The Problems With Donald Trump’s Foreign Policies

 

With Ted Cruz and John Kasich out of the Republican nomination race, a Trump presidency is looking increasingly likely. Many of Trump’s foreign policy proposals shocked both the American foreign policy establishment and foreign officials.[1] It is predicted that Trump’s policy proposals would be bad not only for the United States, but for international peace in general. Aside from Trump’s famous wall that would antagonize Mexico, Trump also had given indication that he would be tougher on America’s allies and “enemies” alike. Trump’s other pillar of foreign policy, his plans for American economy, encourages protectionism and throw up walls, both literal and legal, to international trade. If Trump somehow forces his policies through, the established system of international alliances and trade networks would be thrown into disarray, and the international situation would likely become worse for everyone.

One of the pillars of Trump’s foreign policy that most worried foreign policy experts is Trump’s security policies. Trump has a penchant for ultimatums. Attacking the Democrats, Trump claimed that under Obama, America’s allies have come to expect America to be forgiving and therefore they have no will to fulfill their obligations. Trump applied a similar argument towards America’s enemies, especially Iran.[2] Trump argued that in negotiations with Iran, the U.S. should have given Iran a “take it or leave it” ultimatum and shut down negotiations if Iran did not agree to everything.[3] Trump claimed he would do the same to America’s allies, to make them understand what America is doing for them and is prepared to abandon the said allies if they do not fulfill their obligations, as defined by Trump.[4] Needless to say, if Donald Trump tries to impose his views on the world with a similar attitude to George Bush’s “with us or against us”, the result would certainly be similarly disastrous. It is conceivable that the Western European countries such as Germany would be further alienated by American arrogance. Ongoing negotiations would fall apart because Trump would exclusively rely on ultimatums rather than actually negotiate. If Trump really carried out his threats, it can seriously undermine the ability of nations of the world to gather together and solve problems.

Compounding the issue is what Donald Trump thinks how other states would respond to him, and what the reality actually is. In interviews and speeches, Trump has complained numerous times that he believe that American allies are not “pulling their weight”. In one instance, Trump claimed that the U.S. had done more for Ukraine than all the other countries nearby combined. In another instance, Trump claimed that America is spending billions of dollars subsidizing countries that are wealthier, specifically naming Germany, Saudi Arabia, Japan, and South Korea.[5] Perhaps even more absurdly, in an effort to justify America’s spying on its allies, Trump claimed that America’s allies, such as Germany, are similarly spying on the U.S.[6] Many of Trump’s statements mischaracterize the international situation. Saudi Arabia and South Korea certainly exceeded the 2% GDP spending on their military that Trump likes to harp about. Allies are often more than about the money they spend on their militaries. They often contribute to America’s foreign adventures with monetary support, aiding post-war occupation, and assist in anti-terrorist operations, especially in intelligence sharing. Most importantly, America’s allies lend legitimacy to America’s international endeavors by publically supporting the U.S. Yet for Donald Trump, the only relevant support is military spending, and everyone is ripping off the United States. For instance, Trump demanded Japan to pay 100% of the cost of the American forces stationed in the country, although Japan is already paying 50% in addition to its own military. Trump’s claime that no one else other than the U.S. cared about the conflict in Ukraine,[7] which is definitely not true. Trump’s perception of “injustices” towards the U.S. would undermine trust between some of the world’s most important states. Its overemphasis on militarization also increases tensions in the world, as other forms of cooperation and contribution are closed off.

Likewise, Trump’s reading of America’s adversaries also misaligns with reality. Trump’s policies are likely to make the world a more dangerous place. Trump believes that he can coerce Russia through American military buildup and negotiate from a position of strength.[8] This was also the position that American presidents such as Eisenhower and Reagan had adopted. Yet repeatedly, the commitment to negotiation from strength only resulted in further arms race until the Soviet Union collapsed from its own economic shortcomings. Trump also indicated that he would use financial and economic means to confront China, and China would simply bow to his economic pressures.[9] Given the past history of generally ineffective military and economic coercion towards these states, there is no reason to believe both Russia and China would give into Trump’s demand now. It is more likely that Russia and China would respond to Trump’s challenge by increasing their own military spending and diversify their trade partners. Trump’s misplaced confidence in America’s ability to coerce friends and foes alike seems to have stemmed from his misreading of the Cold War. Trump apparently believe the Cold War ended because American pressure led to the downfall of the Soviet Union.[10] In reality, the fall of the Soviet Union is much more complex than merely “Republicans and Democrats united”. Trump’s dangerous misjudgment of the international situation, believing that everything will fall into place with more pressure and more force, would estrange the U.S. from its allies while plunging the world into a new arms race as well as trade war.

The second pillar of Trump’s foreign policy, his promised economic policies, is also full of problems. Trump already has his famous wall with Mexico and his proposed 40% tariff against China. Numerous times, Trump has promised to bring jobs to America through restricting foreign trade.[11] The problem with this approach is that it creates jobs in the U.S. at the expense of competitiveness. The American economy effectively becomes a captive market, as competition become restricted to a few designated “American” firms. Most likely, America would see a period of inflation and falling living standards as goods become more expensive. While import substitution works in some circumstances, these circumstances tends to be restricted to developing countries that are trying to create their own industry and move beyond exporting raw materials.[12] When protected for too long, as in the case of Latin America, India, or the USSR, these industries become liabilities rather than assets. Instead of trying to bring jobs to the United States by trying to stimulate innovation and competitiveness, Trump instead wants to create jobs by restricting competition. What it would accomplish would be the regression of the American economy as it produces for a captive market. It would reoriented towards producing labour intensive, sweatshop produced cheap goods, rather than high quality, technology intensive goods an advanced economy should be producing.

Trump’s protectionist measures would also have adverse effect on the world economy. Protectionism and trade wars naturally decreases international trade, resulting in fall in international economy. During the initial stages of the Great Depression, all the industrialized countries tried to prioritize their own economy by throwing up tariff walls and artificially depreciate their currencies. The resulting depression lasted a decade, and caused dictatorships including those in Germany, Italy, and Japan to replace democracies, eventually leading to WWII. After WWII, international agencies such as IMF, World Bank, and GATT were set up to prevent a repeat of the experience. If, as Trump claims he want, tears up trade agreements and start throwing up tariff barriers, it sets up a bad precedent with other nations following suit. The result would be a slowing of international trade and slowdown of the global economy. This situation would ultimately benefit no one, as the 1930s demonstrated.

Many of Trump’s international positions are untenable and threatens international stability.  In the realm of security, Trump’s ultimatum and the take-it-or-leave-it approach is bound to alienate friends and foes alike. It is not conductive towards diplomacy, instead turning international relations into a dangerous game of “Chicken” to see who blink first. Economically, the worst case scenario Trump’s economic nationalism would see a repeat of the trade wars and economic collapses of the 1930s. There is always the chance that what Trump says is merely campaign language, and he would not carry out most of his radical proposals. Nevertheless Trump’s bombastic style has already made many foreign leaders nervous about American credibility and dependability. America certainly needs to revaluate its past policies given the current circumstances, but many of Trump’s proposals would either violate international laws or are going to be counterproductive towards world peace or restoring American reputation.

 

Bibliography

 

Bresser-Pereira, Luiz C., Jose L. Oreiro, and Nelson Marconi. Developmental Macroeconomics: New Developmentalism as a Growth Strategy [in English].  Abingdon: Routledge, 2015.

Kay, Katty. “Us Election 2016: The Trump Protectionist Party.”  BBC News (2016). Published electronically 24.05.2016. //www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35836102.

Sanger, David E., and Jim Yardley. “In Donald Trump’s Rise, Allies See New American Approach.” The New York Times, 05.05.2016 2016.

Trump, Donald. “A Transcript of Donald Trump’s Meeting with the Washington Post Editorial Board.” By Frederick JR Ryan, Fred Hiatt, Stephen Stromberg and Jo-Ann Armao (21.03.2016 2016).

———. “Donald J. Trump Foreign Policy Speech.” Trump, Donald J., https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-foreign-policy-speech.

———. “Transcript: Donald Trump Expounds on His Foreign Policy Views.” By Maggie Haberman and David Sanger (26.03.2016 2016).

“Trump Urges Japan to Pay More to Maintain U.S. Military Bases Here.” The Japan Times, 05.05.2016 2016.

 

[1] David E. Sanger and Jim Yardley, “In Donald Trump’s Rise, Allies See New American Approach,” The New York Times, 05.05.2016 2016.

[2] Donald Trump, “Donald J. Trump Foreign Policy Speech,” Trump, Donald J., https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-foreign-policy-speech.

[3] interview by Frederick JR Ryan, et al., 21.03.2016, 2016, Washington DC.

[4] “Trump Urges Japan to Pay More to Maintain U.S. Military Bases Here,” The Japan Times, 05.05.2016 2016.

[5] Trump.

[6] Donald Trump, interview by Maggie Haberman and David Sanger, 26.03.2016, 2016, New York.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Trump, “Donald J. Trump Foreign Policy Speech.”

[9]

[10] Trump, “Donald J. Trump Foreign Policy Speech.”

[11] Katty Kay, “Us Election 2016: The Trump Protectionist Party,”  BBC News (2016), //www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35836102.

[12] Luiz C. Bresser-Pereira, Jose L. Oreiro, and Nelson Marconi, Developmental Macroeconomics: New Developmentalism as a Growth Strategy (Abingdon: Routledge, 2015).

Hanyu Huang

Related