President Trump’s aggressive policies are generating divisive, confounding effects all around. The world order is in an exacerbating state of anxious, agitated flux. President Trump seems intent on first undoing most of the US’ existing institutions, systems, policies, relationships, strategic partnerships, etc., and then recrafting them anew to primarily serve US national interests. This is apparent from the manner in which he has redefined and recast the US’ multidimensional relations and dealings with its North American neighbours, Europe including Ukraine and NATO, Russia, China, and the world at large. There is bound to be some method, some rationale to this apparently incomprehensible rigmarole. This seemingly haphazard, albeit profound, paradigm shift is well underway, and the world is scrambling not only to make sense of it all and keep up with its dizzying pace, but also to keep constantly positioning and repositioning itself to meet its inevitable geopolitical, geostrategic, and geoeconomic ramifications!
In the North American context, the US’ coercive diplomacy seems to reign supreme. Its relations with Mexico and Canada are now strained, forcing them to take up strong positions to secure their own national interests. Canada’s PM-elect, Mark Carney, has already conveyed his intention to not only retain Canada’s territorial integrity but also its independence, sovereignty, and freedom. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the US’ tariffs policy has not been thought through to its logical conclusions. Reciprocal tariffs are now the order of the day. This tit-for-tat tariff war is now acquiring ludicrous, farcical dimensions. On the other hand, Greenland is going through a parliamentary election dominated by President Trump’s annexation threat. Greenlanders might have to decide upon either becoming totally independent, retaining the status quo under Denmark, or leaning towards the US. Mexico is still biding its time, though it appears ready with its own slew of reciprocal tariffs. Panama has been successfully coerced by the US to ditch the Chinese BRI and jump onto the US bandwagon.
The paradigm shift initiated by the Trump Administration in its policy towards Europe (including NATO), Ukraine, and Russia is upending most regional geopolitical, geostrategic, and geoeconomic imperatives. At one time, it seemed that a vivid split of sorts was emerging between the US and Europe. The hitherto seemingly impregnable transatlantic strategic partnership and alliance (NATO) appeared under severe stress and strain. The US asserted that it might not be as forthcoming, eager, and keen to come to Europe’s defence unless it started contributing wholesomely to the ideal of “collective defence.” Europe now faces unprecedented and urgent challenges to its economy, defence, and security. It was committed to Ukraine in line with President Biden’s policy. It had invested significant political, diplomatic, economic, technological, and military capital in boosting Ukraine’s military capacities and countering Russian aggression. It earned Russia’s remorseless ire in the process. All that has now undergone a rapid and profound change. The Europeans are now scrambling about, trying to comprehend the objectives of this new US policy, make sense of this basic “reversal of roles” in Europe, and find viable ways and means to not only remain relevant to the fast-paced geopolitical developments but also to secure Europe and engage/tackle Russia. Their woes have been further enhanced and compounded by the US’ intention to have an ostensibly reformed, reconstituted, more equitable NATO. Unsurprisingly, the US has excluded Europe from the peace process with Ukraine and Russia!
Europeans are contemplating shoring up their own defences—“rearming Europe”—and moving to continue supporting Ukraine in its war against Russia. They hope to add another 800 billion euros to their collective defences. This will still not be able to match the domineering deterrence that NATO could exude at any one time. Period. French President Macron has even hinted at offering a nuclear umbrella to all Europeans, which in effect reflects Europe’s obvious nervousness, insecurity, and inherent weakness. The future of NATO, without the active participation of the US, becomes seriously questionable. Will it survive this blatant “betrayal” by the US? Will it force Europe to come up with an alternative to NATO—a strictly European defence and security alliance? Will it be strong enough to meet its security obligations and, importantly, deter Russia? Will Europe seek an independent-of-the-US approach to Ukraine and Russia to secure its vital interests at the individual and collective levels? Can Europe do it, and will the US allow it? Will this fissure, in the geopolitical dimension, facilitate a Sino-Russian ingress into Europe?
However, it is also most unlikely that the US will actually recoil west of the Atlantic Ocean, become totally isolationist, and abandon Europe and the rest of the world. It feels naturally compelled to challenge and confront Chinese and Russian influences and hegemony in the world. It is thus bound to reiterate its support for Europe and revive its strategic partnership and alliance with it once it has resolved the Ukraine-Russia imbroglio. However, it will be with recrafted, redesigned terms and conditions and with much more even-handed obligations and responsibilities. The US must also realise that if it wants to continue as the sole economic and military hegemon of the world, then it will have to pay the price for it. Being essentially isolated and yet expecting to simultaneously be a global superpower are mutually exclusive settings. The US has a global strategic reach and sphere of influence. It can maintain both only through the projection of economic and military might and power through its policies, numerous bases, coalitions, alliances, strategic partnerships, and relationships it maintains worldwide. A global hegemon must pay, in full and more, for that unique honour and privilege or make way for another power that is more willing and able to meet the multidimensional costs!
Ukraine, in the meantime, bleeds relentlessly!
Imran Malik
The writer is a retired brigadier of the Pakistan Army. He can be reached at im.k846@gmail.com and tweets @K846Im.