical change, parliament—which is dominated by Gnassingbé's ruling party—now chooses the president. The new constitution also increases presidential terms from five to six years and introduces a single-term limit, but crucially doesn't count the nearly 20 years Gnassingbé has already served. Critics have denounced this as a "constitutional coup" designed to entrench the Gnassingbé family's 57-year dynasty, which began when his father, Eyadéma Gnassingbé, seized power in 1967. The government's preparation for these changes included banning protests, arresting opposition figures, blocking the Catholic Church from deploying election observers, and restricting foreign journalists. The new system also creates a powerful prime minister-like position that critics fear will provide Gnassingbé another avenue to maintain control. Civil society groups have called for protests to reinstate the previous constitution, with one spokesperson declaring, "We will never accept this new constitution." This latest maneuver continues a pattern of constitutional engineering that has allowed Gnassingbé to potentially remain in power until at least 2030, extending his family's rule far beyond what would have been permitted under strict term limitations.

• Bolivia: Evo Morales sought a controversial fourth term based on a 2017 court ruling declaring term limits a violation of human rights, despite the constitution's two-term limit. Morales was ultimately unsuccessful, as he was forced to resign and flee the country in 2019 amid protests over electoral irregularities. The constitutional crisis has continued to evolve: in November 2024, a constitutional court ruled that presidents are limited to serving only two terms (whether consecutive or nonconsecutive), barring Morales from running again. Despite this ruling, Morales defiantly launched a fourth presidential bid in February 2025 for the August elections, switching from his traditional MAS party to a small leftist group called "The Front for Victory." Meanwhile, his former ally turned rival, President Luis Arce, has faced accusations from Morales of political persecution, particularly regarding an arrest warrant issued against Morales for alleged "human trafficking involving a minor." This ongoing power struggle has contributed to Bolivia's severe economic crisis, with high inflation, shortages of essential goods, and frequent protests. Bolivia represents a case where a leader's attempt to extend power through constitutional manipulation has faced effective resistance, though the political aftermath remains turbulent and unresolved.

• Russia: Vladimir Putin's constitutional redesign reset his term count after previously sidestepping limits by temporarily serving as Prime Minister between 2008-2012. The 2020 constitutional amendments addressed what was known as the "2024 problem"—the fact that Putin would reach his final constitutionally permitted term that year. Between his 2018 election and the January 2020 announcement of constitutional reforms, there was a marked increase in public discussion of constitutional changes by members of Russia's political elite, from just two comments in pro-Kremlin media between 2016-2018 to 37 between March 2018 and December 2019. While Putin initially proposed reforms focused on "improving checks and balances," a late amendment by Duma deputy Valentina Tereshkova effectively "zeroed" his previous presidential terms while limiting future presidents to two terms total. This maneuver allowed Putin to secure a fifth term in March 2024 in an election where turnout was officially reported at 74%, but was neither free nor fair according to international observers. His most outspoken critics were either dead (such as Alexei Navalny, who died in prison in February 2024), jailed, or in exile, while potential challenger Boris Nadezhdin was barred from running after authorities claimed over 15% of his supporting signatures were flawed. The constitutional changes now potentially allow Putin to remain president until 2036, extending his effective control of Russia to a staggering 36 years—longer than any Russian leader since Joseph Stalin.

• Guinea: Alpha Condé's constitutional rewrite allowing a third term sparked widespread protests. Unlike many others on this list, his attempt proved short-lived—he was deposed in a military coup in September 2021, just a year into his controversial third term. The coup was led by General Mamadi Doumbouya, who dissolved the constitution that had increased presidential terms from five to six years. After more than three years of military rule, Guinea announced plans in March to hold general elections later this year to restore constitutional order. The country completed drafting a new constitution in July 2024 that restores the presidential term to five years and permits only two terms. The transition charter stipulates that neither the interim president, junta members, nor government officials can run in the elections that will mark the end of the transition—a promise Doumbouya made during his 2021 inauguration. The term limit manipulation triggered deeper instability leading to military intervention, but may potentially result in stronger constitutional guardrails against future attempts to extend presidential power–this is still left to be seen.

• Hungary: Viktor Orbán has maintained power not through changing formal term limits (Hungary has no formal term limits for Prime Ministers) but by methodically dismantling democratic institutions. Since returning to power with a parliamentary supermajority in 2010, Orbán has transformed Hungary from a functioning democracy into what the European Parliament has declared an "electoral autocracy." He used his legislative majority to rewrite the constitution, undermine judicial independence (forcing nearly 300 senior judges into retirement), centralize media control, weaken civil society, and reshape electoral laws to favor his Fidesz party—which has won two-thirds parliamentary majorities despite receiving as little as 44% of the vote. At this time, Orbán's control has become so entrenched that he openly speaks of a "golden age" that marks the "collapse of liberal democracy." His government has increasingly targeted vulnerable groups, recently banning Budapest's Pride parade and announcing a "spring cleaning" against opposition politicians, judges, journalists, and activists, whom he collectively described as society's "stink bugs." Orbán's regime also operates through extensive corruption networks that, according to sociologist David Jancsics, exceed even Soviet-era levels of graft, with cronies and relatives benefiting from state contracts through shell companies and legal structures designed to make this corruption technically legal. While Orbán doesn't need to manipulate term limits because he controls the entire political system, Hungary as a case study demonstrates how democratic backsliding can occur through legal means, creating a model that has inspired autocratic leaders worldwide.

• Central African Republic: Faustin-Archange Touadéra abolished presidential term limits and extended terms from five to seven years through a July 2023 constitutional referendum. This change allows him to potentially remain in power indefinitely, beginning with a third term bid in the December 2025 elections. The referendum was conducted with the backing of Russian Wagner mercenaries who serve as Touadéra's personal bodyguards and have been credited with preventing rebels from capturing the capital Bangui in 2021. Thousands of protesters took to the streets of Bangui today in what opposition leader Martin Ziguélé called "a historic show of protest," demanding Touadéra respect the previous constitution's two-term limit and addressing grievances about poor living conditions, including lack of water, electricity, and healthcare, as well as soaring prices and persistent insecurity. Protesters specifically criticized Russia's Wagner Group presence in the country, with one demonstrator claiming the mercenaries "have raped and killed without any justice." The constitutional changes continue a pattern of governance problems in one of the world's poorest countries, which has been in conflict since 2013, with Russian military involvement further complicating the country's sovereignty and human rights situation.

The Twenty-second Amendment, which Congress proposed in 1947 and the states ratified by 1951, emerged as a direct response to Franklin Roosevelt's unprecedented four terms. For seven decades, this constitutional guardrail has prevented presidential permanence in America. Its modification would require either a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress, or a constitutional convention called by two-thirds of state legislatures—followed by ratification from three-quarters of states. The Founders designed this process to be difficult, but not impossible.

What distinguishes our American context from these international cases is not constitutional exceptionalism, but historical practice. Prior to Roosevelt and the subsequent 22nd amendment, presidential restraint was governed by tradition rather than law, starting with George Washington's initial decision to decline a third term.

As James Romoser recently outlined in Politico, democratic backsliding rarely announces itself with the pageantry of dictatorship. Instead, it proceeds through incremental reinterpretation, legal chicanery, and appeals to populist sentiment which are justified as expressions of democratic will while serving individual ambition. Leaders invariably present themselves as indispensable to national welfare–the only bulwark against some imagined catastrophe.

Trump's persistent musings about a third term suggest more than casual provocation. "I suspect I won't be running again unless you say, 'He's so good we've got to figure something else out,'" he told House Republicans a week after his November election victory. In January, he declared, "It will be the greatest honor of my life to serve not once but twice—or three or four times," before quickly adding, "Nah, it will be to serve twice." These statements reveal a man who, at minimum, is testing the waters.

The pathways to a third Trump term are not merely hypothetical. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) has already proposed a constitutional amendment to explicitly allow Trump to run again. The vice-presidential loophole (what some have dubbed the "Vance scenario") poses a particularly plausible workaround. When pressed by NBC News about a scenario involving VP Vance winning the Presidency only to somehow transfer power back to Trump, the President acknowledged this as "one" method, before adding, "But there are others, too."

Some Democrats are treating these calculated overtures with sober concern. Rep. Dan Goldman has introduced a resolution reaffirming that the 22nd Amendment applies to non-consecutive terms. Meanwhile, several blue states are moving to revoke their long-dormant requests for a constitutional convention, fearing Republicans could harness these decades-old petitions to trigger a convention and propose sweeping amendments, such as a potential repeal of presidential term limits.

In this context, the White House's February post on X depicting Trump crowned like a monarch above the caption "LONG LIVE THE KING!" acquires an unsettling significance. What might once have registered as provocative humor amidst the common buffoonery of a Trump administration now appears as an obvious trial balloon, floated for the purpose of testing public tolerance for monarchical pretensions in a republic designed explicitly to prevent them.

As one legal scholar observed to Politico, "All you need is a court that is willing to be your faithful helper." The willingness of our institutions to defend constitutional guardrails, rather than the existence of those guardrails themselves, will ultimately determine whether Trump can achieve what Putin, Erdoğan, and so many others have managed in their own countries.

When George Washington stepped down after two terms, he established perhaps the most important precedent in American political history. Trump's casual dismissal of this tradition tells us that no democratic guardrail, however venerable, remains beyond question.

---