 "Trump 2.0: What it means for India and the world")
US President-elect Donald Trump is no doubt an unorthodox politician. It would not matter much if the US were not a globally pre-eminent power and whose views and positions had little impact on the world. But the US is the world’s foremost economic and military power, it intervenes militarily abroad liberally in pursuit of its interests as it sees them and has numerous military bases across the globe which gives a huge reach to its power. It dominates the global financial system and uses sanctions as a tool to punish countries at will. A maverick US president who is unpredictable in his conduct therefore poses a major challenge to the international community.
Trump’s first presidency had already rocked many boats. The Transatlantic Alliance has been the pillar of the West’s post-war hegemony notwithstanding the loss of their colonial possessions by European powers. Trump questioned the continued relevance of NATO, believing that the Europeans were exploiting the US by placing upon it the principal burden of providing them security. He summoned the Europeans to raise their defence budgets, a demand to which the Europeans have been responsive.
He came across as anti-EU to the point of openly backing Brexit. His views on engaging Russia, seen by the previous US administrations and Europe as a continuing major security threat to the West, caused dismay in Europe. He walked out of the Paris climate change agreement, the Iran nuclear deal, the WHO as well as the UNESCO. He disregarded UN resolutions on the Palestine issue by shifting the US embassy to Jerusalem and turning his back on the Palestinian Authority.
He was seen by Europe as a right-wing nationalist, disinterested in pursuing a values-based foreign policy centred on democracy and human rights as political tools to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries and promoting regime changes. He was seen by his allies and others as “transactional”. No wonder the Europeans felt unsettled by his policies and personality, to the point of affirming that they and Trump’s America no longer shared the same values.
Impact Shorts
More ShortsTrump’s slogan “Make America Great Again” was seen as an inward-looking streak, a rejection of globalisation, and protectionism in trade. His administration undermined the WTO and used tariffs to extract concessions, etc.
During his election campaign, Trump made it clear that he would negotiate with Russia and seek a quick end to the conflict in Ukraine, causing immense anxiety in Europe.
All this explains why the Europeans, with the exception of Hungary, rooted for a Democratic win in the presidential election and were aghast at the idea of a Trump win. The UK’s Labour Party also favoured a Kamala Harris win. The blistering attack on Trump by the current UK foreign minister when he was in the opposition is no doubt a source of embarrassment for the British. The US Vice-President Vance has already derided the UK as the first Islamic state in Europe.
Now that Trump has been re-elected, Europe will face a particular challenge in terms of compatibility of values. Trump is aggressively anti-woke, he abhors the DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) as an organisational framework, rejects transgenders, has announced that he will remove all transgenders for the US armed forces, is strongly opposed to gender affirming surgeries, has strong anti-immigration views, and so on.
In the lead-up to his taking charge as president, Trump has been brutal with some of his allies and partners. He has always disliked Trudeau, and that antipathy has been expressed cruelly by calling him the Governor of Canada and inviting Canada to become the 51st state of the US, as that would provide the country full security, ease its internal tax burden, and so on. He has continued this personal humiliation of Trudeau by referring to him as the Governor of Canada and inviting him again to make Canada the 51st state of the US in his somewhat bizarre Christmas message.
He has announced his intention to impose a 25 per cent tariff on Canadian and Mexican exports to the US — and this in violation of the revised NAFTA agreement that he had already forced on these two countries during his first presidency — if he did not obtain cooperation from the two countries on illegal immigration and on controlling the flow of the drug fentanyl into the US.
In an earlier statement, Trump had made claim to the Panama Canal built by the US 110 years ago, which was strongly rejected by the President of Panama. In a most unusual Christmas message, Trump has reiterated his complaint about China illegally operating the US-built canal and the US expending billions in repairs but excluded from any say in operating it. The implied threat to Panama’s exclusive ownership of the canal has been repeated.
In his first term, Trump had voiced his desire to own Greenland. In his Christmas message, which should have been that of peace and harmony and not territorial ambitions, Trump lays claim to Greenland, which he argues is needed by the US for national security purposes and that this will be realised in accordance with the wishes of the people of Greenland.
On China, his messaging has been confusing. He had earlier threatened China with 100 per cent tariffs on its exports to the US. In November, he announced his intention to impose an additional 10 per cent tariffs on China (along with additional 25 per cent tariffs on Mexico and Canada), as part of his first Executive Orders when he takes office on January 20, 2025. He has also announced his intention to continue providing arms to Taiwan.
At the same time, he has extolled Xi Jinping as China’s leader, calling him an “amazing person” and observed in mid-December that there was no global problem that the US and China cannot solve together. Is Trump conscious of the fact that such a statement can be misconstrued as US’s willingness to explore a G2 consensus with China?
He has extended an invitation to the Chinese president to attend his inauguration, when there is no precedent of a foreign leader attending the ceremony. That the Chinese president would at all be willing to be present at the inauguration when Trump has surrounded himself with China hawks, and when Xi Jinping is not in a position to make a deeper assessment about the challenges ahead in the US-China ties, is not something that Trump seems to have considered. Why should Xi Jinping expose himself to an embarrassing snub, when, as announced, Trump imposes, on the heels of Xi’s presence at the inauguration, increased tariffs on Chinese exports to the US as one of first administrative acts?
While Russian President Putin has expressed his readiness to listen to Trump’s proposals for a solution to the Ukraine crisis and his willingness to explore a compromise, Foreign Minister Lavrov has spelt out Russia’s position on any potential discussion with the US on Ukraine more explicitly. He has ruled out any ceasefire, as he sees such a step as merely buying time for Ukraine to recoup and to be furthered armed by NATO. Any solution has to fundamentally safeguard Russia’s security interests, which includes the eastward expansion of NATO, as well as an agreement that is so constructed that it cannot be legally violated. This would be in addition to addressing another root cause of the situation which lies in the Kiev regime’s racist policies with regard to everything Russian in Ukraine.
Trump has already announced his intention to quit the WHO. On climate change, even if he does not withdraw from the Paris Agreement again, his intention to boost oil and gas production in the US means that the US position on the climate change issues, be it financing or technology transfer, would be uncooperative. On Iran, he could follow a more aggressive approach, now that Iran has received a major strategic setback in Syria and Lebanon, and Israel has been emboldened by its successes against Hamas and Hezbollah. Israel could well enjoy full support from Trump for its doggedness on security issues.
India has to take all these dimensions of Trump’s thinking and policy approaches in forging its own responses to the challenges ahead. Trump has repeated his reproaches about India’s high tariffs and his intention to reciprocate. His good personal equation with Modi and the pro-India disposition of some of his key appointees, such as the Secretary of State, the NSA and the Director of National Intelligence, would provide us diplomatic cushions. Unlike as in the case of China or Russia, the issues in India-US ties are relatively manageable, as they are not deeply strategic and the roots of US power are not being challenged by India.
Kanwal Sibal is a former Indian Foreign Secretary. He was India’s Ambassador to Turkey, Egypt, France and Russia. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
