Unlike most U.S. presidents who traditionally make their first foreign trip to Canada or Mexico, Donald Trump broke precedent in 2017 by choosing Saudi Arabia and returning again in 2019. These visits signaled a dramatic recentering of U.S. foreign policy around Riyadh, reflecting Trump’s fascination with Saudi wealth, spectacle, and geopolitical leverage. Yet, as Saudi Arabia increasingly builds ties with Russia and China, Trump’s approach raises pressing questions: was this relationship about U.S. strategy, Trump’s personal ambitions, or even his desire for a Nobel Peace Prize?
Trump’s 2017 trip to Riyadh featured lavish ceremonies, sword dances, and a glowing orb photo that came to symbolize his early presidency. He announced a $110 billion arms deal touted as historic, praising the Kingdom as a “bulwark against extremism.” The trip projected strength, opulence, and alignment, hallmarks of Trump’s preferred diplomatic imagery.
By departing from tradition, Trump sent a message: his foreign policy would privilege spectacle and transactional alliances over conventional diplomacy. Riyadh became not just an ally, but a stage on which Trump performed global leadership.
The Costs of Transactional Diplomacy
Trump’s close rapport with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, or MbS, shaped how his administration responded to the Yemen war, the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and arms sales to the Kingdom. When intelligence agencies concluded that MbS likely ordered Khashoggi’s killing, Trump publicly defended the Crown Prince and blocked congressional efforts to sanction Saudi Arabia. He justified continued weapons sales as essential to U.S. jobs and security, even as bipartisan lawmakers accused him of abetting a humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen.
Despite Trump’s self-proclaimed success in “securing” the alliance, Saudi Arabia has tightened coordination with Russia on oil production through OPEC+, often against U.S. interests. It has also expanded energy and investment partnerships with China, signaling a pragmatic pivot away from reliance on Washington. While he pursued symbolic deals and flattering optics, Saudi Arabia pursued its long-term autonomy. Thus, Saudi Arabia leveraged its ties with both superpowers to enhance bargaining power. Trump’s emphasis on pageantry and public praise overlooked a deeper structural shift as Riyadh attempted to diversify its alliances in a multipolar world. Saudi Arabia’s careful maneuvering between Washington, Moscow, and Beijing reflects a broader realignment in global politics, where personal rapport and flattery no longer guarantee loyalty. Ultimately, this evolution shows that Trump’s approach secured headlines rather than hegemony, leaving the United States with less influence and a more assertive, self-interested Saudi Arabia.
The Pursuit of Legacy and the Limits of Spectacle
Throughout his presidency, Trump openly mused about winning a Nobel Peace Prize for his Middle East diplomacy. His Abraham Accords initiative normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states, a major achievement he hoped would cement his legacy. But his broader Middle East policy, centered on personal rapport with authoritarian leaders and lavish state visits, blurred the line between diplomacy and self-promotion. The Saudi partnership was the clearest manifestation of that blur.
Strategic Realism or Personal Gain?
Some MAGA defenders and even several foreign policy analysts argue that Trump’s outreach to Saudi Arabia reflected a pragmatic recalibration of U.S. strategy rather than mere self-interest. By prioritizing Riyadh, they contend, Trump sought to contain Iran’s regional ambitions, strengthen counterterrorism coordination, and consolidate Arab support for the Abraham Accords, objectives consistent with decades of U.S. regional policy. His defenders note that his transactional approach achieved tangible results: unprecedented normalization between Israel and several Arab states, a temporary de-escalation of hostilities with Iran, and renewed defense investments that signaled continued American influence in the Gulf. To them, Trump’s unconventional diplomacy was not recklessness but realism, a recognition that economic incentives often succeed where moral appeals fail.
Soft Power as Performance
Still, these successes cannot obscure the broader pattern that defined Trump’s diplomacy: one driven more by image and personal gain than by strategic coherence. While it produced short-term spectacle, the long-term effects have been mixed at best. Washington’s credibility weakened as it appeared willing to overlook human rights abuses for arms deals and photo ops. Meanwhile, Riyadh’s deepening coordination with Moscow and Beijing shows how far Trump’s assurances of loyalty fell short.
Trump’s soft power strategy amplified these risks. His efforts to charm world leaders through lavish ceremonies and praise for authoritarian strength projected influence without the discipline of diplomacy. In Saudi Arabia, he replaced the traditional language of shared democratic values with the rhetoric of flattery and transaction, calling the Kingdom a “great friend” and its leadership “visionary.” By redefining persuasion as performance, Trump weakened the moral authority that had long underpinned U.S. soft power, reducing it to a contest of image rather than ideals.
A Broader Decline in U.S. Influence
The implications of this shift extend beyond Saudi Arabia. Trump’s rhetorical style, boasting of “deals” and “historic successes” while avoiding substance, signaled to both allies and adversaries that U.S. commitments were contingent on personal loyalty, not principle. This perception undermined trust and emboldened competitors such as Russia and China to expand their influence in regions once defined by American leadership. Saudi Arabia’s growing independence is therefore not an isolated case but a reflection of a broader erosion of U.S. diplomatic gravity under Trump’s image-first approach. His soft power moves, intended to demonstrate strength, instead revealed how easily credibility can dissolve when foreign policy becomes an extension of ego.
Featured Image Source: PBS
