EghtesadOnline: The US latest presidential election could be viewed as a referendum and a 'No' vote to Washington's hegemonic policies. If Donald Trump fails to make a fundamental change in US foreign policy, worsening tensions in the arena of international relations may be within sight.
Very few people expected Trump to be the winner of the US presidential election due to a heavy atmosphere created by Western mainstream media and their efforts to portray Trump as the 'antagonist' of the story. But despite all the odds, he managed to push his controversial campaign through to the White House.
According to IRNA, the big question which now remains is about Trump's approach at the international scene after he enters the Oval Office. Although there might be some changes to Trump's acts as president as opposed to his words as campaigner, it is still worth pondering about the possible consequences of his words if really implemented.
**Unclear, profit– oriented positions on foreign policy
The billionaire trader and real estate tycoon entered the presidential race under the flag of the Republican Party with radical slogans and by accusing US political elites of corruption and also with repeatedly calling US political system 'rigged.' He swept aside all Republican figures like Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and finally got the vote of American people.
Trump has yet to formulate and announce a clear foreign policy agenda and has so far just articulated some controversial stances on US traditional alliances like the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) which has sounded alarm bells and interpreted as a wake-up call in some European capitals.
One motif and saga in Trump's campaign was 'renegotiate' foreign deals in order to get better conditions at the expense of its allies and rivals alike.
**Americans big 'NO' to the establishment
Many experts and even officials have described the result of US vote as a No vote to the political and economic establishment of Washington.
Germany's Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen for instance, described Trump's gains in the US presidential election as a 'huge shock' and told broadcaster ARD that the Republican candidate's strong showing was 'not a vote for him but rather against Washington, against the establishment'.
On the international hotspots like Syria, Trump's declared stance is in sharp contrast to the policies of his Democrat rival Hillary Clinton. While Clinton called for establishing a no-fly zone in Syria and for creating strong leverages against Russia, Trump acknowledged that US is no longer capable of toppling President Bashar Assad and should join hand with Russia and Iran in fighting the terrorist group of Daesh (ISIS).
Trump repeatedly lambasted Clinton for blindly approving war in Iraq and military operations in Libya, accusing her of having bad judgment.
From this angle, we may interpret the result of the US vote as a big No from American people to Washington's long–standing hegemonic and meddling policies in the world which have worsened living conditions in the US on the expense of American tax payers.
Now the election season is over in US. Trump is left with a so-called corrupt and rigged system and a huge number of American voters are waiting for a real change. It remains to be seen to what extent Trump can succeed in changing the US hegemonic foreign policy.
As Francis Fukuyama in a recent article on Foreign Affairs puts it, 'Donald Trump will now have to deliver and this is where the problem lies.'
But even if Trump somehow manages to push through his agenda without fostering a fundamental change in US traditional bipartisan hegemonic foreign policy, it could be the harbinger of more tensions should the future administrations decide to undo his short term adjustments and return to the past trends. In this regard it is also worth noting that some International Relations experts point to US isolationist trend in 1930's as one of the main factors contributing to the strengthening of Nazi Germany and subsequent World War II.