An erratic superpower is dangerous

Remember when US President Donald Trump promised in the election campaign that he had a secret plan to wipe out ISIS? And that he could not discuss it so ISIS would not be able to prepare? That was empty grandstanding, of course. His promise not to lead the USA into another full-blown war in the Middle-East may prove just as empty.

Last month, he pretended to forge a strong Sunni alliance against terrorism in Riyadh and arguing that Tehran was the hub of Islamist violence. He conveniently ignored, for the moment, that ISIS is a Sunni outfit and that Iran-supported Shia militias are fighting ISIS too. Soon after, Saudi Arabia and allies imposed an embargo on Qatar, accusing Qatar of supporting terrorism. Part of the problem is that Saudi Arabia and Qatar disagree on what kinds of Islamist extremism amounts to terrorism. In support of Qatar, Iran has started delivering food. The Sunni alliance that Trump has vehemently endorsed in May has thus fragmented immediately.

Making matters more complicated, Washington depends on Qatar because of its big airbase there. Oh, and in Iraq, US troops are aligned with Shia militias that support the Iraqi government. The Iraq war that, according to then US President George W. Bush, was supposed to bring peace and democracy to the Middle East has actually strengthened the position of Iran. Nonetheless, Washington is not communicating with Tehran anymore, without, however, having cancelled the nuclear deal as Trump had promised in the campaign.

The Saudi-Qatar crisis remains unresolved, and now matters are becoming ever less predictable in Syria. It looks as though ISIS will soon be dispelled from its two strongholds Raqqa in Syria and Mosul in Iraq. The Islamist terrorists are besieged by various militias that do not agree on goals beyond fighting ISIS. Iran wants its allies to take control of the areas from which ISIS is dispelled. The US military seems to want to prevent them from doing so. Strategic decisions are increasingly taken by the Pentagon and not the White House. Defence Secretary James Mattis is known to be an Iran hawk.  

It aggravates the problems that the White House has not defined its strategic goals. Washington’s officials still pretend to be focusing entirely on beating ISIS at a time when all other players involved wonder what will happen next. The Guardian has assessed this matter well.

The FT and the Washington Post have published interesting stories too. They use pay walls, so perhaps you won’t have access. The FT comment points out that all major forces involved in Syria’s civil war – with the exception of the USA – have well known strategic goals, and Russia even seems to be looking for an exit strategy. The Washington Post wants Congress to assess the Middle East scenario and oversee the Trump administration and warns of a “slippery slope into war”.      

In the past, Trump has indicated that he thinks it is clever to be unpredictable. He wants his adversaries to stay nervous. A stable world order, however, depends on adversaries knowing what to expect. A nervous government may over-react, after all. In any case, an erratic super power is dangerous, and the sad truth is that Trump is indeed erratic. His promises are worthless and his statements plainly do not add up to any coherent point of view. Compounding the problems, his state department is under-staffed and unprepared to handle major challenges. There was no secret plan to beat ISIS - and apparently there is no plan for what comes after ISIS either.