US Foreign Policy Wanders in Rising Geopolitics

31 March 2011 | 05:12 Code : 10823 America
By Farhad Koleini
IRD: In the past year, the US government was forced to reconsider its viewpoint in some areas and policies. Some part of the change that the US made in its foreign policy is related to the changes in the congressional elections in November: Republicans played a bigger role in politics and the political balance in the United States was maintained. This affected Obama’s decisions and limited his maneuvers performed in the beginning of his career in foreign policy.

Moreover, in the last year the arrangement of decision makers was changed in the United States. Some replacements were appointed to the US National Security Council and the US security community, as well as in the White House. These changes caused people like James Jones and Rahm Emanuel to leave their close positions to Obama.

Other developments in US foreign policy in the last year were the changes that occurred in the geopolitical area. The US was concerned with discrepancies in its operational look, especially in West Asia, and made some changes that led to reconsidering the Af-Pak strategy adopted in the beginning of Obama’s presidency. Within the geopolitical changes that occurred in West Asia, the US should design a futuristic model of influence and power for sustainability in the region, make changes in the missions of its troops in the region and in the manner of providing security in West Asia.

On the other hand, in the last year, especially in the waning months of the year, serious developments occurred in the Arab Middle East. The starting point for the developments was in Tunisia and North Africa, with a domino effect in all Arab countries.

Although the US adopted a narrow viewpoint about regional developments, especially those in Egypt, there was no comprehensive understanding of them. Therefore, it seems that the US was ready to face the Middle East developments and deal with them in a confusing and unscheduled process.

Yet in facing the developments in the Persian Gulf region, the US adopts the policy of inhibition and control as its agenda, and in ​​North Africa it pursues "transition management". Especially in Libya’s case, it tries to follow this policy together with its international allies in a "level consensus".

So, US foreign policy was affected by three factors last year:

1. Change in the balance of power within the political structure of the United States;

2. Change in the order of decision makers close to Obama; and

3. Promotion of global geopolitical developments in the region.

Now it should be seen how US foreign policy in the geopolitical momentum can affect several points.

It should be mentioned that in order to have a new kind of engagement with Russia, Obama tried to use cooperation with Russia as a new capacity in its foreign policy and as a priority to exploit in the US domestic scene. Hence after the new beginning, the US will seek new engagement with Russia in the next year.

In this context, Vice President Joe Biden visited Russia to interact with the Russians, especially on security in Europe, based on a new version of the missile defense shield and to review the next levels of engagement after signing the defense shield treaty.

Biden’s visit and a favorable context for Obama to visit Russia were provided and pragmatism, examination and inhibition were applied in the three forms with Russia.

US relations with China did not change, and the parties insisted on their own interests and goals, and even in the US intelligence community, the Chinese and Russians were reported as threatening.

The US did not play the role of Europe’s supporter any longer last year, and paid more attention to Asia. Obama’s behavior with India represents a new direction and a change in emphasis from Europe to Asia.

The US’ involvement in Latin America represents that there are still challenges and an inability to restore a Cold War-style aristocracy in the US, because it faces the rise of new regional and ultra-regional actors and the international actors, especially China and Russia, will not draw back.

The sum of these developments indicates that the US is also still trying to adopt its desired strategic management. The US still insists on introducing the management changes as the principle of supremacy in the global power system.

Also, it seems that in the last year, US foreign policy regarding Iran gradually entered a new phase, although it was not with a full consensus on the inside. In this context, the US look at Iranian domestic developments, the US being blinded in the process and its lack of enough attention to Iran’s influence in the region, were the main indicators.

Hence, the US is still half way now in its calculations of the role and power of Iran in the region and also the Iranian interaction strength as a stability factor. Regarding the nuclear issue and the last reports delivered to the representatives by Clapper, the head of the US information society in the Congress, the US understood the lack of performance in "strike, pressure and sanctions" measures and in this respect, it cannot achieve its inhibiting goals in the Iranian nuclear issue. The lack of management and capability in the US can create a new situation, especially if it is accompanied by a correct assessment.

The US must fundamentally reconsider the viewpoint on the region after the ​​negotiations in Geneva and Istanbul, and also its minimum and maximum policy on Iran. It should be seen, after the changes, whether the US adopts a comprehensive view of the matter or continues to treat Iran as a sub-plan of its old map, and follows the minority in dealing with the Iranian issue.