So, what is the world (read American allies) to do to ‘deal with’ Donald Trump’s America First foreign policy? The ‘nagging teller of truth’, The Economist Magazine of London has an answer (typically). The London based newspaper avers that Americas allies - mostly European and to some extent in Asia - must inject ‘chokepoints’ in America’s ‘superpower stack’.
Given that postmodern Europeans lack hard power, The Economist enjoins them to use their leverage in the chip production value chain, global shipping and insurance, the SWIFT global payments system (based in Belgium), the Five Eyes espionage system, commodity trades and so on.
The aim, it would appear, is not so much to break the ‘transatlantic alliance’ but to develop frisson with Donald Trump’s America (but only up to a point) to salvage the ‘post war liberal international order), by making the 47th president of the US blink. In the parlance and terminology of International Relations, the Economist is suggesting ‘balancing albeit of a soft nature’ against an ally (ironies abound in the world!!).
In the meantime, The Economist hopes that the use of debt by Europeans (especially Germans) will release both the funds and stasis necessary for re-armament of the continent (if only irony could speak!).
There are obvious issues with The Economist’s suggestions and prescriptions. But if the ‘Eurocrat Ursula Von der Leyen’s newfound zeal, activism and (re)purpose in life is taken as a proxy for The Economist’s prescriptions, (who Russian Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov recently lampooned and mocked as ‘Fuhrer Ursula is re-arming’), then it would appear that US president Donald Trump is having his way.
How?
A defining element of President Trump’s MAGA vision is, by putting America first, for America’s allies to ‘burden share’, not piggyback and free ride off America, and so on. If Europe rearms, Donald Trump scores a coup. But European re-armament is full of pitfalls: the first is the very nature of the European construct (the EU).
A key component of the EU was to hem in Germany and France (or core Europe. The rest of Europe, save Benelux countries, are wannabe Europeans) - whose historical rivalry has been the bane of Europe. If and when Europe rearms, what is to prevent the recrudescence of this historical rivalry.
If one may take recourse to reasonable speculation, cannot Emmanuel Macron to bolster his flagging fortunes and to take France out of some of its self-made morass be tempted to don the mantle of modern-day Napoleon? If this hypothetical comes to pass, would not the dormant Bismarckian instincts of Germany be roused? And again, an iffy proposition, if these scenarios come to pass, bang goes the European Union.
In these schemata, the renewed life purpose of Ursula Von der Leyen may merely correspond to puffing (or egging) up this Eurocrat to spend more on defense, rearm (with the opportunity cost of this spending showing in, say the welfare state of Europe – another defining feature of the continent).
Surely not a rhetorical question, would this not mean and imply a rehash of the US’ and its allies cold war policy of containment – a prong of which was to make the former USSR overspend on defense, something that was a major contributor to its dissolution?(In this schema , is Von der Leyen being propped up as the ultimate ‘useful idiot’?
But all said and done, these are all hypotheticals which may or may not come to pass. The real question is what should Donald Trump do if ‘soft balancing’ comes to pass? One easy and facile option would be to split Europe- between ‘old’ and ‘new’ Europe- in the middle, vertically and horizontally.
There are definite and definitive faultlines in Europe that can be exploited. But this would be too Machiavellian and may have implications on the West’s cohesion. What then are Donald Trump’s options?
To pre-empt ‘soft balancing’ against the US, Donald Trump must make deft and prudent use of American power (initially in an overweening way) that makes the country the ‘indispensable nation’ (not in traditional liberal way). The rational for this policy must be to make Europeans think twice by raising the costs of soft balancing in a disproportionate way. (This may entail posturing, eyeballing and some minimalist but effective policy action).
Once this is done and the Europeans sobered, Donald Trump must wait for them to reach out to him. Post this, Trump must involve then in the crafting of a new world order where America is ‘primus inter pares’, the Europeans do their ‘proper’ burden sharing and so on.
The gravamen of this world order can be an America at the apex, but with fully developed interests that puts the country first and re-orients its international orientation that redounds to the broad and defined welfare of its people. An America defined by interests (than so called values that are stretched and redefined by armchair ideologues in consonance with their pet theories) may be better for the world at large as well.
Sobering Europeans may, however, be the easiest bit. The challenge that stares the Trump administration may be how to convert the deep uncertainty that it has ably created in world politics and international relations to enduring advantage for America.
No easy answers or solutions lend themselves here. But one prong of the approach may be, after a few months, take recourse to and imbibe what the Chinese philosopher Chuang Tze (if memory serves me right) called,’ create something out of nothing’. This would mean a multi-front pause and hiatus, say after 3-4 months in all dimensions of policy and political omissions and commissions. (This pause would keep everyone guessing).
Post this pregnant pause, team Trump can lay out policies for America and the world that have the ingress of ‘America First’ but it should be one that respects the interests of other nations in a non-zero-sum way in an idiom of realism. Normatively speaking, the larger aim should be to create a buy in by other countries and nations.
This buy in could potentially lead to what Donald Trump appears to be seeking – equilibrium in the US – which by extension would lead to equilibrium across the world.
Admittedly this is a broad-brush stroke prescription, but its application could lead to peace, stability and proportional prosperity between and among nations.
To conclude, Trump has veritably disrupted international political economy, international relations and world politics. Now may be the time to think of a pause and convert this deep uncertainty into durable advantage!
Have you liked the news article?