American policy stands at the heart of major strategic shifts
We are living through an era defined by uncertainty and disorder within the international order, an impediment laid bare by Donald Trump’s rise to power in his current term. After decades of relatively stable American global dominance, the rivalry among great powers has re-emerged, though it had been taking shape gradually over recent years. The past decade has witnessed significant strategic transformations as international institutions lose influence, Washington’s geopolitical influence is fading, and regional conflicts are multiplying. Together, they expose the fragility of the existing balance of power and the cracks through the structure of the international order.
Realists, whose principles largely guided US foreign policy during the Cold War, view America’s current decline as a troubling sign, after it was the anchor of the global order. Liberals, whose ideas shaped U.S. foreign policy in the post Cold War era, argue that the liberal hegemonic order Washington once built is now in visible retreat. Constructivists, whose ideas Washington embraced only in theory, warn that disregard for global norms and shared values might leave the international system drifting toward disorder.
The current Donald Trump administration’s foreign policy plays a role in deepening uncertainty in the international order, reflecting a deliberate disregard for international institutions, a de-emphasis of multilateral cooperation, and an ignorance of the global norms and values built over decades. Understanding this shift in US foreign policy is impossible without considering Trump’s personality, his business instincts and interests and his hostility to large-scale immigration. In fact, many of the contradictions in his policy make more sense when viewed through the lens of a leader who merges national interests with his personal business affairs.
Trump entered office under the banner of “Make America Great Again,” yet one of his first acts was to sideline his Western allies and shrink the partnerships that had long defined America’s liberal, cooperative order. Those allies had long been the backbone of America’s global leadership, sustaining its role as a unipolar power through deep partnerships and alliances grounded in shared ideology and overlapping interests. At the same time, Trump amplified his rhetoric against China, raising the tone of rivalry and confrontation, while neglecting the enforcement of the alliances needed to counter his country’s chief competitor. In contrast, he pulled back the US military presence from key fronts in Europe, the Middle East, and parts of Asia.
While Trump imposed tariffs on more than a hundred countries, friends and foes alike, in an effort to bring manufacturing “back home,” he doubled down on anti-immigration policies, targeting a vital part of the country’s industrial workforce. Trump has shown a clear preference for returning to punitive policies, relying on tariffs and economic sanctions to extract concessions from allies and adversaries alike, leaving even Washington’s closest partners off balance. He also harbors a deep hostility toward multilateral institutions, which have long served as a safety net against global disorder.
The current era is witnessing a decline in the United States’ relative power. Washington has begun shifting financial, security, and military burdens onto its European and Asian partners, stepping back from the role that once made it an unrivaled global power. Many of America’s allies including India, Japan, and several European states now maintain trade, economic, technical, and even security cooperation with China, while continuing to purchase oil and gas from Russia. Although Trump initially adopted a confrontational stance toward Beijing, launching a trade war early in his presidency, he later softened his approach under pressure from China, signalling a more flexible policy even as competition between the two powers grew fiercer than ever.
After more than fifteen years of US preoccupation with combatting “terrorism” in the Middle East, the Trump administration’s national security and defence strategy shifted their focus toward confronting great powers, evoking memories of the Cold War era. During his first term, Trump underscored the growing threats posed by China’s economic, technological, and security policies imposing sanctions and tariffs on Chinese entities and goods while restricting Beijing’s access to sensitive US technologies. His predecessor, President Joe Biden, largely preserved Trump’s strategic posture toward China but relied more heavily on Washington’s allies to contain it. Since then, the United States has reinforced its military presence across Asia and expanded regional partnerships through frameworks such as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (the Quad) and AUKUS. Even the war in Europe, which Washington has helped to fuel in an effort to weaken Russia, fits squarely within this broader containment strategy.
Trump’s return to power began with an economic offensive against China and several other nations, a campaign he later scaled back. China, leveraging its control over the supply of rare earth metals essential to US and global industries, managed to restore balance and exert pressure on Washington to ease its restrictions. By weaponising its supply chains, Beijing eventually pushed the United States to relent, easing sanctions, lifting trade barriers, and returning to the negotiating table to secure new economic deals. In doing so, China forced Washington to abandon some of its most important tools for countering Beijing, including those employed over the previous eight years. Beijing also extracted political concessions, such as a softening of US support for Taiwan and a reduction in its military presence across the region.
READ: US lawmaker criticizes ex-president Biden for mishandling Gaza conflict
Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine has reshaped the global alliance structure, prompting a visible military and strategic alignment that has drawn together parts of Europe and Asia, effectively fusing the two continents into a new and uneasy military cooperation. Russia has found partners in China, North Korea, and Iran, an alarming strategic development with far-reaching consequences for the US and Europe. In response, and seeking to offset this emerging axis, European powers have begun forging their own partnerships with Asian counterparts, sometimes without Washington’s direct involvement, marking another significant shift in the global balance of power and leaving the United States less central to the world it once defined.
Military capabilities are rising in countries such as Turkey, India, and South Korea, while economic and technological power is becoming increasingly dispersed among new poles of influence in Asia, Europe, and Latin America. At the same time, US allies are deepening their cooperation with Washington’s traditional rivals. For instance, India has become an active member of the BRICS bloc alongside Russia and China, while the Netherlands continues to export advanced semiconductor manufacturing technology to China, much to Washington’s displeasure. The world is thus moving toward an uneven multipolar order in which the United States and China remain the dominant powers, yet a broader group of mid-tier states, such as Russia, India, and Germany, play an increasingly consequential role in shaping the dynamics of the international system.
In the latest developments surrounding the Gaza ceasefire, and consistent with Trump’s broader foreign policy approach, it became clear that the American president was eager to consolidate partnerships with the wealthy Gulf states that are largely centered on deal-making. Following Israel’s attempted assassination of senior Hamas figures in Qatar, Trump compelled Netanyahu to issue an apology to Doha , an unprecedented move. He also brokered a ceasefire in Gaza, halting Israel’s plans to occupy the enclave and displace its residents, a task that has since become far more difficult. The wars Israel has fought over the past two years have exposed the depth of its dependence on the United States, revealing how the country has increasingly become a strategic liability for Washington.
An unprecedented shift is taking place in US politics: a growing majority of Democrats now support justice for the Palestinians, an extraordinary political development. Even US aid to Israel has become a subject of debate within the party. While Republicans have traditionally backed Israel, nationalist factions aligned with the “America First” agenda have begun questioning the limits of US support, particularly when it appears to be in conflict with America’s own interests.
The details of Israel’s war on Gaza, along with its policies toward the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Qatar, have made its intentions toward the Arab world unmistakably clear. These actions have, in turn, undermined earlier US and Israeli efforts to forge a “new Middle East” built on Israel’s centrality and dominance. a vision in which the region’s states were expected to revolve within its orbit.
Although Israel has succeeded in achieving tactical objectives in its recent wars, such as targeted assassinations, aerial bombardments, and large scale destruction through its air and missile power, it has failed to secure any enduring strategic gains. It has neither eliminated Hezbollah nor dismantled Hamas, nor has it neutralised Iran’s nuclear capabilities or altered the realities on the ground in any of these arenas. Israel now seeks to attain those unfulfilled objectives through negotiations following the suspension of direct hostilities.
Current US policy toward the region, particularly its emphasis on advancing economic interests and forging broad partnerships aimed at promoting stability and reducing costs may ultimately serve to preclude those Israeli ambitions altogether, curbing their potential impact across the region.
This moment may mark the threshold of a new era, one in which justice and freedom are finally realised for Palestine, and stability takes root across the wider region, within an emerging international order that is increasingly isolating Israel and holding it to account.
A stark contrast has become evident among the states that share this strategically vital part of the world. On one side stands Israel, fueling instability, violence, and aggression across the region while flouting international law and UN resolutions. On the other side are nations such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which aspire to foster security, peace, and stability.
Even as the world was shaken by scenes of death and destruction in Gaza, it watched in awe as Egypt, home to one of humanity’s oldest civilisations, unveiled the Grand Egyptian Museum, a monument to millennia of history and a testament to enduring human achievement. At the same time, the Arab world takes pride in the economic ascent of the Gulf states, which are now emerging as dynamic and competitive players among the world’s major powers.
The question, then, is whether the Arabs, amid these shifting dynamics, can shape a new Middle East, one defined not by external designs but by an authentic Arab vision and identity that has long been absent.
OPINION: War unlikely to return to Lebanon and Gaza
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.