Font size:
Print
Trump’s Foreign Policy and the Western-Led Order
Context:
Recent moves by US President Donald Trump have signaled a dramatic shift in global politics. His proposal to remove Palestinians from Gaza and transform the region into a “riviera” under American control has sparked intense debate.
More on News
- Simultaneously, Washington’s shifting stance on the Russia-Ukraine war—marked by its refusal to support a UN resolution condemning Russia—suggests a departure from its previous commitments in Europe.
- In both conflicts, the United States appears to be making strategic decisions without direct involvement from the most affected parties—Palestinians and Ukrainians.
- Critics argue that this shift challenges the very “rules-based international order” that the US and its allies have long championed against Russia and China.
A Return to Spheres of Influence?
- Imperialistic Thinking: Many analysts believe that Trump’s foreign policy represents a return to imperialistic thinking, where powerful nations divide the world into spheres of influence.
- This approach, which dates back to ancient empires and colonial times, has historically limited the agency of smaller nations.
- Grand Bargain: Benjamin Jensen, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), recently suggested that Trump is attempting to strike a “grand bargain” to reshape global power dynamics.
- This would involve major powers acknowledging each other’s dominance in specific regions, potentially sidestepping smaller nations’ sovereignty in the process.
- History: The echoes of history are undeniable. Consider:
- Berlin Conference (1884-85): It saw European colonial powers carve up Africa, disregarding existing cultural and geographical realities.
- The Durand Line, imposed by the British, still fuels tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan today.
- Yalta Conference (1945): It marked the formal rise of the US as the West’s security guarantor.
- The absence of French leader Charles de Gaulle from the meeting continues to be viewed as a diplomatic slight.
- Berlin Conference (1884-85): It saw European colonial powers carve up Africa, disregarding existing cultural and geographical realities.
US and Neo-Imperialism: A New Isolationism?
- Neo-Imperialism: For decades, US interventions across Latin America, the Middle East, and Asia have been criticised as neo-imperialism.
- However, Trump’s latest moves mark a paradoxical shift—a more isolationist stance in Europe, while simultaneously considering direct occupation in Palestine.
- Geopolitical Inconsistencies: This has led to less Western outrage over Palestine than over Ukraine, highlighting geopolitical inconsistencies.
- While some question the morality of these decisions, a more pressing concern is what Trump’s “grand bargain” strategy could mean for global stability.
A US-Russia Bargain: Aimed at China?
- Some analysts suggest that Trump’s willingness to negotiate with Russia on Ukraine is part of a larger strategy—to drive a wedge between Moscow and Beijing. However, history offers cautionary tales:
- The Munich Agreement (1938) saw Britain’s Neville Chamberlain appease Hitler by allowing Germany to annex the Sudetenland.
- The move failed to prevent World War II.
- The European powers’ grand bargains before World War I did little to stop the inevitable outbreak of conflict.
- If Trump’s outreach to Putin leads to a premature end to the war in Ukraine, it may not necessarily guarantee long-term peace.
- In fact, it could prompt middle powers to rethink their own geopolitical alignments—especially in relation to China.
How Domestic Politics is Reshaping Global Relations?
- For much of the post-Cold War era, the foreign policies of Western nations remained largely insulated from domestic political shifts. However, this appears to be changing.
- UK: In the UK, foreign policy remained bipartisan until Brexit disrupted long-standing alliances.
- India: In India, foreign relations have traditionally followed a consistent trajectory—balancing ties with Russia, the US, and neighboring countries.
- USA: In the US, Trump’s election represents a “great disruption”, similar in impact to Mikhail Gorbachev’s leadership of the USSR.
- Right-Wing: The rise of right-wing movements across Europe—from the AfD in Germany to Marine Le Pen in France—suggests that foreign policy is now deeply intertwined with domestic political shifts.
- Strategic affairs expert C. Raja Mohan describes this phenomenon as the rise of the “Con-intern”—a global conservative alliance challenging liberal policies across borders.
Where Does India Stand?
- Multi-Alignment: India has so far successfully navigated the uncertainties of a rapidly shifting world order.
- Its multi-alignment strategy allows it to maintain ties with the US, Russia, Europe, Israel, and Palestine simultaneously.
- Becoming Challenging: However, if the US under Trump begins treating international relations as a zero-sum game, India’s balancing act could become more challenging.
- Wait and Watch: Recent diplomatic signals—such as New Delhi’s efforts to improve relations with Beijing and its cautious approach to the Russia-Ukraine conflict—suggest that India will likely continue its “wait and watch” strategy while advocating for peace.
- Neutrality: A key moment came on February 24, when India abstained from voting on both competing UN resolutions—one perceived as pro-Russian and the other pro-Ukrainian.
