Q&A - US Foreign Policy under Trump
Q&A - US Foreign Policy under Trump
I propose this topic for discussion due to its importance in understanding the status quo of world politics.
The most influential bloc in the world, which virtually controls the whole world, is the bloc of capitalists in America, namely banks and financial institutions. This group seems to have made up its mind and chosen the policy of international hegemony which manifested itself after the collapse of the Soviet Union. During the tenures of Bill Clinton and George Bush, they pursued policies that led to the dangerous situation of 2008 due to their huge costs, such as the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. Then came Obama with a host of policies aimed at saving the banks, but his approach led to aggravating the debts, thus accentuating the spectre of economic collapse rather than eliminating it.
It seems that Donald Trump’s arrival was expressive of the change in this trend after it had been exhausted, aggravated the debts and led to the migration of industries from America.
The question is: has this group brought Trump with his inward-oriented policy to reverse the trend of international hegemony that had started before Obama’s tenure? Or is Trump a mere step back – from Obama’s policy – with the policy of international hegemony still ongoing but merely catching its breath to rearrange the US household and then set forth with a fresh impetus to dominate the world? And would Trump be a scapegoat for the aforementioned step-back, taking into account that Trump may succeed and consequently his tactical move may turn into a strategy? Is this narrative is corroborated by the intense domestic tussle between Trump and the Democrats?
The policy of international hegemony is persistently implemented by the US administration. In an article published by Foreign Policy magazine in November 2009, former US House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich wrote “To lead the world, the United States needs to communicate effectively. This crucial capability must receive adequate resources, and the State Department must learn to fulfill this role. As the world’s only superpower, largest economy, and most aggressive culture, the United States inevitably infringes on the attention and interests of other peoples and nations. A country this large and powerful must work every day to communicate what it is doing. The world does not have to love us, but it must be able to predict us.”
For his part, professor of International Politics Robert Jervis wrote in his article entitled the Compulsive Empire: “Most countries are concerned mainly with what happens in their immediate neighbourhoods; but for a hegemon, the world is its neighbourhood.”
Hence, the US has been viewing the world as a farm that she ought to manage herself and harvest its produce for her own benefit. An extensive political debate took place within the American political milieu after the Soviet Union had collapsed, especially on the issue of shaping US foreign policy either by dominating the world – through military force – or leading the world. The options of isolation or inward-oriented policy or any other were not raised.
Hence, the accession of Donald Trump to power does not mean that America has adopted the “inward-oriented” policy; all that happened is that Trump’s tenure has introduced a change of style in hegemony and the attempt to control the world’s resources and riches.
Hence, under the theme of “America first”, Donald Trump, together with the banks, financial institutions and the rest of the deep state elements, has succeeded in generating new styles to blackmail the world, starting with Western European states, who have been asked to increase their financial contributions to NATO, and ending with the Gulf States; all this is according to the rule of “money for protection”, be it in respect of the Gulf States or Europe herself.
As for China, the policy of imposing tariffs and laying siege to giant Chinese firms such as Huawei, it is but one of the manifestations of the US policy aimed at dominating the worldand luring US firms back into the US with their capital in order to weaken China and generate more jobs for the American workforce. What Donald Trump had pursued in terms of protectionist policies in economy and politics may give observers the impression that a change had occurred in the hegemonic policy whereas in fact the policy is ongoing but in different styles. Donald Trump’s styles seem at first on the surface to be inward-oriented but an insightful perception of the slogan “America first” reveals the reality of those styles which are inherently aggressive and built on the policy of brinksmanship in international relations and the policy of “shock and awe” in statements and decisions.
To shed more light on Donald Trump’s policies, it is clear that since he took office in January 2017, he has been running the US administration according to the aforementioned style of shock and awe. It is a style that confuses friends and enemies alike. The image Donald Trump has portrayed of himself and consequently that the media has portrayed of him is that he is an unconventional ruler who takes everyone by surprise when it comes to taking decisions and issuing statements, relying always on the slogan of “America first”. This slogan that Trump has been hoisting since the launch of his electoral campaign projects America as conducting herself in utter political egoism in foreign policy, whereas in fact it reflects the level of periodic thinking the deep state reached in America, especially in the manner it conducts world’s affairs. The decision-makers in America view Trump as the right man who should generate an extensive shift in terms of reaping the fruits of the former rulers’ efforts on the political, economic and military planes.
After the phase of the “Arab Spring” had ended and the counter-revolutions succeeded in downsizing the so-called “political Islam”, and after the functional role of Daesh in Syria and Iraq had shrunk, came the time to generate major changes in the Middle East and the rest of the world on the basis of “America’s interests first”; the most important changes aimed at achieving America’s interests are as follows:
1 – The Middles East: It is obvious that the American administration is working towards acquiring direct control over oil resources in the region, as is the case in Iraq for instance, and seizing the financial assets of the Gulf States, blackmailing them via huge financial deals to revive the US economy and demanding their rulers to pay for the protection of their thrones. America has also embarked on establishing new political entities; this is evidently reflected in her endeavour to fragment Yemen into at least two entities, one in the north under the sponsorship of Iran and one in the south under the sponsorship of the UAE, settle the Palestinian issue by propagating the "Deal of the Century” that stipulates closing the file of the refugees – by depriving them of financial aid – handing the whole of al-Quds to "Israel", propagating the state of “Greater Gaza” and the like.
2 – Europe, Russia and the rest of the world:
It is noted that America has been harassing the European states and twisting their arms into shouldering the financial burden of NATO, the security umbrella through which America controls Europe and turns her into a satellite state in respect of defence, security, foreign policy and international relations. The tariffs America imposed on Europe are but a means of extorting Europe financially under the principle of “money for protection”.
With regards to Russia and China, America exerts pressure on them to shrink the boundaries of their regional influence and prevent them from aspiring to challenging her on the world stage, be it on the economic plane for China or the military presence for Russia, in addition to America’s endeavour to control the oil supplies surrounding Russia and what it entails in terms of controlling oil resources in Central Asia.
America has overtly been working towards controlling maritime routes especially the entries and exits to the straits and international waters’ passages. In this context, it is imperative to perceive the UAE attacks on behalf of America on the seaports of Yemen, Djibouti, Eritrea, Somalia among others.
It is clear that the US decision-makers found in Donald Trump what they had been looking for to achieve those major changes and interests because he was good at staging propagandist stunts and unsettling friends, allies and enemies through the calculated contradictions in the statements, decisions and actions undertaken by his administration.
This apparent “chaos” in US foreign policy and the evident and deliberate contradiction emanating from the State Department backed from behind the scenes by US intelligence, and from the White House backed by the Pentagon, are designed to pass the aforementioned policies while the world is engrossed in exploring and perceiving this deliberate chaos of the US administration.
Ever since Donald Trump took office, America has been pursuing a policy characterised by an element of surprise; Trump explained this by saying “We must as a nation be more unpredictable.” The most important tool of this policy is projecting chaos in the actions and statements, coupled with threatening to go to war during negotiations. Such styles tend to unsettle and paralyse enemies and friends alike when it comes to dealing with the comportment of the American administration since they cast thick fog and ambiguity on the real intentions of the US decision-makers. As for the possibility of sacrificing Donald Trump and making him a scapegoat, it would be likely once his administration has achieved for that which it had been brought in.
10 Thil Qi’dah 1440h
14 July 2019