It is proving to be something of a bumper year for subscribers to Foreign Affairs. In January, we had a special edition on the future of the international order. In March we had a special edition on what 'Trump Time' might look like. In July, we are to have a special edition on what Trump might do in practice. In many respects, this is a reflection of the degree to which President Trump has surprised the Washington elite. In a state of shock, it is, in effect, an exercise in catch up.
The March edition contains a series of articles looking at the meaning of the Trump victory and how it may impact a number of areas of concern. The first article - The Jacksonian Revolt by Walter Russell Mead - places the Trump victory in historical context. He argues that Trump could be viewed as an American populist of the Jacksonian variety. I wonder if it is considered bad form to point out that President Jackson inhabited a very different world to President Trump? President Jackson didn't sit astride the most dominant nation on earth. There was room for American Exceptionalism then, there is less so now. Current conditions require a greater degree of responsibility from the US, which has, to date, been lacking.
This is followed by an article on 'Trump and the Economy' by John Paulson. The aim is to jump start economic growth. The method is by reducing the US corporate tax rate, adopting a territorial tax system, reducing red tape, boosting energy production, and attaining better trade policies. Mr Paulson claims that this will double the growth of US GDP. I doubt it very much. The US is suffering from a deficiency in aggregate demand, and there is very little in this plan to boost that. The argument rests on a belief that, by increasing corporate profitability, corporate investment will take off. This is unlikely unless there is a way to put more money into the pockets of those with a high propensity to spend (economist-speak for poor people). I was unconvinced by this short article and still retain the view that Trump will do more harm than good to the American economy.
There then followed a pair of articles on 'Trump and Russia' (by Messrs Rumer, Sokolsky, and Weiss) followed by one on 'Trump and China' (by Susan Shirk). I see these as the two key relationships of Trump's presidency. We started the presidency with Trump accommodating Russia and confronting China. I still see this as a default position, but I do believe that the story has become more nuanced as time has worn on. Obviously, the role of Russia in the presidential election, if any, will have an impact on how things play out. Both articles set out a programme for better relations between the US, Russia, and China. I remain to be convinced of this.
There then followed three articles (Trump and Terrorism, Trump and the Holy Land, and Trump and North Korea) which we may safely discount. The set of articles finishes with 'Trump and the World Order' by Stewart Patrick. This really does have my attention. It starts to flesh out the process by which a policy of offshore balancing could be achieved. It hints at which nations could be left to look after themselves and speculates upon how a power vacuum might be filled. The irony that America is walking away from a world order that was created in it's own image seems to be lost on the author. If it does happen, then the world will become a more dangerous place.
Not part of the collection on Trump, but well worth mentioning, are two more articles. There is 'How America Lost Faith in Expertise' by Tom Nichols, which charts the disconnect between many ordinary Americans and the governing elites. Also, there is 'The Dignity Deficit' by Arthur Brooks, which considers how the governing elites could reconnect with ordinary Americans. In the context of the rise of a Trump styled Jacksonian populism, I wouldn't hold too much hope for this re-acquaintance.
Looking at the body as a whole, it does provide a great deal to think about. I have to admit that I see Trump's economic plans as having very little chance of success. If he pursues them aggressively, then he risks confronting both Russia and China at the same time. This has the potential not to end well for us all. Of course, there is the possibility that President Trump is an undiscovered genius and that he will herald a renaissance in American fortunes. Time will tell.
A far more interesting exercise would be to consider what would happen if Trump fails. Could the US head towards a more extreme populism? Could it become a failed state? Or could the nation pull together to present a more unified front to the world? For my part, I can fully understand the panic now being experienced by the Washington elite because, if Trump fails, I see things becoming more extreme rather than less. All I can say is that the American elite has brought it upon themselves.
Stephen Aguilar-Millan
© The European Futures Observatory 2017
No comments:
Post a Comment