Trump’s foreign policy: The disruption of the political balance
Four years of Donald Trump have not only led to a paradigm shift in domestic politics, but also greatly changed the doctrine in foreign policy. The maxim of us foreign policy, namely the role of the world police, was criticised in many parts of the world. Above all, the war in Iraq, the mission in Afghanistan and, in some cases, the dealing with the Arab Spring were criticised. On a moral and possibly emotional level, the foreign policy activities of the USA, but also of Russia and China, may indeed be disliked. From a rational and realpolitik point of view, however, there is a need for hegemonic powers in world politics, ideally a balance between two different poles.
Between polarisation and the creation of an imbalance
The balance of powers in individual regions of the world is in fact a stability factor. The loss of the balance of powers, by contrast, can become a risk factor in a region. A balance between the United States and Russia has made it possible to establish a more or less strong stability in conflict regions. Both countries act as mutual barriers and do not allow their counterparts to go too far. Without justifying the role of the US and Russia in some Middle Eastern conflicts: America’s complete withdrawal from a given conflict area has fatal consequences for the region as a whole. For reasons of objectivity, it must be mentioned that a withdrawal from some areas has already taken place under Obama, although in a gradual, orderly and not complete manner.
The new narrative under Trump has had two main effects: a complete polarisation in the region and the creation of an imbalance. Donald Trump’s black-and-white policy of viewing states in the Middle East as either allies or arch-rivals leaves no room for nuance in relations. In parallel, the foreign and security policy withdrawal from regions such as Syria has led in some sense to the creation of a power vacuum that has been filled by Russia and Turkey. Looking back over time, we can see that since Donald Trump’s inauguration and the associated withdrawal from the Middle East, Turkish and Russian activities in the region have increased significantly.
The loss of the balance of powers, by contrast, can become a risk factor in a region.
Filling the power vacuum: new actors, new conflicts
If until now Russia had to find minimal compromises in an unvoluntary partnership of convenience with the United States for this region, it now has a completely free hand since the withdrawal of the USA from the region. The Turkish intervention in northern Syria would probably not have been possible in this form without the green light from Moscow and Washington. Only after the US withdrawal of troops from northern Syrian areas, which, by the way, Kurdish minorities have warned against, a Turkish intervention could take place. This also leads to a certain partnership of convenience between Russia and Turkey, where on the one hand there is a lot of conflict of interest, but at the same time concessions are made.
The US power vacuum has been filled not only in Syria by other regional powers, but also in Libya in particular and in the all-Arab region in general. The Turkish provocations in the Mediterranean and the deepened partnership with parts of the Libyan rulers should be seen in the context of the absence of the American presence.
The American withdrawal, neo-Ottoman ambitions in the Middle East and the Mediterranean, and the partial partnership with Russia have also led to harsher rhetoric between Ankara and Brussels. Only after Donald Trump’s electoral defeat was manifested Ankara again showed itself ready for “friendly relations” with the EU.
The US power vacuum has been filled not only in Syria by other regional powers, but also in Libya in particular and in the all-Arab region in general.
Regardless of the positions of Russia and the USA, they created a more stable balance of power and were at least able to prevent the interference of other actors, such as Turkey. Since 2016, on the other hand, the already hot pot of conflict has been further inflamed: a new confrontation in the Mediterranean, direct proxy wars in Libya, attacks in Iraq and the Karabakh war. All these are conflicts that would not have occurred, at least in this form, without such a strong paradigm shift by Washington.
A clear example of this is the Karabakh War of 2020: apart from the fact that Turkish intervention and motivation caused the conflict in the first place, the only major power in the region, Russia, was unwilling to actively intervene. With the removal of American influence, it became a pure conflict between Russia and Turkey. Russia’s tactical non-intervention (at least actively) in the conflict and the following ceasefire conditions which were painful for Armenia and profitable for Russia are at least partly due to the US withdrawal. The common “America First” isolationist policy and the disinterest in foreign policy have led to unbalanced conditions in the region that are profitable for Russia and Turkey. To be objective, it should be noted that due to foreign policy withdrawal, the United States has not become involved in any new conflict in recent years. Globally and regionally, however, it entails more instability: a more active US foreign policy would reduce the unilateral decision-making power of Russia and Turkey and, specifically, in the case of the Karabakh war, provide better conditions for Armenia. The only activity the Trump administration has shown in the Caucasus conflict is the reduction of financial aid to Armenia and the increase of the same aid to Azerbaijan.
Biden’s election victory: relief for Europe, tension in Moscow and Ankara
Besides the lack of interest in foreign policy, polarisation has had a fatal effect on the instability of the region. Meetings and agreements between Israel and Palestine, North Korea and the USA or in the Balkans may be marketed well in the media, but they are to a large extent just symbolic politics without any serious improvement of the situation. The withdrawal from the Iran deal and the open confrontation with Iran, on the other hand, have nullified years of efforts by the Obama administration to achieve a more or less stable peace.
Trump’s removal from office has led to relief in some regions: with the election of Joe Biden, a rapprochement with Europe and a more active diplomacy in the Middle East can be expected in terms of foreign policy. As a result, Moscow and Ankara are not necessarily happy about Joe Biden’s election victory.
Without making a judgement on the domestic policy, the rhetoric or the substantive positions of the Trump administration, it is possible to state the following with regard to foreign policy: In recent years, the United States has abandoned the basic rules in geopolitics, leaving behind an imbalance, a vacuum, and thus instability, especially in the Middle East and the Mediterranean. The former American Secretary of State Henry Kissinger accurately formulated one of the principles of world politics as follows: “In the end, peace can be achieved only by hegemony or by balance of power.