As war and instability engulf portions of the world, Donald Trump’s return to the White House is expected to transform US foreign policy, offering potentially drastic changes on several fronts.
Trump made general policy promises during his campaign, frequently devoid of specifics, based on the ideas of trade protectionism and non-interventionism, or, as he puts it, “America First.”
In the face of many crises, his triumph signifies one of the biggest possible upheavals in Washington’s foreign policy strategy in many years.
His remarks made during the campaign and his performance during his tenure in government from 2017 to 2021 allow us to piece together some of his potential approaches to certain issues.
Russia, Ukraine and Nato
Trump claimed he could put an end to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine “in a day” during the campaign. In response, he proposed managing a transaction, but he has refrained from providing details.
The United States should continue to provide Ukraine with weaponry, but only if Kyiv agrees to engage in peace negotiations with Russia, according to a May study authored by two of Trump’s former national security directors.
In order to attract Russia, the West would pledge to postpone Ukraine’s eagerly anticipated NATO accession. Instead of abandoning its aspirations to regain all of its land from Russian occupation, the former experts advised Ukraine to negotiate using the front lines as they stand.
Democratic opponents of Trump claim that his strategy amounts to a giving up for Ukraine and will put all of Europe in jeopardy. They also accuse Trump of cosying up to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
His top priorities have always been to put an end to the war and stop the depletion of US resources.
The extent to which the former advisers’ report accurately reflects Trump’s actual opinions is unknown, but it should serve as a reference for the type of advice he will receive.
Regarding the strategic question of the future of NATO, the transatlantic all-for-one and one-for-all military alliance established following World War Two, initially as a bulwark against the Soviet Union, his “America First” approach to ending the war also applies.
Trump has long been a sceptic of NATO, which currently comprises 32 member nations, and has accused Europe of taking advantage of America’s assurances of safety.
There is still disagreement about whether he would truly pull the US out of NATO, which would represent the biggest change in transatlantic security ties in almost a century.
His tough stance, according to some of his supporters, is only a negotiation ploy to get members to adhere to the alliance’s defence budgetary requirements.
However, the truth is that NATO leaders will be extremely concerned about the implications of his win for the alliance’s future and how adversarial leaders would see its deterrent effect.
The Middle East
Similar to Ukraine, Trump has pledged to bring “peace” to the Middle East, suggesting that he will put an end to the wars between Israel and Hamas in Gaza and Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, but he has not specified how.
He has stated time and time again that if he had been in charge instead of Joe Biden, his “maximum pressure” policy on Iran, the organization’s funding source, would have prevented Hamas from attacking Israel.
In general, Trump would probably want to revert to the course of action that saw his administration execute Iran’s most senior military leader, Gen. Qasem Soleimani, impose harsher sanctions on Iran, and withdraw the US from the nuclear agreement with Iran.
Trump’s strong pro-Israel policies while in office, such as designating Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and relocating the US embassy from Tel Aviv there, galvanised his Christian evangelical constituency, a key segment of the Republican electorate.
Trump was referred to as Israel’s “best friend in the White House” by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Critics counter that his strategy caused regional instability.
Due to Washington’s rejection of their claim to Jerusalem, the city that serves as the historical centre of Palestine, the Palestinians boycotted the Trump administration.
Trump’s strong pro-Israel policies while in office, such as designating Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and relocating the US embassy from Tel Aviv there, galvanised his Christian evangelical constituency, a key segment of the Republican electorate.
Trump was referred to as Israel’s “best friend in the White House” by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Critics counter that his strategy caused regional instability.
Due to Washington’s rejection of their claim to Jerusalem, which serves as the historical hub of Palestinian religious and national life, the Palestinians boycotted the Trump administration.
Trump’s mediation of the so-called “Abraham Accords,” which saw a historic agreement to normalise diplomatic ties between Israel and numerous Arab and Muslim nations, further alienated them. They did this without Israel having to agree to the so-called two-state solution, which was traditionally a requirement of Arab nations for such a regional agreement, which calls for Israel to support an independent Palestinian state in the future.
In exchange, the participating nations were granted access to cutting-edge US armaments in exchange for acknowledging Israel.
The single force that can actually exert influence over both sides of the war left the Palestinians at one of the most vulnerable moments in their history, further undermining their perceived capacity to defend themselves on the ground.
Throughout the campaign, Trump stated repeatedly that he wants the violence in Gaza to cease.
Although his relationship with Netanyahu has been complicated and occasionally dysfunctional, he is undoubtedly capable of exerting pressure on him.
Additionally, he has a track record of solid relationships with the rulers of the major Arab nations that have ties to Hamas.
It’s uncertain how he would strike a balance between wanting to end the war and demonstrating his strong support for the Israeli government.
Trump’s supporters have frequently presented his unpredictable nature as a diplomatic strength, but it’s unclear how this would work in the hotly contested and unstable Middle East during a crisis already of unprecedented proportions.
Trump will have to choose whether or not to continue the diplomatic process that the Biden administration started to secure a truce in Gaza in exchange for the release of the hostages that Hamas is holding.
China and trade
The most strategically significant aspect of American foreign policy, with the greatest impact on international trade and security, is the country’s relationship to China.
During his time in office, Trump placed taxes on certain Chinese goods into the US and called China a “strategic competitor.” Beijing responded by imposing tit-for-tat tariffs on American imports.
Relations deteriorated after the former president called the Covid epidemic a “Chinese virus,” destroying any chance of de-escalating the trade issue.
The Biden administration maintained many of the import tariffs from the Trump administration, despite its claims to adopt a more responsible stance on China policy.
Even though factory automation and production changes have contributed as much to the long-term job decline in traditional US industries like steel as global competition and offshoring, trade policy has become closely tied to domestic voter perceptions about protecting American manufacturing jobs.
As part of what opponents have described as Trump’s fondness for “dictators,” Trump has lauded Chinese President Xi Jinping as both “brilliant” and “dangerous.” He is a very effective leader who uses a “iron fist” to govern 1.4 billion people.
In an effort to limit China, the former president is probably going to abandon the Biden administration’s strategy of forging closer security ties between the US and other nations in the region.
Taiwan, a self-governing territory that China views as a renegade province that would inevitably fall under Beijing’s authority, has continued to receive military support from the US.
In October, Trump declared that if he were to return to the White House, he would put crippling tariffs on Chinese goods and would not have to use military action to stop a Chinese blockade of Taiwan because President Xi knew he was “[expletive] crazy.”
Source: Citinewsroom