Compromising on Turkey for stability and balance: Trump's grand strategy

In the previous two articles in our series, we examined the respective grand strategies of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan. In this third installment, we will examine the American grand strategy for the Middle-East.


US President Donald Trump is fixated on surpassing his predecessor, Barrack Obama. In the Middle-East, this means regional stability and balance - and balance means a larger role for Turkey.

President Trump inherited seven conflicts from his predecessor. Of these, stabilizing Afghanistan and Iraq are the highest priority, since they have cost the most for America financially and militarily. Almost every other US move in the region has stabilizing Afghanistan and Iraq in mind.

For its part, Afghanistan is extremely difficult to stabilize. One of the ways the US has worked towards stability is through the Lapiz Lazuli transit route. Turkey is the main partner in the transit route, which connects Afghanistan to Europe via Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey. This deal ensures that in the event of a US withdrawal, Afghanistan might just be able to become economically independent of other, larger nations like Iran, Pakistan and Russia. Economic independence gives Afghanistan more ability to confront terrorist groups and prevent a Taliban takeover.

The Lapiz Lazuli transit route is a crucial reason the US has given Turkey lots of regional autonomy. Turkey has been toeing the line with Afghanistan and, as a result, its own strategy for cracking down on Iran by proxy in Syria has been endorsed by the US. Even though defeat of the Syrian opposition is inevitable, Turkey delaying this defeat ensures that Iran spends more and more of its precious resources there.

The main reason the Trump Administration has put maximum pressure on Iran and Syria - apart from nuclear concerns - is because of Iraq. Since the 2003 Iraq War, Iran has been the major beneficiary and this, in turn, has completely destabilized Iraq. But substantial economic pressure on Iran and Syria gives Iraq maximum opportunity to pivot away from Iran and towards US allies in the region, particularly the UAE and Saudi Arabia.

But the tide has been turning against autocratic nations like the UAE and Saudi Arabia in favour of Turkey for some time now. The autocrats have failed to end the wars in Libya and Yemen, and this is causing President Trump to explore other options. In December 2019 Turkey signed an agreement with Libya's Government of National Accord and intervened against autocrat-backed Haftar Al-Khalifa. Meanwhile, Turkey is also increasing humanitarian assistance and funding for Yemenis linked to Al-Islah, the Yemeni branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.

While Jared Kushner may have pushed for UAE-backed hegemony in the Middle-East as the best way to help Israel, President Trump seems to be making compromises with Turkey to restore political balance in the region. Should Turkey politically control all of Libya and Yemen, Russia would have its influence contained to Syria, Iran would lose Yemen, and Turkey would be more amicable to political stability in Afghanistan and Iraq in the US' favour.

With Libya and Yemen lost, the autocrats would have little choice but to compromise further to US interest in Afghanistan and Iraq. This compromise would only increase the likelihood of Iran being forced out of Iraq and of a stable Afghanistan. Such a result would end five of the seven wars inherited from the Obama Administration, and allow for a geostrategic balance not seen in the Middle-East since before the Iraq War.

However, relations between the autocratic wing of the Middle-East and Turkey are hostile. Even should Afghanistan and Iraq be stabilized and out of Iran's reach, a Turkey-controlled Libya and Yemen increases the likelihood of instability erupting out of Saudi Arabia. This, in turn, would challenge the Trump doctrine as never before, and give Turkey the ability to tip the balance of the Middle-East in its own favour.