As the controversial US presidential election approaches, more speculation and rumors are heard in the news every day. If we look at the past thirty years, that is, after the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, we can intuitively see that the process of developments in the domestic politics of many countries is different from the past. The most important of these differences is the type of increasing influence and impact of these domestic developments on each other and on international politics. Certainly, the political history of the world is also full of evidence of influencing and being influenced by the domestic politics of countries. But what seems clear is the change that the flow of information is faster and more widespread in different parts of the world. Now, not only do politicians and experts follow the domestic politics of other countries, but at the same time, even in the most remote villages of a country like Iran, politics and elections in the United States are followed in detail.
In addition to communications and the pervasive flow of information, the impact of people's lives on this issue and the motivation to follow the news is also effective: the fact that a country is sanctioned and finds its own problems makes the issue of politics in the sanctioning country more important both for the citizens of that country and for all traders and producers who are affected by these sanctions in third countries and, for example, are prevented from exporting goods or traveling to the sanctioned country or have been subject to restrictions or penalties due to non-compliance. This is also a recent issue due to the narrowing of banking and commercial connections, which are increasingly under the scrutiny of international and national institutions.
The above introduction and today's observations show that on the one hand, the people and politicians of the countries of the world are watching November 3rd today, and on the other hand, this is also the game of the elections in the United States, which is within the scope of influence of the actions of other countries, so that there is always the claim that other powers, and most of all Russia, China, and Iran, are trying to influence the election candidates and even the process of holding it through advertising or hacking, etc.
That is why it is always important to be able to provide a correct analysis of the various sides of this multilateral policy around an issue such as the upcoming elections in Washington. But it seems that the last analysis that can be provided is about the United States itself. Because the whole issue in America depends on very fine details that take the issue beyond the level of analysis and limit it to the separation of situations, and we only have a percentage of nearly fifty percent for choosing each of the two main candidates, and the rest is guesswork and favoritism.
But if we were to examine the five (for us) important axes around this imminent event, perhaps we would have done a more meaningful job. These five axes, in the author's opinion, are the unofficial tendencies of the political rulers in the Middle East (Arabs and Israel), the European Union, China and Russia, and most importantly, Iran:
The Middle East: The main players in this region are, of course, the Arab countries and Israel, which today, whether said or unsaid, have somewhat common positions towards a common enemy or rival called Iran, and even in an election show in Trump's favor, several small countries have agreed to establish belated official relations with Israel. The description "belated" is mentioned because it has been and is obvious to everyone that a country like the United Arab Emirates has had unofficial and somewhat secret relations with Israel for years, and even trade and security exchanges are ongoing between these two sovereignties. Therefore, presenting this issue in the US election scene only shows the desire of the parties to this game - namely the Arab countries and Israel - to keep Trump in the White House. If we look at Obama's tense relationship with Netanyahu and the failure to support Saudi Arabia's rule during the recent Democratic era, there is no doubt that these Arab countries - mostly Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain - and Israel, which have been struggling with Iran in recent years in various regions, including Yemen and Syria, are doing everything they can to avoid losing a full-fledged supporter like Trump in Washington. Naturally, arms and energy exchanges - especially with the Iranian oil embargo and its replacement by Saudi Arabia - have lucrative dimensions and clear material incentives in this sense. Europe: The reality is that the countries of the liberal democratic bloc, including the European Union led by Germany and France, the United Kingdom and the United States, have an unwritten but guaranteed peace with each other despite all the tensions. In addition, the economic and commercial interdependence of these countries means that even with someone like Trump, the strategic inclinations of the remaining countries are to maintain the level and security of relations with the United States. But this does not prevent European and British politicians from being indifferent to the choice of either. Naturally, given the serious differences of opinion between Europe and Trump's America on international issues, including the issue of Iran and, above all, trade relations between Europe and the United States (the issue of tariffs), the first inclination of the Green Continent will be to replace Trump with a conventional, reasonable, and mature politician like Biden, who will have the credibility of a person like Barack Obama behind him and probably people like Kerry, Burns, and Susan Rice on his team.
Two other factors should be added to this issue, both around Britain. One is the unimportant factor of Boris Johnson's personal relations with Trump, which has no effect on the issue due to the island's strong parliamentary system, and the other is the important issue of Brexit and the European Union, which, given the possible distancing of the United Kingdom from Europe, requires the country to strengthen relations with the United States, especially in the trade dimension. This may, given Trump's right-wing and unilateralist stance on the European Union, increase London's greed for making and receiving concessions from Trump and increase its desire to keep him in the White House.
Of course, regardless of domestic competitions, this game must be played with the team and as carefully as possible, because the power that Trump has in building a consensus against Iran is extremely strong for Biden, and this means that playing with Biden's card must be sure and fast, so that it cannot be postponed and made conditional on the presidential elections in Iran next year, and whatever it wants to happen must be done immediately and unconditionally. Because prolonging this issue will make it possible for the views of others - not only Europe, but even Russia and China - to move closer to America.
