Middle East security issues and the US's relationship with the region accounted for a substantial portion of US President-elect Donald Trump's campaign rhetoric. Including the nature of the traditional role the US plays as an influential country with interests, most notably in a region that is the hotbed of conflicts and terrorism and that is at the forefront of world affairs. The form and timing indicate that this rhetoric was an expression of personal ideas and visions of advisors, not necessarily strategies. However, after winning the presidential race there is another factor at play — institutions, even if Trump's personal view remains central. Judging from his statements, Trump views the Middle East overall as a region of infinite wars. The US army has been directly involved there for 15 years, following the Iraq war. This defines the region for Trump and suggests that using force in a region of enduring wars and conflicts leads to a quagmire and comes at a high material cost. By giving priority to domestic issues, involvement in the region should be limited to issues relating to US interests. But this does not mean there will be no US military involvement in the region. On the contrary, its presence may be greater than during Obama's tenure and will be based on different considerations, particularly with regard to funding this presence. Trump appears obsessed with power, linking it to the US's stature in the world, and restoring this status through military force is one foundation. Trump also believes that the policies of the incumbent administration squandered much of the US's prestige. A clear example of this was the scene of US marines made to kneel by Iranian Revolutionary Guard, or similar skirmishes in the Red Sea after ballistic missiles were fired from Yemen at the US navy. “We will expel them by force,” declared Trump, which indicates he will adopt a policy of pushing Iran back from the region. Security with a price tag, or “pay for protection by the US, the world's policeman,” is one of Trump's stances. He transforms power into a commodity subject to supply and demand. Based on lengthy discussions had within Trump's team, the US army will be rehabilitated after large defence budget cuts over the past eight years. When Trump says NATO is irrelevant does that mean he has a plan to dismantle or reform NATO? Probably not. But Trump does appear determined to rebalance the US's military engagements to serving US interests while generating large economic revenue for the United States. Gaps exist in Trump's outlook regarding security issues in the Middle East. He underestimates the priority of Yemen, for example, and believes the primary party with interests there is Saudi Arabia without understanding Yemen's historic magnetism for international terrorist organisations such as Al-Qaeda and possibly the Islamic State (IS) in the future. Also, that it is possibly the country with the largest amount of US drone strikes in the world. Who will Trump cooperate with on Middle East security issues? Israel, Egypt and Kurds are the main candidates for this cooperation. Turkey will come at a later stage. There are also countries that he must provide security for — namely Gulf states and others that need security intervention, such as Iraq and Syria. There is a shift on Iran. Trump believes the recent rapprochement crowned by the nuclear deal does not serve US interests and gives Iran the upper hand over the US. It also lacks guarantees and Trump appears ready to amend it, if necessarily to annul it. It was a bad deal, according to Trump. His presidency will focus on renegotiating deals where US interests are not well enough protected. In the Gulf, it is unlikely there will be a new pattern of relations. Verbal outbursts on some issues will likely recede and the US may become even more involved in regional issues. But on a different basis. The picture will become clearer as the members of Trump's security and defence team are announced. On Iraq, the priority is primarily to fight the Islamic State group. Trump has an undeclared plan, and will likely act before declaring it. Providing US troops requires a large budget which Iraq will fund in the form of more weapons deals beyond what was agreed in the past. As for Turkey, it is obvious it will remain a key pivot of US security. The Obama administration made a mistake when 13 US officers participated in the July 2016 coup attempt. Some information has been passed to Trump, and other information has not been made public. The challenge is to revive a good relationship with the Turkish government. It is likely to be a pragmatic relationship on security issues, but it will not be exclusive, meaning that other factors — such as Israel and the Kurds — will be incentives.
