Reshaping the Global Landscape: How Will Trump’s Return Redefine Global Dynamics?

7 The Trump administration will definitely take a tougher line than the Biden administration regarding the Iranian nuclear program. We should expect much tougher sanctions and a harshmilitary response to any Iranian, or Iranian proxy, attack on Americans. Nonetheless, the goal will be to negotiate a better deal with Iran. In contrast to the foreign policy doctrine of George W. Bush, Trump has no interest in regime change. The president views such ambitions as the cause of the “forever wars” that he has vowed to avoid. This also means the US will avoid putting “boots on the ground”. Some of Trump’s nominations, likeMarco Rubio, have indicated in the past that they would support US involvement in an Israeli attack on the Iranian nuclear program. Other more isolationist-leaning figures, such as Vice President-elect J.D. Vance, have hinted that they would not support this. As with everything else, the key decision-maker will be the President himself. On the one hand, the President is instinctively inclined to prioritize a diplomatic deal. He had no issue with trying to do a nuclear deal with North Korea, even holding a friendly meeting with Kim Jong-un – leader of the odious regime in Pyongyang – while offering to withdraw all 25,000 US troops from South Korea. With that said, Trump walked away from that deal when his terms were not met. In the Iranian case, there is an added reason why Trump might support an Israeli military strike. The FBI has confirmed that the Islamic Republic of Iran was involved in two assassination attempts on Trump’s life. No American president has ever allowed US foreign relations to be more influenced by personal ego than Donald Trump. This personal angle on the issue could very well tilt Trump’s inclination decisively. Another potential challenge will be on the financial side of the special relationship. Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign aid and Trump has already gone on record saying that Israel should receive this in the form of loans rather than grants. In the twilight of the Obama administration, annual aid to Israel was set at $3.8 billion a year until 2028 – that is, about 1% of Israel’s GDP and about 15% of its defense budget. The Trump administration will definitely take a tougher line than the Biden administration regarding the Iranian nuclear program. Nonetheless, the goal will be to negotiate a better deal with Iran In the last year, the Biden administration granted Israel over $14 billion in extra aid to assist with the war. This was held up for a long time by Republicans in Congress on Trump’s orders. While foreign aid is unpopular with Republicans in Congress, Israel is an exception because of robust evangelical support for Israel. Evangelicals make up about two-thirds of the Republican base. Trump no longer needs evangelical support to get re-elected as he cannot run again, but Congressional Republicans continue to require evangelical support. When it comes to financial matters, Congress has a great deal of influence, so Trump may decide that cutting aid to Israel is not worth the fight. However, even in that case, inaction could have serious consequences for Israel because when the current deal runs out, there may not be the political will to sign a new deal. Once the continuity of aid is broken, it will be very hard to restore. On the other hand, since Israel has to spend all the aid it receives inside the US, Trump may be persuaded to view such aid as indirectly supporting the American arms industry. On a related point, Trump has spoken of imposing “across the board” tariffs on imports to the US. This could seriously damage the Israeli economy. America is Israel’s largest trading partner and Israel has a large trade surplus of almost $6 billion. International trade accounts for about two-thirds of the Israeli economy compared toabout a thirdof theUSeconomy. Though unlikely, the possibility cannot be ruled out that while evangelicals will continue to donate money to Israel (estimated at about $100 million a year), they may take the view that the US government should adopt the line preferred by Trump. Photo: Shutterstock

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDU2MA==