In War, Trump and Putin Are Much Alike

Foreign Policy | Keir Giles

The United States is now adopting the Russian Federation's strategic methods of warfare, a move which directly serves Moscow's geopolitical aims. The fact that the two countries have aligned themselves in both their political and military strategies poses a serious threat to the current global security situation, especially as it relates to the war in Ukraine, U.S. foreign policy, and the future of the Western alliances.

The fact that these changes are taking place shows the deep structural transformations occurring within Washington's foreign policy establishment as it readies for a possible second presidential term by Donald Trump. These institutional adjustments might affect the way in which Washington handles regional crises, such as the conflict in the Middle East and its strategic competition with China. The transition indicates a move away from traditional democratic norms towards more transactional and centralised methods of decision-making. This represents a significant change. In the end, these two parallel approaches to dealing with conflict and with governance could lead to the weakening of international treaties, cause disruption in global trade, and speed up the fragmentation of the rules-based international order, thus giving rise to revisionist powers.

Comment

The fact that American and Russian strategic approaches are converging indicates a major change in global deterrence policies. The transactional security stance adopted by Washington is exactly comparable to the grey-zone doctrine that Moscow has long adhered to. This convergence undermines the basic premises of NATO's Article 5 collective defence arrangement. As a result, the practical feasibility of bilateral arms control agreements such as the New START treaty is now under unprecedented systemic pressure.

The convergence of this doctrine takes place via the intentional use of diplomatic ambiguity within the United Nations Security Council; by viewing security guarantees as negotiable items, Washington is adopting the coercive negotiation methods which Moscow used during the 2015 Minsk II talks. As a result, confidence in the institution is diminished and this permanently changes the way Poland and the Baltic states assess their own decision to procure Patriot missile systems.

Strategic Question for Discussion

What will Poland and the Baltic states do about the extent of their reliance on NATO's Article 5 system when planning their long-term air defence procurement if Washington keeps seeing its security commitments as transactional assets?

It shows that the frontline European countries will tend to give up on collective arrangements and instead go for bilateral, fast-tracked purchases of systems such as the Patriot PAC-3. This move is likely to speed up the fragmentation of NATO's integrated air defence system as the various nations place a greater emphasis on local deterrence than on overall regional coherence. As a result, the regional security arrangements will change from having a single command structure to consisting of a number of independent, transaction-based defence agreements.

Share your assessment in the comments below.

To read in details click here