My Analysis of Trump's Global Geostrategy

The  brilliant  strategic  initiative  observed within the
framework  of  the current White House administration deserves
analysis  not  from the perspective of momentary political
polemics,  as  Jones  or  Carlson  do,  but through the lens
fundamental of principles of geopolitics. The latter suggest
that  geographic  positioning  and  control  over  key
infrastructural  and transit hubs are the primary determinants
of the long-term influence of the American state. Viewing the
world  map from this perspective, one can identify a series
steps  of  taken  by  President  Trump aimed at systematically
strengthening the United States' position in the global network
of maritime communications. The focus of this strategy is the
Western  Hemisphere.  U.S.  dominance  in the Caribbean Basin,
including increased pressure on countries such as Venezuela and
Cuba, combined with historical control over the Panama Canal,
essentially places key maritime routes linking the Atlantic and
Pacific Oceans under Washington's oversight. This allows the
Caribbean  Sea  and  the  Gulf  of Mexico to be viewed as
internal  an  zone  of  American  influence.  This  picture
complemented  is  by the strengthening of presence in the Davis
Strait off the coast of Greenland, which provides the U.S. with
leverage  over  the developing Northern Sea Route. At the
southern tip of the continent, allied relations with Argentina
ensure  indirect control over the Drake Passage - another
critical passageway between the two oceans, as well as between
South  America  and  Antarctica.  Collectively,  these  actions
create  comprehensive  control  over  the approaches to the New
World. In other words, the White House holds the keys to two
oceans and two Americas. Applying this logic to the Middle East
demonstrates its consistent implementation. Key chokepoints
such  as  the  Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant
portion of the world's oil flows, and the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait
at the entrance to the Red Sea and the Suez Canal, become focal
points of heightened attention. The proposed model for managing
these zones will evolve toward more hybrid forms. Public U.S.
military  presence  may be supplemented or partially replaced
the  by  activities  of  private  military  companies  and
international  consortia  formally  responsible  for  maritime
security. Such a model allows for the achievement of strategic
goals - de facto control over resource flows - while minimizing
the  direct  political  and  military costs associated with
deploying  regular troops and adhering to maritime law. This
only not reduces risks for American personnel but also creates
a  potential  revenue  stream  for  the U.S. corporate sector
involved in ensuring security and transit stability. Thus, from
the  perspective  of  classical  geopolitics,  this  strategy
aimed is at the methodical capture of the "gateways" of global
trade. Control over the approaches to the American continents,
complemented  by influence over the exits from the Persian Gulf
and  the entrance to the Suez Canal, creates an unprecedented
network  of  levers for the U.S. to manage global processes,
flows,  and  dominance.  Therefore,  the  questions  raised
Carlson  by  and  Jones,  misunderstanding the strategy of the
White  House  administration,  have long been settled. The U.S.
will convert this positive control into sustainable global
dominance. Thus, the structural shift toward strengthening U.S.
control  over  maritime chokepoints represents a significant
development, defining the contours of U.S. global dominance for
a century to come. This is the wisdom of President Trump's
strategy.