Withdrawal of the United States from the Arms Trade Treaty is based on Washington’s logic and national security doctrine of rebuilding its strategic forces. The United States intends to rebuild these forces and military infrastructures not rebuilt since the Cold War, as well as military contracts with the rest of the world to sell weapons, build nuclear power plants and even provide nuclear weapons equipment. It should be noted that any country in the international system wants to establish an order or, in other words, to become a hegemon, must have legitimacy in that system in order to be able to make others accept these principles and rules of order.

The basis of the legitimacy of this power and hegemon is to provide public benefit; that is, the state in question must provide a service in order to benefit the rest of the countries; hence, these countries will, on the basis of their interests, take on the order they have established, and accept part of it.

Contracts, conventions, regimes, and institutions created after World War II and during or after the Cold War were mainly based on the idea that after WWII, the United States was creating this public service; with the Marshall Plan, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and institutions took shape the basis of which was financial aid and after that this legitimacy was established for the United States. In fact, countries were willing to accept the legitimacy of a desirable American order in return for this public good the United States offered.

Therefore, these public services cost more to the order moderators and had more blessing for other countries. China is said to have grown to such an extent today and is leaving the US behind based on the use of this public order.

Thus, the basis for the legitimacy of this system is public services and benefits which is created. What Donald Trump does is to change the definition of legitimacy and the foundation of legitimacy. If the basis of legitimacy was the efficiency of the regimes and contracts, then Trump has turned this efficiency into beneficial.  That is, the US president believes that any regime, treaty and convention that are beneficial to Washington would be important to him, and should be abolished if not beneficial. So, one of the foundations and principles behind US withdrawal from conventions is the debate on usefulness. Because America was hegemonic in a certain era and created a series of public goods, naturally NATO and many other military agreements have cost the United States more than their military profit.

Therefore, these costs are not consistent with the logic of Trump and he pulls out of them one after another. He also changed the definition of legitimacy in the international order and wants to go forward according to his own logic.

On the other hand, every president needs both a series of legacies to stay in history and to win in the next round (of elections); hence, some actions of Trump, including withdrawal from agreements and treaties aim to insinuate to the people and the voter base is that these treaties do not serve the interests of the United States and for the same reason he pulls out of them. He claims to be building new contracts with strength and firmness, and “America First”, also means the same. Therefore, such actions carry a negative weight for the vote base of Trump.

In the meantime, it is sometimes said that the president of the United States intends to create a kind of disorder in the international system by pursuing such measures. But it should be noted that he does not intend to do so. In fact, it seems that Trump follows the path of the former presidents of America, namely consolidation and continuation of American supremacy, but with different tactics and methods.

In international relations theories, it is said that each country, when it comes to a hegemonic position and relative dominant power over others, becomes a country that wants to maintain the status quo. That is because it is in a relatively good state of governance and position, it tends to maintain the balance of power and the status quo.

In such a situation, as this hegemon pays for the maintenance of the system, and the other challengers use the services and the public benefits and ultimately become a level challenge (such as China, which is becoming an existential challenge to the United States). Under such a system we reach a point where this hegemon becomes a revolutionary hegemon: A revolutionary hegemon that wants to disrupt the existing order. Of course, this disruption does not mean this hegemon has backed down, but it disrupts in order to rebuild and reestablish this order: In such a way that it would build the existing order based on its own interests and reduce the costs.

Therefore, America’s Trump is creating a revolution in the current order of the world, so that it can reconsolidate its dominant position in the international system by relying on strong support, regulating the domestic infrastructures, strengthening the national economy and reducing the costs, and preventing the emergence of a challenging competitor like China.