Batya Ungar-Sargon said President Donald Trump’s foreign policy is forcing countries such as Iran, China, Russia and Venezuela into positions that are more conciliatory toward the United States, and she suggested that the approach could have broad strategic effects.

Ungar-Sargon discussed what she described as a new “axis of evil” involving Iran, China, Russia and Venezuela, and outlined her view of how Trump’s policies have shifted global dynamics.

“To the President Iran is not just Iran. We have this sort of new access of evil, of Iran, China, Russia, Venezuela. And what the President seems to be doing to me anyway is isolating them from each other, and then sort of picking them off one by one, forcing them into a more conciliatory posture vis-à-vis the United States. And honestly, what could be more America first than that?”

Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?

Ungar-Sargon said China previously relied on Venezuela and Iran for a significant portion of its oil supply. She said that loss of that supply has repercussions for Chinese foreign policy.

“China was getting 10% of its oil from Venezuela at sort of bargain basement rates, and the other 10% from Iran. So it’s lost 20% of its oil supply. So for China now, every barrel it has to consider Okay, are we going to use that for our expansionist foreign policy goals, or do we have to really focus on protecting our domestic aims, especially at a time when it is heading into an economic crisis? Now, that choice is being forced on China. It’s in a much weaker position than it was three months ago.”

Ungar-Sargon linked China’s weakened energy position to Beijing’s calculus on other foreign policy objectives, including Taiwan. She said reduced energy resources could make aggressive action less feasible.

“And I think when you think about Taiwan, one of the most important and most difficult and most treacherous foreign policy questions for the United States, to me, it seems like China is much less likely now to do something there, just because it’s much less likely to be able to easily afford it. I mean, that would take unbelievable amounts of energy to pull off. So the President is really playing for D chess here, and I think it’s really starting to pay off.”

FREE Gun Law Map: Laws Don't Pause During Social Unrest

She also addressed Iran’s nuclear program and how cooperation with the United States on nuclear issues could shift Tehran’s reliance on China.

“Think any Iran that is cooperating with the United States that gives up on any nuclear enrichment, anything to do with that which the President has said he will not accept any uranium enrichment from the Iranians, that has been sanctions relief from the United States. I mean, why would they then go to China? They only went to China because we had the sanctions on them.”

Ungar-Sargon contrasted the current policy approach with past U.S. actions, calling it more “mature” and limited, without deployment of U.S. ground forces.

“So the President is creating governments that are, it’s not full fledged Bush era regime change. I mean, you can look at Dulce Rodriguez and see he didn’t do that in Venezuela, they’re playing a much more mature, limited game, no boots on the ground.”

Ungar-Sargon also questioned Iran’s ability to sustain pressure on the United States over an extended period.

“Honestly, I just don’t see how Iran can even afford to keep this up for the four weeks the President has said it’s going to take.”

She said similar pressures are affecting Russia and China, and noted what she described as a lack of substantial support from those countries for Iran in the current situation.

“And I think the same thing with Russia and China. It’s amazing that neither Russia nor China has lifted a finger to help Iran. You had a phone call between the Chinese and Sergey Lavrov, where they all, you know, they rattled the saber. They said, This is terrible. This is terrible. But they haven’t done anything. Nobody can afford it, and they can’t afford to take on this President.”

WATCH:

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Objectivist. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.