If you think that we live in a zero-sum world and conflict is inevitable, then President Trump's willingness to end Pax Americana is completely rational. By Pax Americana I mean the liberal order constructed around American hegemony with its rule-governed network of military, financial, energy, and trade security system(s) developed from the middle of twentieth century onward. In this order, America shouldered many military and financial costs in excess of other states in order to have no military and political rival, and to benefit economically from economies of scale, lowered transaction costs, and reserve currency. Along the way, it could rely on its cultural and standard setting soft-power in lots of intangible ways. In this ordered world the US was the indispensable nation (and de facto the only site of true politics), and its international standing was a consequence of its ability to enforce international law and its clear symbolic willingness to abide by it (largely--the exceptions are non-trivial, but about that some other time more).
It is very clear that President Trump has decided to undo Pax Americana. Both as a candidate and as a President he has worked to undermine NATO and the security guarantees it provides. By removing the US (from the otherwise fairly pathetic) Paris Accords, Trump has announced that the old rules do not apply anymore. It's America First, as he says.
Throughout the US Presidential election campaign I argued that the vision conveyed by Trump is completely rational if you assume the world is zero-sum (e.g., recall, here, and here). In a zero-sum world, many people who fear they may be on the losing side in the future want a crooked/bullying/unprincipled leader to be on their side. They know that they risk betrayal, but better risk of betrayal than sure loss. Moreover, because Trump's virulent nationalism and racism is authentic, the odds of betrayal for some of his partisans is rather low.
Now, it is entirely foreseeable that if climate change is not brought under control, we can expect, even without an increased population, more conflict over scarce resources (water, arable and habitable land above sea-level, food, energy, etc.). It is arguable that the Arab Spring was, in part, caused by conflict over rising food prices. (While it is possible that technological breakthroughs can generate cheap food supply.) So, the departure from Paris will only enhance the risk of more such structural conflicts and symbolically facilitates loss of mutual trust.
But more conflicts and loss of mutual trust undermine the remnants of the liberal order. It will only reinforce the ethno-nationalist-better-to-have-a-bully on our side dynamic that brought Trump to power. Moreover, such a dynamic will facilitate the transformation of Pax Americana into a security state in which family based crony capitalism rules. This will be a world of high profits for those with the right sort of connections (that's a world that already exists in China, Russia, etc.). There will be lots of conflict around the globe, but because the US has overwhelming power, for it these will be ongoing low level conflicts (in which it can choose to participate or not) that justify a permanent war-footing and security state. These are not bugs, but features of the new world order that is being inaugurated.
I close with two disclaimers. This post does not endorse President Trump's actions. Second it does not rely on any claims about Trump-the-person's intentions. Donald Trump instinctively understands the zero-sum world I sketch and his actions show that he is very comfortable in it. I am not claiming that he has some grand strategy, but I think the folk around him do. Having said that, his critics (people like me) systematically underestimate him. He destroyed a truly talented and well-funded group of Republican politicians, and he beat a candidate who ran a better campaign and who had played by the old rules. And while I think it is very possible that he will self-destruct in power, I increasingly believe that by the time he has does so, the forces he has put into motion will be near-unstoppable.
"Moreover, such a dynamic will facilitate the transformation of Pax Americana into a security state in which family based crony capitalism rules. This will be a world of high profits for those with the right sort of connections (that's a world that already exists in China, Russia, etc.). "
It seems fair to say that this is the world the president already lives in, which makes his apparent fondness for such states more understandable. But I'm curious, how far off is American capitalism from the sort of crony capitalism you describe? The Trumps and Kushners are not, sadly, new phenomena, and perhaps the real estate world is different than others, but I'd be curious to see how much truth there is in that.
Posted by: Michael Mirer | 06/03/2017 at 12:19 AM
"a truly talented and well-funded group of Republican politicians": is there anything he has done that any other member of this pool would not have done?
Posted by: David Duffy | 06/03/2017 at 12:47 AM