From Bellicosity to Soft Diplomacy: the de-Trumpification

On the 8th of November much of the world celebrated Senator Biden’s victory in the US presidential elections and the prospect of a new leadership in the world. The US public is still divided, and as the popular vote portrayed, one half supports the vociferous and self- proclaimed anti-establishment Trump and the other half supports almost what-ever alternative is presented to them, i.e. Joe Biden. This divide will not disappear for a long time and tackling the deeply rooted issues such as structural racism will be precarious at best. Moreover, without the Democrats controlling Congress domestic policy will be problematic. In fact, ‘the free world’, which the US has been leading for the past 70 years, will exhale with a sigh of relief that the volatile and adventuristic leadership of the past will change for the better, hopefully. However, president-elect Biden will need to focus on the international obligation of the US by restoring its image and ties globally, and as a prelude for security and stability through a pragmatic lens. The past four years with Trump and his ‘America first’ policy at the helm has left a clear and damaging mark on the world and a return to soft diplomacy and democratic values is strongly needed and carries many hurdles.
The EU and mending of fences
The transatlantic relationship has traditionally been stable with standardized critique from the US that EU member states should pay their fair share of NATO security contributions. However, the general consensus that the US/EU axis should bring the world together in a web of strong international institutions, agreements, and trade relations to ensure democracy and mutual dependency was not questioned until four years ago. Since Trump stepped into office he has pulled out of the nuclear agreement with Iran; left the Paris climate agreement; pulled the US out of WHO (the World Health Organization); and entered trade wars with China, the EU, and Canada. The trust from European leaders after four years of ‘America first’ is damaged at best and now it is time for the US to restore its image and position as the leading power in the world. Biden has strong personal relations with a host of European leaders from his time as vice president under the Obama administration and his almost 40 years in American Congress, which could hope that trust and mutually compatible relations can be restored in the US/EU axis.

Internally, the democratic path in the EU has been threatened by autocratic tendencies in a few member states, for example Hungary and its Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, which will be reluctant to see a return to the Democrats’ “moral imperialism” of the past. Trump and Orbán’s close relationship has been a thorn in the eye of the EU, which has left the Union with significantly less power to confront the Hungarian leader as he continues curtailing the country’s democratic institutions and restricting its modus operandi. Consequently, the new Biden leadership might leave the EU better bolstered to face its internal issues of autocratic leaders the way it is deemed lawful and consensual for all parties.
International law and democratic principles: no Saudi ‘carte blanche’
Trump’s disregard for the significance of a world order based on international law and democratic principles has not only been troublesome to the EU. Biden has clearly stated that he would defend the rights of activists, political dissidents, and media and vowed never to break with American values to sell weapons or buy oil. Thus his approach to the Gulf regimes will be reconsidered and re-evaluated, especially with Saudi Arabia. Hopefully, the latter will abide by the new rules of the game.
Rather than controlling Iran through military support and arms sales to Saudi Arabia, Biden will probably re-enter the Iran nuclear deal to make the Iranian threat more controlled, contained, and predictable. Without the strategic protection of the US, the Saudi regime will be more vulnerable to accusations of human rights violations and interference in the domestic politics of several Middle East countries.
The case of China
Much as was the case for both the Obama- and the Trump administration, Biden will continue to focus on Asia and containing the alleged Chinese threat. The expected difference will be the measures used, as Biden will be aware that cooperation between the two great world powers will be necessary in many regards, and in particular economically. Biden has established the climate crisis as a main objective to handle during his tenure and for this he will need the Chinese, as they remain the most critical polluters in the world – despite of setting new targets for China to be carbon neutral by 2060. Moreover, if he aims to become the champion of American values – human rights, democracy, and international law – he will need to bridge dialogue with China through cooperation and goodwill is needed to be able to challenge Chinese human rights violations and to the world ECO system.

Is it a beacon of hope for Palestine?
Four years of Trump has brought more detrimental repercussions for the Palestinians than decades prior of various Republican and Democratic administrations. With an obvious lack of understanding of international relations and a complete disregard for the core issues pending of the Israel/Palestine conflict, Trump moved the US embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem; approved new settlements and the expansion of others in the West Bank; withdrew US funding for UNRWA, the Palestinian Authority, and displaced Palestinians; and presented an explicitly bias peace plan for the conflict – the so-called ‘deal of the century’, which Palestinians refer to as ‘the steal of the century’.
Biden will not lead the same confrontational and adventurous line in brokering the Israel/Palestine conflict but by no means will he repair the damages done during Trumps tenure. The US embassy will remain in Jerusalem and the strategic partnership with Israel will not be used as leverage to demand concessions for the Palestinians. When Senator Bernie Sanders suggested this, the reply from Biden was short and concise: “ridiculous and unacceptable”. So the honest broker will still be missing in the Israel/Palestine conflict, this even if funding for the Palestinian refugees and UNRWA will be put back in place and diplomatic relations between the US and Palestine will be restored.
For decades the Middle East has been the enigma of US foreign policy where the resolution of the conflict has been seen as the solution to peace, security, and stability in the Mideast region – although the management of crisis was a dismal failure of policy. Many commentaries and academics expect a decline in attention towards the Middle East apart from US anti-terror units, which will remain present in the region for a certain period of time due to the September 11 tragedy. This could also mean a decline in attention towards the Israel/Palestine conflict, as the sights are set to re-engage with the Europeans and establish a new sort of relationship with China based on mutual dependency and interest to some degree.
At any rate, US policy in the Middle East will not change dramatically, but cosmetics will be used to restore the US image as the leading country in the Middle East political process. Be reminded that in reality only 20% of the decision power lies with the president, the rest is in Congress. The adversarial position of Congress towards Palestine and progress in the peace process is the core issue to reckon with and the reason why unequivocal support to Israel will most likely continue as a strategic policy. Indeed, the Palestinians have paid a heavy price for the past four years of volatile and ill-considered US policies but they have maintained their resilience and steadfastness.

As goodwill to the new president-elect, one of the immediate scenarios is that the Palestinian leadership will accept the Palestinian tax revenues being withheld by Israel for more than a year now, and re-establish security collaboration with Israel under US sponsorship.
At last the Palestinians got rid of Ambassador Friedman who was the advocate of settlements along with Jared Kushner, the real estate representative of the settlers. New representatives and mediators can set a new dawn full of cautious hope to resolve this epistemic community conflict that has been going on for decades. The answer, as President Abbas put it, is simply an international conference with neutral brokerage.
The cautious optimism lies in the prospect for a future US policy to the Middle East and the Israel/Palestine conflict that will not be rooted in bellicosity and jingoism – the least required from the new American administration. Indeed, the application of US soft diplomacy might ensure that this protracted conflict does not reach a point of no return.
The world is at a dawn of a new era with expectations of lesser regional, economic, and political tensions. The stability of the world order is organically tied to the performance of the US unipolar power, which as of lately has been challenged by big powers.
Combatting Covid-19 and the Corona pandemic has been a challenge to the world that created insecurity, as a pandemic should be dealt with through cooperation and exchange of information world-wide. Again, the US will take the lead on that to sustain its hegemonic prevalence globally.
Furthermore, combatting world terrorism will continue to be a basic concern and challenge and that has to be contained through a combined world effort. No one can deny that the source of insecurity and instability in the Middle East is the essence of chaos and anarchy.
One final reminder.
The Israel/Palestine conflict is the crux of instability and insecurity in the Middle East in particular and in the world at large. This realistic fact should be addressed seriously or else more intensified conflict could lead to disastrous repercussions.
It’s time to walk the walk and talk the talk.