Jacek Rostowski
Jacek Rostowski was Poland’s Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister from 2007 to 2013.
WARSAW
– In the weeks since Donald Trump’s inauguration as President of the
United States, it has become clear that he intends to roll back the
progressive-egalitarian agenda that is commonly associated with
“political correctness” to the starting block – not just in the United
States, but globally. Stephen Bannon, Trump’s White House Svengali and
former CEO of the extreme right Breitbart News, has long pursued
this ideological project, and we now know that what he or Trump says
must be taken both seriously and literally.
Trump’s transition
was initially reassuring, because he nominated many undeniably serious
(if also seriously well-heeled) people to his cabinet. But, after the
inauguration, all hell broke loose as Trump and Bannon began to
implement their project in earnest.
First, Trump
appointed Bannon to the National Security Council’s highest body, the
principals committee. Then he nominated Ted Malloch, an obscure business
studies professor at the University of Reading, in England, as US
Ambassador to the European Union. Malloch recently expressed a desire to
“short the euro,” and predicted that the currency will not survive
another 18 months. Trump has also increased the likelihood of a trade
war with Mexico, and he has been willing to confront major US
corporations over his executive order banning travelers from seven
Muslim-majority countries.
The ideological
project that Trump and Bannon will seek to carry out could have
far-reaching geopolitical and economic implications that should worry
not only progressives, but also dyed-in-the-wool conservatives like me.
To understand how far they are willing to go, one must understand their
ultimate aims.
Most disturbingly,
Trump and Bannon’s agenda seems likely to entail policies to weaken,
destabilize, or even ultimately dismantle the EU. No motive other than
ideology can explain Trump’s open hostility to the bloc, his bizarre
ambassadorial appointment, or his notorious question to EU President
Donald Tusk: “What country is next to leave?”
In conventional
geostrategic terms, the EU is almost a costless extension of US
political and military power. Owing to NATO’s significant military
superiority, and the EU’s role as a barrier to Russian expansion, the US
can avoid becoming entangled in a “hot war” with Russia. Meanwhile, the
EU – together with Japan – is a dependable economic and military ally,
whose friendship allows the US to speak for the “international
community.”
There are no
circumstances in which dismantling the Western international order is in
America’s national interest – even when perceived through a nationalist
lens. A truly “America first” administration would rightly expect its
allies to pull their weight within NATO, and to defer to US foreign
policies on non-European issues. But it would never gratuitously
dismantle an essentially free multiplier of US power, as Trump’s foreign
policy threatens to do.
If I am right about
Trump and Bannon’s ideological agenda, we can expect them to find a way
to support far-right National Front leader Marine Le Pen in the French
presidential election this year, and to encourage a “hard Brexit” for
the United Kingdom (only to leave it in the lurch afterwards). Trump
will also likely lift the sanctions that the US imposed on Russia after
its 2014 annexation of Crimea. After all, Russian President Vladimir
Putin and Bannon are ideological twins.
Moreover, we should
not put much stock in any security assurances that Secretary of Defense
James Mattis may have offered to South Korea and Japan during his East
Asia trip. Such promises are worth as little as Trump’s pledge to Polish
President Andrzej Duda that “Poland can count on America.”
Domestically,
Americans should be prepared to watch the administration dismiss
officials who do not defend its agenda, and disregard court orders that
inhibit its actions. In fact, we have already seen early signs of this
when complaints emerged that immigration agents in New York were
ignoring a federal judge’s emergency stay on Trump’s travel ban.
The prospects for
business are just as sobering. Sooner or later, Trump’s destabilizing
foreign policy will lead to global economic turbulence, uncertainty, and
reduced investment – even barring full-scale trade wars. And
domestically, his weakening of the rule of law will negate any potential
economic benefits from tax cuts and deregulation.
Implementing this
project is undoubtedly a dangerous strategy for Trump. By polarizing the
American public to such an extent, he and the Republicans could suffer
defeat in the 2018 midterm elections or in the 2020 presidential
election; and he could even expose himself to the risk of impeachment.
There are two
possible explanations for why Trump would take these risks. The first is
that divisiveness has worked for him so far, by winning him the
Republican nomination and the presidency. Politicians tend to stick with
what works – until it fails.
The second
explanation is that Bannon is calling the political shots, and is more
interested in building a permanent populist “movement” than he is in
getting Trump reelected. If Bannon wants to transform the American
political landscape, an impeached or defeated Trump could become an
ideal martyr for his movement.
That may not bode
well for Trump himself; but, in this scenario, Trump’s fate will not
weigh heavily on Bannon, who has set his sights on achieving goals that
will leave America and the world very different from how he and his
putative boss found them.
No comments:
Post a Comment