Populism strengthening grip over US once again

The unmistakable expressions of fascination which were written all over the faces of most attendees at the swearing-in formalities on January 20th of comeback US President Donald Trump and the roaring approval the latter drew from them at the end of almost every rhetorical sentence he uttered, told it all. Here is hard evidence that these Trump adulators are allowing their emotions to get the better of them and that they would be an uncritical, mesmerized cheer squad of their leader. The ‘Trump Magic’ was working all over again.

The world would have much to think about from now in the area of foreign policy, considering Trump’s pronouncements in relation to the latter, but as matters stand, the ordinary citizenry of the US would likely be the hardest hit from another Trump presidency.

Considering that the US economy would come in for some beating in the days ahead as a result of Trump’s cavalier trade policies, for instance, the lot of the average American could be expected to aggravate as we go along. There is unlikely to be any quick relief from nagging ‘Bread and Butter’ issues and the question could be reiterated; what’s in this second Trump tenure for the US citizen?

Moreover, the occupation of some of the most important positions in government by ‘tech giants’ and like ‘money bags’ would ensure that there would be little or no ‘trickle-down’ wealth for the average US citizen. The rich could not be expected to give much ear to the wailings of ordinary people, since their sole fixation is financial empire-building and it could not be otherwise; ‘Social condition determines consciousness.’

Issues of equal magnitude emerge from the arena of domestic politics. Within minutes of taking the top job, Trump stands accused of subverting the US Constitution and of unreservedly taking the US in the direction once again of a populist, rightist and repressive state which is least sensitive to the principles of democratic governance.

For example, the Rule of Law has been grossly violated by the US President’s decision to pardon the rightist rabble who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 and made a mockery of the democratic process.

Among Trump’s virtual avalanche of executive orders are moves to nullify the former administration’s measures relating to climate mitigation, equity and minority concerns, for instance, which hitherto have testified to the US’ commitments of a democratic nature.

The question arises; did Trump’s rank-and-file supporters bargain for such costly compromises and betrayals of the democratic ethos when they voted for him? Moreover, they would need to consider that the US was nowhere near being the unchallenged ‘first’ during Trump’s first term. They could be accused of wild wishful thinking if they entertain the idea that the US will be the pre-eminent ‘first’ under Trump in this his comeback tenure.

However, such is the stuff of populist governance. The leader appeals to the gut emotions of his supporters and rallies them to consolidate his power. But whether these diehards would in any respect be individually empowered is an open question.

Moreover, such emotional appeals could result in further erosions of law and order and the Rule of Law. For example, Trump’s claim that ‘very soon we will begin the largest deportation exercise in US history’ could steadily aggravate antagonisms between the white majority and the US’ minorities, resulting in stepped-up racial discord and violence. Race relations could come to be characterized by increasing intolerance and hatred, which situation would be in no-one’s interest.

The depth of the gullibility of Trump’s support base could be gauged also from the fact that it has fallen for his rhetoric on international relations despite some hard realities staring it in the face. For instance, it ought to be plain to see that most of the powers the President is threatening to confront on a number of questions are no ‘push overs’.

On the Western front, the rest of the G7 states and NATO, for instance, could be counted on to defy Trump on issues relating to the Ukraine and the Middle East. These countries are unlikely to see eye-to-eye with the US President on the matter of arming Ukraine and on containing the influence of Russia in Eastern Europe. Thus far, they have been, broadly, for continuing to arm Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression and expansionist designs and on this policy it is difficult to see the rest of West caving-in, as it were, to US demands.

Nor would the EU look on tamely as the US President seeks to exercise his suzerainty over the world and tries to establish a single world order, fashioned basically in the US’ image. Any confrontations with the rest of the West would prove very bruising for the US, considering the economic, military and political power wielded by the former.

International relations have been increasing in complexity over the decades and it would smack of simple-mindedness for any substantial power to forget this fact. It calls for foreign policy sagacity of the first order for even the foremost powers to navigate the current ‘world disorder.’ Such navigation was not easy for Trump during his first tenure and it would be no different this time around as well. It would not be a case of the US riding rough-shod over the rest of the powers that matter.

A species of foreign policy myopia is prompting President Trump to be focused primarily on his backyard and the West at present. His rhetoric on annexing Canada and buying Greenland, for example, could have been music in the ears of his followers in the run-up to the US presidential poll but these aims would be difficult to achieve, given that the rest of the world’s powers are unlikely to stand idly by when any attempts are made to turn these dreams into reality.

Trump misses out badly on also the complexities of the Eastern hemisphere. He would have to deal very delicately with ASEAN, considering that it remains the ‘economic powerhouse’ of the world. The US would be challenged to ‘give’ to ASEAN in economic terms inasmuch as the US ‘receives’ from it. Once again, simplistic thinking is inapplicable.

Likewise, China and India also call for perceptive foreign policy thinking. If the US deals roughly with China in the trade field, for instance, it should be prepared for like retaliatory measures from China, given its economic importance for the world.

The same applies to India. Going forward, the US would find in India a strong contender in science and technology and the economic fields. It too would be no easy ‘pushover’. India, for example, is virtually breathing down the neck, so to speak, of the US in space exploration.

Accordingly, Trump rhetoric is currently palatable for only some simple-minded domestic sections. Given the complex realties of the present ‘world disorder’, the Trump administration would do well to be prepared to deal with creeping disenchantment among its diehard domestic supporters.