Opinion

Trump's foreign policy legacy

photo_camera Donald Trump

The American elections are in a few days. During the debates, the main issues were police brutality against African-Americans and control of COVID. 

Although these issues are relevant, there was little discussion of foreign policy, especially the impact Trump has had in this area. Issues such as nuclear policy, where the US and Russia are negotiating the extension of the New START Treaty - which expires in February 2021 - or Afghanistan, where the US has committed to withdraw all its troops by May 2021 after negotiations with the Taliban, are also absent. These two points are not unimportant, as they will be the first challenges facing the winner of the elections. Both also have consequences for the reputation of the United States. 

What is Trump's foreign policy legacy?

To answer this question, it would not be wrong to recall what was said in 2016 - before the elections - about the consequences of Trump coming to power. In its 16 July 2016 edition, the British weekly The Economist predicted the following: "Win or lose in November, Donald Trump has the power to reshape America to look more like the dysfunctional, declining place he claims to be. Seen now, we can say that The Economist was right, especially this year with the disastrous US control of VIDOC and the lack of US leadership on the pandemic. 

The seminar also warned against Trump's impulsiveness and lack of self-control: "The most troubling aspect of a Trump presidency is that a person with his weak self-control and defective temperament has to make quick decisions on national security - with the world's most powerful military, naval, air and nuclear codes at his disposal. They were half right, because Trump used Twitter as a tool to create fear, but he was not able to unleash all of America's military and nuclear power. 

Although his impulsiveness did not lead to World War III, in four years Trump achieved things that seemed unthinkable in 2016: he became the first US president to meet with the leader of North Korea, he was the first US president to strike a deal with a terrorist group (the Taliban), and in the Middle East, he energised decades of consensus in international politics by recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and being the godfather of relations between the UAE and Israel. 

The consequences of these three actions combined have been the erosion of the (already damaged) credibility of the United States as a guarantor of the security of its allies (in the case of North Korea and Afghanistan) and the degradation of the United States' capacity as a reliable moderator in resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict. 

Trump has also tarnished the image of the United States by showing little interest in the defence of human rights. This is what happened in the case of the death of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in October 2018. The lukewarm American response to his assassination by Saudi Arabia and Trump's description of Prince Mohamed Bin Salman as a good guy sent the message that the United States is more interested in resources (oil) and geopolitics (rivalry with Iran) than in human rights violations. While it is true that the United States has a poor international human rights record - especially considering that it has not signed or ratified six international human rights treaties - and that during the Cold War it supported regimes that violated human rights, Mr Trump's behaviour not only weakens US support for human rights, but also weakens the struggle for democracy in countries that are US allies with authoritarian regimes.

Trump has demonstrated his rejection of international agreements

One of its first decisions was to withdraw the United States from the Iranian nuclear deal. This decision increased Iranian hostility, as seen last year with the tanker incidents in the crucial Strait of Hormuz. Moreover, Iran has decided to return to the status quo before the agreement, despite (unsuccessful) efforts by the European Union to save it.  The Iranian case demonstrates the risks that Trump's re-election can pose in raising tensions in difficult places. Iran, which in 2015 - when the agreement was signed - seemed open to negotiating with the West to save its economy, returned to aggressive rhetoric following Trump's decision. Will the same thing happen with New START?

Trump has also demonstrated its rejection of international trade agreements. 

While it is true that the most relevant trade "war" in this area is the trade "war" with China, where the main players are 5G, Tik Tok and tariffs, Trump dismissed trade agreements such as TTP and NAFTA. The most obvious consequence of these decisions is the loss of confidence in the US as a reliable player in international agreements. What country would want to sign a trade agreement with the US right now, knowing that the US might pull out of it by surprise? If Biden wins, the person who will be appointed Secretary of Commerce will have the difficult task of restoring the confidence of neighbouring and allied countries in the reliability of the United States as a trading partner.

Who has won in these four years of Trump?  

Among America's allies, two stand out. Mohamed Bin Salman and Benjamin Netanyahu. The first saw how Trump did not oppose the murder of Jamal Khashoggi and how - unlike other administrations - he did not question human rights in Saudi Arabia. 

But it was perhaps Netanyahu who benefited most from his four years with Trump. Under his reign, the Zionist dream of Greater Israel made great progress. In addition to the recognition of Jerusalem and the peace with the Emirates mentioned above, the United States recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. The Economist - in its 8 September 2018 edition - described Netanyahu's dream as follows: "This is Netanyahu's dream: to negotiate with a world leader without having to talk about the occupation. As we have seen, this dream has come true because Trump has not bothered to inform the Palestinians of his decisions. 

In conclusion, these four years of Trump were marked by the invisibility and dismantling of the agreements. As for the unprecedented, he will be remembered as the first president to negotiate with North Korea and a terrorist group (the Taliban) and the one who changed - probably forever - decades of international consensus on the status of Palestine and Israel. In his facet of dismantling international agreements, the withdrawals of the Iranian nuclear agreement, NAFTA and the TTP show that Mr Trump is allergic to multilateral agreements which, in his view, weaken the image of the United States. However, US interests have been more affected by Trump's withdrawal from these agreements than by his participation in them. His image in the world has been tarnished, while traditional partners such as Japan and Canada have had their backs turned.

On November 3, we will know whether or not we need to look at another four years of foreign policy strength. On that day, we will know whether or not everything will continue as we have described, or whether or not Biden will impose change. 

1-The dividing of America”, The Economist (London), 16-22 July 2016, p. 10. 

2-“The dividing of America”, The Economist (London), 16-22 July 2016, p.10. 

3-“Nothing to talk about”, The Economist (London), 8-14 September 2018, pp 30-31.