USA foreign policy is driven by a consistent agenda of maintaining global supremacy, even at the cost of destabilizing other regions and using allies as “pawns.” While historical events like the British-era Two-Nation Theory led to geopolitical realignments in South Asia, a critical perspective on contemporary USA foreign policy suggests a pattern of actions that, perhaps unintentionally, contribute to the fragmentation or weakening of larger geopolitical blocs, particularly concerning Russia and other perceived competitors. This represents a core aspect of the developing multipolarity, as the United States, formerly the singular hegemon after the post-Cold War unipolar era, gradually sees its global influence diminish.
The end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 marked a pivotal moment in USA foreign policy, solidifying its position as the preeminent global power. While some critical analyses suggest a deliberate USA strategy to hasten the USSR’s demise, mainstream historical accounts emphasize the internal contradictions and systemic weaknesses within the Soviet system, exacerbated by policies like Perestroika and Glasnost. These reforms, intended to revitalize the Soviet economy and society, inadvertently unleashed forces that led to its collapse. Francis Fukuyama’s ‘End of History’ thesis, for instance, interpreted this event as the triumph of Western liberal democracy and market capitalism over alternative ideologies, rather than a direct USA intervention.
Russia and China Persist
Decades after the USSR’s dissolution, many former Soviet republics, including Ukraine, Moldova, and Uzbekistan, continue to face significant developmental challenges. Russia, under President Vladimir Putin, has demonstrated a clear ambition to reassert its influence over former Soviet territories, notably through its actions in Ukraine. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s government, with significant and widely reported military and financial assistance from NATO countries, led by the USA, is actively resisting Russia’s aggression. Ukraine’s pursuit of NATO membership and closer integration with European institutions is a key driver of its resistance.
USA engagement with alliances, such as NATO and various bilateral agreements, is primarily driven by its strategic interests and efforts to maintain its geopolitical standing. This pragmatic approach also underpins its cautious stance towards the rapid economic and military growth of China, which is increasingly viewed as a significant challenger to the existing global order.
The Middle East is Still a Problem For USA
Turning to the complex dynamics of the Israel-Palestine and Israel-Iran conflicts, it’s worth noting the role of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), headquartered in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Comprising 57 member states, predominantly Muslim-majority, the OIC aims to represent the collective voice of the Muslim world. While its effectiveness and achievements are subjects of ongoing debate, particularly regarding internal divisions and the diverse developmental statuses of its members, its growing diplomatic efforts and potential influence in certain regional contexts warrant consideration.
Within the OIC, significant disparities exist among member states in terms of economic development and governance. Nations such as Pakistan, Yemen, Afghanistan, and Syria face profound challenges including poverty, humanitarian crises, and underdeveloped infrastructure. These states, despite their own struggles, participate in the OIC’s initiatives, highlighting the diverse range of interests and capacities within the organization. While the OIC aims for collective action, internal dynamics and varying national interests can influence perceptions and cooperation among its members.
As detailed by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in their report “The OIC: Between Rhetoric and Reality” there also seems that silent internal disputes exist among OIC member states regarding leadership. These underlying tensions, though rarely acknowledged publicly, manifest in several ways. Beyond the long-standing sectarian and territorial rivalries (such as the Sunni-Shia divide) that extend beyond specific leadership roles, there are also the pronounced rivalries between Saudi Arabia and Iran, fueled by both sectarian and geopolitical competition, and Qatar’s regional ambitions further complicate this dynamic. In this complex geopolitical landscape, the growing assertiveness of certain Middle Eastern powers, rather than the OIC itself, is sometimes viewed with caution by the USA In this context, the USA maintains strong support for Israel, given the region’s critical strategic importance in the broader Middle East.
OIC’s Clout Grows as USA wanes
The growing influence of Middle Eastern countries and the OIC is now perceived as a threat by the USA To counter this, the USA supports Israel, recognizing that the Israel-Palestine region serves as a strategic “chicken neck” for the Middle East.
From the Israeli perspective, deeply rooted in patriotism and religious devotion, the ongoing conflict is a fight to secure their homeland and ensure survival. This perspective is informed by a long history of persecution and displacement, including the Exodus, periods of foreign rule, and the horrific events of the Holocaust. Despite these immense challenges, the Jewish people have demonstrated remarkable resilience and a sustained commitment to their national and cultural identity, continuing their struggle for self-determination.
Israel could be a liability
While the USA has been a steadfast provider of military and financial aid to Israel, the nature of this alliance is complex. USA support for Israel aligns with its broader strategic interests in the Middle East, including regional stability and counterterrorism efforts. Israel, for its part, has demonstrated significant independent capabilities in defense, finance, and technology, achieving considerable success in regional conflicts. However, like any major power, the USA continually recalibrates its foreign policy based on evolving geopolitical circumstances. The perception that the USA might eventually seek to constrain Israel’s power, or is primarily using Israel as a strategic asset to manage the Middle East and influence organizations like the OIC, is a critical perspective on the enduring dynamics of great power relations and regional alliances.
But if history has taught us anything, it’s that once Israel begins to grow too powerful, USA strategists may attempt to stifle its progress.
Ankita Paul is geopolitical enthususiast . Her interests lie in foreign policy, global economy, international relations, and alliances. She plans to pursue a PhD in foreign policy in future.
