Opinion: How the Emerging Trump Doctrine Played at Astana International Forum
With His Riyadh Allocution, Trump Ripped Up the Foreign Policy Playbook The May 29–30 Astana International Forum (AIF) in Kazakhstan drew thousands of attendees — heads of state, senior diplomats, and entrepreneurs — eager for insights into Central Asia’s rising global significance. Topics ranged from foreign policy and water management to energy, trade, and economic integration. A key message from the organizers was that Middle Powers — Kazakhstan, Indonesia, Türkiye, South Africa, Argentina, and others — should serve as bridges to peace and solidarity amid growing global polarization and Great Power conflict. Unsurprisingly, lots of folk were trying to horn in on business opportunities – mainly agriculture, mining, and metals, of which there is an abundance in the region. Yet the real buzz in the hallways and cafés wasn’t about panel discussions, raw materials, or the next sound bite for the press. What had international policy mavens all atwitter was President Trump’s unexpected speech in Saudi Arabia – which might well prove to be the Trump Doctrine: global crises, he said, are better resolved through diplomacy and mutually beneficial business partnerships, not bayonets, diktat, and moral sermonizing. That message, coming from the President of the United States, landed with force. During the three days I spent in Astana, I noticed that many delegates who normally spoke in well-rehearsed sound bites designed not to offend, suddenly spoke more bluntly, even going off-script. They dropped the cautious language and the standard foreign policy group-speak. What was going on? Was this the Trump effect? My guess is that Trump’s Riyadh allocution was intended to rip up the decades-old foreign policy playbook of Brussels, London, and prior U.S. administrations. Instead of promoting the globalist/woke agenda, which had been de rigueur at international diplomatic clambakes of the Astana sort, Trump called for détente and reciprocity – more the realism of Nixon and Kissinger (leavened with a pinch of Ronald Reagan) than the idealism of Wilson and FDR. He wanted to deliver on his promise to the American people to make America great again (including boosting domestic manufacturing) rather than squander precious resources beating down any country that looks at us cross-eyed. Trump’s Riyadh speech — like his inaugural address — called for a peaceable foreign policy. That message reverberated in Astana: “Before our eyes, a new generation of leaders is transcending the ancient conflicts and tired divisions of the past and forging a future where the Middle East is defined by commerce, not chaos; where it exports technology, not terrorism; and where people of different nations, religions, and creeds are building cities together — not bombing each other out of existence.” Perhaps most cutting was Trump’s indictment of interventionist dogma: “This great transformation has not come from Western interventionists giving you lectures... The gleaming marvels of Riyadh and Abu Dhabi were not built by 'nation-builders,' 'neo-cons,' or 'liberal non-profits'... Instead, the birth of a modern Middle East has been brought about by the people of the region themselves – pursuing their own visions and charting...
