US Middle-Class Foreign Policy

 

Regardless of whether tariff policies will ultimately lead to an improvement in the U.S. economy,
It remains essential for any American policymaker to address seriously the ongoing decline of the middle class.
When President Joe Biden assumed office, he pledged to pursue a foreign policy for the middle class.
However, his administration became increasingly entangled in foreign conflicts, inflation escalated during his tenure, and interest rates were raised—factors that collectively contributed to economic stagnation.
Whether one supports or opposes former President Donald Trump, it is difficult to overlook that the American people have borne significant costs from globalization and the redirection of national resources toward military engagements and international expenditures, often at the expense of domestic welfare.

The World is rapidly Transforming

 

- The Post-WWII Economic Order is undergoing a radical shift.
- The current World Trade Organization (WTO) rules may soon become obsolete.
- Post-Cold War Europe will not remain the same, as internal and external forces may reshape its identity and Unity.
- The regional order in the Middle East will not endure in its current form (this much is certain)—no system can remain static in a rapidly evolving world.
- Israel, too, may not retain its present form, given the swift-moving regional and international dynamics.

Deeper Analysis:
- Consequences of an Unbalanced Globalization:
The industrialized "Global North" initially benefited from globalization and WTO rules.
However, China’s accession to the WTO in 2001 (with U.S. approval) triggered a dramatic transformation in an astonishingly short time.
- The Evolving Role of Social Media:
Platforms once used as one-way tools of cultural influence (from North to South, West to East) have become multidirectional channels, reflecting a broader shift in global cultural power dynamics.
These transformations demand a fundamental reassessment of traditional conceptions of the world order, compelling us to prepare for a new era of international relations in a new international system.

Will the Tariff War Undermine U.S. Global Dominance?

 

In The World in Depression: 1929–1939 (1973), Charles Kindleberger introduced the concept of “stability through hegemony,” arguing that the absence of a dominant economic power contributed to the global instability of the interwar period.
This idea, later developed into Robert Gilpin's Hegemonic Stability Theory, holds that international order depends on a hegemon that provides public goods, such as security, open markets, and monetary stability, while bearing disproportionate costs.

However, hegemonic power is inherently limited. According to the theory of hegemonic decline, the burden of leadership fosters relative decline over time. Rising powers benefit from the system without sharing costs, while the hegemon becomes overextended.

Gilpin argues that hegemonic decline is driven by three factors: high domestic costs (e.g., fiscal deficits and military overreach), the emergence of capable rivals (e.g., China), and global dissatisfaction with the prevailing order (e.g., the rise of the Global South).

Faced with the exorbitant costs of hegemony, and to avoid losing its global primacy, the U.S. has three potential paths:

A- Renew hegemony through innovation, as Ronald Reagan did in the 1980s. By prioritizing technological and economic breakthroughs instead of over-reliance on military might or traditional industries, the U.S. could revitalize its comparative advantage, dominate critical sectors, and shape global standards.

B- Retreat into protectionism, which risks gradually ceding global influence as trust erodes in the post-WWII and post-Cold War order America built.

C- Adapt to a multipolar world—a difficult pill for Americans to swallow today, even if U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio acknowledged in late January that a return to multipolarity is inevitable, noting that a unipolar world is unnatural and was merely a product of the Cold War’s end.

A Scholarly Journey Developed by US Experiences

 By Leila Nicolas, PhD

The release of my latest book, "Global and Regional Strategies in the Middle East: In Pursuit of Hegemony," (Routledge, August 2024), marks a defining moment in my academic journey—one deeply influenced by my experiences as an alumna of two transformative US exchange programs: The SUSI (Study of the US Institutes) in 2016 and Fulbright in 2021.

While I have previously published several books in Arabic and English, this work represents a culmination of insights, blending regional expertise with the critical analytical tools I gained in the United States. 

This book goes further—it dissects the mechanisms of hegemony with sharper precision, thanks to the methodological rigor and interdisciplinary perspectives I encountered in the US. 

The SUSI program at Bard College (New York) was my first experience in the US. I still remember the academic debates and professional visits, which broadened my understanding of US policy-making and "grand Strategy in context," a tool that later became central to my research.  

Years later, the Fulbright Program at Fordham University elevated my work to new heights. The generosity of the US Department of State, SUSI organizers, Bard College, and Fordham University (New York) can not be paralleled.

What I took from the US experiences is that the "American Dream" was never about material wealth—it was about freedoms—freedom to think boldly, research fearlessly, and write without constraints. 

In the US, I was taught that academia thrives only when it is free from dogma, can name uncomfortable truths, and ask tough questions. 

All these were reflected in my new book, which discusses global and regional strategies, proxy wars, and the fight of all against all—which stems from that very liberty.  

--

Leila Nicolas is a professor at Lebanese University and a US author and geopolitical analyst with several published works in Arabic and English. An alumna of SUSI (2016) and Fulbright (2021), her research focuses on competition between great powers and MENA politics.

Syria's new government formation

 

- Syrian Interim President Ahmad Al-Sharaa Announces Formation of New Government
- Syrian interim president Ahmad Al-Sharaa has announced the formation of a new government that includes various Syrian factions.
Yet, key sovereign ministries remain under the control of figures close to him—specifically, members of Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham.
Opinions within Syria are divided over whether the new government truly represents all components of society.
While major regional powers have welcomed its formation, the U.S. and European nations have yet to issue clear statements.
---
The establishment of this new government could be seen as a historic turning point following Assad's downfall.
Undoubtedly, the move comes in response to external pressures demanding a more inclusive government that represents all segments of Syrian society, safeguards pluralism, and protects minorities.
This government faces major challenges both domestically and internationally:
Domestically: Establishing state authority, maintaining security, and addressing the severe economic crisis.
Internationally: Gaining recognition and legitimacy, lifting sanctions, being removed from terrorism lists, and securing support for reconstruction efforts.

Above all, the most critical challenges remain preserving Syria’s unity, addressing the Israeli occupation, and preventing the country from descending into fragmentation and all-out conflict.

Trump - Iran exchanged messages

 

- President Donald Trump threatened Iran with airstrikes and secondary tariffs if no agreement was reached.
- In his message, Trump extended a hand for negotiation but warned against rejecting it.
- Iran’s response: We accept indirect negotiations, but the U.S. must first build trust and abandon its "maximum pressure" and threat-based policies.

Key Negotiation Topics
1. Iran’s Nuclear Program
How far Trump's administration will go in its demands on Tehran remains unclear.
Trump previously stated that Iran must not acquire nuclear weapons.
However, some U.S. officials pushed for the complete dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program.
- Iran will firmly reject this demand, as international law does not prohibit the peaceful use of nuclear technology.
Tehran will insist on its right to uranium enrichment for civilian purposes while pledging not to develop nuclear weapons.
If the U.S. raises its expectations to include full dismantlement, negotiations will likely stall and hit a dead end.

2. Iran’s Missile Program
Iran views its missile program as a fundamental part of its national defense strategy.
Tehran considers this program non-negotiable and has ruled it out as a discussion point.

3. Iran’s Regional Influence
Iran regards its regional presence as a form of "forward defense."
Over the past two years, Iran's axis has suffered major setbacks, particularly in Syria, following the collapse of the Assad regime.
U.S. negotiators will focus mainly on Iran’s role in Yemen.
However, The Houthis (Ansar Allah), supported by Iran since 2015, are Iran's allies rather than mere proxies.
Even if Iran halts military aid, securing major compromises from Yemeni factions will be difficult.

Conclusion
According to the 2025 U.S. Threat Assessment Report, Iran is not seen as an immediate or direct threat to American interests (in the meantime).
Therefore, a new nuclear agreement with the Trump administration could be possible—unless Washington’s pro-Israel lobby exerts significant pressure to derail negotiations by introducing conditions Iran cannot accept.