Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian President, and Donald Trump’s meeting, held a few days ago, has ignited several debates concerning global diplomacy and its extensive consequences. Although the direct implications for Ukraine are apparent, uncertainty about the potential ripple effects on international relations worldwide has crept up. As the Middle East is conflicted with its own political, economic and security challenges, the outcomes of this meeting may influence further U.S. foreign policy strategies and diplomatic conversations with Middle Eastern Nations.
A recap
After a heated confrontation between U.S. President Trump and President Zelenskyy, the latter was ordered to leave the White House. The meeting was held concerning signing a minerals deal meant to be the first step towards a ceasefire with Russia. This Ukraine-United States Mineral Resources agreement would give the U.S. access to Ukraine’s natural resources including precious rare earth metals, in exchange for U.S. aid in economic stability and reconstruction. Trump and his vice expressed doubts about Ukraine’s gratitude for U.S. support and sort to strong-arm Zelenskyy into a peace deal on U.S. terms, threatening abandonment. While efforts have been made to repair the relationship after the screaming match, all U.S. military aid to Ukraine has been put on hold, and there is uncertainty that the deal will be signed.
USA and the Middle East
The Middle East faces several political, economic and security challenges, and relies on the United States for a lot of military and humanitarian aid. The United States has diplomatic ties with all but two Middle Eastern countries: Iran and Syria. Even still, the U.S. sends humanitarian aid to Syria. The U.S. has played a significant role in shaping the Middle East’s political ecosystem over the past few decades, from its roles in the Israeli-Palestinian war to its security roles in Saudi Arabia. The recent Ukraine-U.S. exchange indicates that as part of its ‘America First’ approach, America, under the leadership of Trump, is shifting more towards a transactional relationship with allies, and future negotiations with the Middle East may look like this too.
Deal-making
Trump’s shift towards securing economic and strategic benefits for the U.S. is a sign of a shift towards deal-making in exchange for American support. Nations of the Middle East may be expected to offer certain benefits and meet certain conditions in exchange for U.S. support. With such a transactional approach, the Middle East may have to expect future deals like access to resources like oil and gas in exchange for military and humanitarian aid. For example, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, who have a long-standing partnership with the U.S., may be expected to offer sweeter deals on oil export or increased investments in American Infrastructure and military equipment, in return for continued military and political support.
After the halt in U.S. aid to Ukraine following the fallout at the Oval Office, it is clear that the U.S. is adopting stricter conditions for its assistance. Countries of the Middle East may be expected to give in to stronger demands for political alignment and policies. For example, countries like Egypt, which receives significant military aid from the United States, may be asked to adopt stances that align with U.S. interests, such as support for Israel and looser ties with Iran. There may also be negotiations to adopt policies that are in line with American interests. Failure to do so could be met with decreases or pauses in financial assistance and military support.
Bilateral meetings
The direct approach that Trump took by having a one-on-one meeting with Zelenskyy further depicts America’s shift from a coalition-based approach to a more bilateral approach. This means that the Middle East should expect in negotiations on a country-by-country basis. This may weaken some Middle Eastern alliances like the GCC and the Arab League. This is because countries are likely to be negotiating more directly with the U.S., exacerbating already existing rivalries as these countries compete for U.S. support.
Countries like Saudi Arabia and Jordan may have to balance their regional ambitions with more American expectations, and navigate stricter political concessions while maintaining sovereignty. On the other hand, this new approach by the United States may lead to a reduction in ties with the Middle East. These countries may seek to deepen ties with other powerful countries like Russia and China, reducing dependence on the U.S. Countries may also seek to improve relationships with nations like Iran.
The Middle East, ultimately, should prepare for a tougher and more transactional U.S. foreign policy, where American support would be giving in exchange for certain benefits and the adoption of certain policies. America holds a lot of the cards, and every deal comes with a price.
