Today, unless surprises emerge, the world will remain preoccupied with one thing, finding out who will become the next president of the United States on November 3. As demonstrated by the immense media coverage of the intensifying election battle, everyone is waiting to see who will arrive at the White House, the current president Donald Trump or veteran politician Joe Biden.
The great attention being paid to the elections and its results worldwide is routine and predictable. It is not a regular event, and everyone on earth is concerned. For we know this position’s importance and the impact it has on global issues and heated matters.
The US is the land of dreams, opportunities, freedoms, miracles and democracy. Despite everything, it remains a country of laws and institutions, even with the gaps, deficiencies, developments, contentions or indications of insecurity or violence that appear from time to time, it consistently entrenches the principle “what is right is right.”
Some are betting on a change in the presidency, linking it to the potential impact it will have on our region. Their assessment sets off from analyzing the winning candidate’s speeches and statements to become acquainted with his views, positions and the policies he will pursue in the future. This approach is sound in many ways. However, the predictions and convictions that some have formulated on the basis of that analysis are exaggerated, and they raise the ceiling of expectations from this or that president too high.
It is no secret that the speeches and statements candidates make during elections are framed for purely electoral ends. As for the policies that are drawn after the candidate takes power, they are shaped by the balance of power and institutional stakeholders and determined according to the country’s interests, ascertained by listening to experts and advisors’ assessments. It is totally different from the logic and methods of an electoral campaign. And, despite this or that candidate winning a debate or even leading in the polls, it is difficult to know who will emerge victorious until zero-hour and the last results come out.
An change in leadership does not necessarily imply a dramatic or radical change in US foreign policy. The faces and officials might change, but foreign policy strategies and parameters are nonetheless foundations that are not interfered with and unaffected by a party or candidate’s victory. Disagreements pertain to means, frameworks, tactics and prioritization; that’s it. Both parties’ views on external issues remain tied to protecting vital US interests. Of course, we are not downplaying the impact that presidents have; they stress this or that concern or give impetus to this or that issue.
Historically and theoretically, we know that the Democrats are inclined to idealism in their pursuit of achieve goals. That is, respecting the legitimacy and principles of international law, seeking peaceful resolutions for conflicts, discouraging armament and focusing on environmental, climate and human rights issues. On the other hand, we find that the Republican approach is founded on political realism and aimed at maintaining national interests. All sorts of means are utilized to achieve that end. It believes in the importance of military strength in protecting its vital interests and is concerned with producing oil. This formula has not been the same since Obama took office.
The first Black president in American history disregarded those notions and took an approach consistent with his convictions and ideas. The US relationship with its allies in the region came to be characterized by an unfamiliar state of confusion. At the time, the state of the US reminded us of the Britain of yesterday when it lost its empire, and its hegemony was fading after it had been omnipresent. It was a turbulent period during which Washington’s influence was obscured, and its influence on our region declined terribly. Obama left the White House, and the fear now is Obamanism returning with Biden. The region cannot forget his words and actions, or how he flirted with Iran and embraced it as though he were rewarding it for supporting terrorism, to say nothing about the Muslim Brotherhood...
Luckily, he was succeeded by Trump, who put things back in order. He restored some of America’s prestige. His administration successfully contained Iran’s ambitions, pulling out of the nuclear deal that Obama had signed in 2015 and liquidating Iranian general Qassem Solimiani, who had been in charge of Iran’s terrorism portfolio in the region.
The American presidential election concerns us and our region, regardless of our emotions, hopes and reactions. We won’t get into the complexities of the voting process and figures, the difference between the Electoral College and the popular vote, and the potential suspension of the results in the event of a judicial dispute. We know that our relationship with the White House will not necessarily be rosy if Trump wins the election; a Trump win, though, would nevertheless suit us better.
Likewise, if Biden wins (perhaps the more likely scenario given the polls and figures), it would not mean that US relations with the Gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia, will suddenly take a negative turn. That’s not how things work. We are talking here about longstanding relationships between nations, their institutions and many intertwined interests. Politics is very complicated, and it is full of entanglement. It would be very simplistic to assume that everything changes with a new president.
We should admit that Riyadh and Washington managed to overcome many periods of tension, tepidness and crises, regardless of who had been in the White House. It is not reasonable for either of the two countries to jeopardize a strategic relationship that has survived for more than eight decades.
The relationship doesn’t depend on goodwill or public relations anymore. Rather, it has shifted toward a sustainable institutional joint effort to meet objectives. Over the past three years, both parties have put immense effort, especially by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, to reformulate the relationship and set priorities. The pragmatic relationship needed to protect their mutual interests was the key to saving the relationship. That does not mean the Gulf states do not have any cards left to play to correct the relationship’s course in case of any future impairments. Still, we know that America today is no longer the one we once knew and that we must prepare for that.
The issue, then, is not whether Trump stays on or Biden sits in the Oval Office, in as much as it is an issue of who is responsive to my requests and furthers my interests. A Trump victory (despite his moodiness and unpredictability) would lead to a fortification of relations with the Gulf states, strengthen their ability to contain terrorism and face up to the dangers of Iranian expansionism. We would also want the US to stop green-lighting the barbaric acts perpetrated on Arab territory by Turkey, which exploited Russia’s actions to garner American support.
As for Biden’s ascension to the presidency, it may not be the Gulf’s preferred option, since he might revive the foundations of Obama’s policy that were detrimental to the region and because he does not understand the changes the region is undergoing, but they will engage and work with him. Indeed, regardless of his inclinations or convictions, Biden is aware that he has to meet his obligations and responsibilities to further his country’s interests. We must deal with him clearly and inform him of the reality of the dangers threatening our region. Irrespective of this or that candidate’s characteristics, whatever the results, the Gulf states will deal with the man whom the US electoral system brings out as president.
What the people of the Gulf want from the next president is serious American policies that correspond to the dangers and challenges facing our region. Whether it is dealing with Iran’s terrorist expansionism and Erdoganist Turkey’s encroachments, what they want is that “Trumpist” policies be pursued and that the mistakes made during Obama’s term do not recur if Biden comes to the White House.
The Gulf’s stability and security is a strategic necessity and paramount to American interests. Any threat that security and stability would have ramifications on the global economy’s stability. Therefore, confronting the Iranian and Turkish projects is crucial, and turning a blind eye to their actions implies further tension, conflict and chaos in the region.
