Shifting Geopolitical Focus: Insights from Kiron K. Skinner
In the evolving landscape of 21st-century foreign affairs, the focus is shifting from the war on terror to broader geopolitical challenges. Kiron K. Skinner, a professor of political science and international relations at Pepperdine University in California, emphasizes the need for this transition. Skinner, a key contributor to the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, notes that it was during the first term of President Donald Trump that the threat of terrorism began to recede. Trump’s administration initiated the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Middle East, redirecting attention towards China and Russia. Additionally, efforts were made to address North Korea’s nuclear ambitions and highlight the weaknesses in the U.S.-Iran nuclear agreement.
The Trump Administration’s Foreign Policy Vision
Leading up to the 2020 elections, Trump frequently discussed territories like Greenland, Canada, Mexico, and Panama. He expressed a desire for the U.S. to gain control over Greenland, regardless of the cost, and often mentioned aspirations of incorporating Canada as the 51st state. Trump’s dissatisfaction with Mexico stemmed from immigration issues, while his concerns with Panama were linked to their growing ties with China.
The Call for International Cooperation Reevaluation
Skinner highlights the overdue need for the U.S. to reassess its partnerships with international organizations to ensure they align with American interests. According to her, Trump is championing a fundamental reevaluation of global diplomacy principles that was not feasible two decades ago. One such organization under scrutiny is NATO. Skinner acknowledges NATO’s critical role in U.S. security since its establishment in 1949 but points out growing imbalances within the alliance in the 21st century. She stresses the importance of shared responsibility among member states, noting that some fail to meet the minimum defense spending target of 2% of GDP. Recently, Trump advocated for increasing this contribution to 5%.
Kiron Skinner: A Profile
Kiron Kanina Skinner is a prominent figure in international relations and political science, holding a doctorate from Harvard University where she studied under former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Skinner served in the national security preparation team during Trump’s administration and was the Director of Policy Planning at the U.S. State Department under Secretary Mike Pompeo from September 2018 to August 2019. She co-authored two books on Ronald Reagan and contributed the foreign policy section to the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025. Her insights into NATO emphasize the necessity of equitable burden-sharing among allies.
James Jay Carafano’s Perspective on Iceland and Greenland
According to James Jay Carafano, Vice President of the Heritage Foundation’s National Security and Foreign Policy Institute and a seasoned expert in defense and intelligence matters, Iceland is currently a lesser concern in U.S. foreign policy. However, he underscores the importance of preventing excessive Russian and Chinese influence there. Carafano perceives Trump’s interest in Greenland as part of a broader strategy to counter Russian and Chinese activities in the Arctic. He recalls historical U.S. strategic interests in Greenland and Iceland dating back to World War I, stressing the ongoing importance of a stable Europe for U.S. security.
Greenland’s Strategic Importance
NATO nations have shared military exercises in Iceland since the U.S. military’s withdrawal in 2006. Following increased Russian submarine activity near Iceland, NATO’s presence was bolstered. Carafano dismisses the notion of re-establishing a U.S. military base in Iceland as impractical. Trump’s focus on Greenland is driven by increased Russian and Chinese activities in the Arctic and Denmark’s reduced defense capabilities in Greenland. Carafano sees Trump’s Greenland and Panama strategies as efforts to avert future geopolitical crises akin to the Cuban Missile Crisis. He argues that allowing China to dominate the Panama Canal, given its potential as a future adversary, is unacceptable. Trump’s assertive approach regarding Greenland and Panama reflects his determination to prevent such a scenario.
Conclusion: A New Era in U.S. Foreign Policy
Trump’s foreign policy initiatives are often misunderstood as purely territorial ambitions. However, Skinner and Carafano’s analyses suggest that these moves are strategic signals to major powers like China. While Greenland, Denmark, and Europe are frequently mentioned, the underlying message is directed at Beijing, warning them to stay clear of U.S. interests. This strategic recalibration is indicative of a broader shift in U.S. foreign policy, seeking to address contemporary global challenges with renewed vigor.