The results of the US elections held last week have produced both relief and shock in equal measure.
The world at large and the Americans in particular are relieved that even if the outcome was largely unexpected, it was unambiguous, decisive and uncontested. This belied many foreboding predictions. There was a clear swing towards the hard right, with the Republican Party making major gains. Donald Trump, its candidate, defied all odds to win the Presidency. The Republicans expanded their control of the Senate and are poised for a majority in the House of Representatives as well. Factoring in the right-leaning Supreme Court and Federal Reserve under pressure to ease its ‘tight money’ policy—the GOP has never had it this good for a long time.
A Rude Shock For All
On the other hand, the “winner taking it all” outcome was a rude surprise not only for the defeated Democrats but also for the psephologists and the mainstream media, who predicted a victory for Kamala Harris and a greater countervailing balance in Congress. Few expected a massive popular endorsement of Mr Trump, a populist with controversial views often bordering on unsubstantiated extremism. To many, the outcome raised questions about the maturity of the electorate and fidelity to the electoral process itself. Despite a booming economy, low inflation and low unemployment, the American voter succumbed to clever manipulation of popular perceptions with pet popular peeves about immigration, globalisation and personal economics being weaponised. For many, this was not an outcome the US deserved.
But now that this is a fait accompli, the larger question that needs to be answered is: How will this binary split play out during the incoming Trump Presidency? A lot would depend on whether Trump 2.0 would hark back to Trump 1.0 or whether the experiences of being the 45th President have been internalised for the 47th Presidency. This requires a granular analysis to discern the likely course of Trump 2.0.
An Unapologetic Trump
To begin with, some basic observations are in order. Firstly, when the 78-year-old person concerned is not only unapologetic but triumphant about his past term, it raises some pertinent issues about his plans for the future in a vastly different context. Most of the catchy electoral promises made by candidate Trump were bare-bone intentions without precise targets. Similarly, many of the policy priorities articulated during the campaign intersect domestic and foreign affairs. Some of the planned and pre-announced quick fixes for the beginning of Trump 2.0 may open new Pandora’s boxes. Further, given the unpredictability and transactional inconsistencies seen in Trump 1.0—from building an anti-immigrant wall on the southern border to the Summits with Kim Jong Un—were infructuous and were quietly abandoned. It cast doubts about keeping the new promises. Lastly, the bitter polarisation and name-calling of Trump 1.0 is a legacy that may haunt Trump 2.0. All these tactical complexities and shifts presage a pattern making Trump 2.0 invariably joined at the hip with Trump 1.0.
Pardons To MAGA To Immigration, A Domestic Roller-Coaster
Opening overtures of Trump 2.0 are likely to be dominated by domestic agenda. It’s partly because his support base expects it and also because he has greater authority to do so. Firing inconvenient officials and presidential pardons, etc, are likely to be in the first flush. It may follow some measures at score-settling with “the enemies within” even as the bite may be less than the bark. He would find ways to flesh out his catchphrases such as “America First” and “Make America Great Again”. Stopping illegal immigration and deporting those who have already done so would be a priority, even as some of these measures may be legally questionable.
On the economic side, Trump 2.0 may prune welfare spending and have a smaller government to balance with the promised lowering of taxes. Other intended moves such as high tariffs on imports and “Drill, Baby, Drill” may have collateral consequences in terms of trade wars, higher inflation, further demonise the “big oil”, environmental damage and lower export revenues. Rewarding Elon Musk and other corporate friends may lead to allegations of crony capitalism. The US political system does grant the President a high degree of impunity and the political context at the Congress and Supreme Court may be salubrious. Nevertheless, Mr Trump comes with the baggage of having been impeached twice and has the dubious distinction of being the first US President found guilty of 34 felony counts. His penchant for leaving a positive legacy is likely to restrain him.
The World Has Changed—For Trump, Too
In the foreign policy domain, President Trump would discover that the international context has turned far more complicated and nuanced. Despite bragging about his foreign policy accomplishments, Trump 1.0 was scarred by failed tactical initiatives, such as a deal with the Taliban, mollycoddling autocrats, reneging on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, antagonising longstanding partners, undermining multilateral architecture, etc. No wonder most partners reacted cautiously to the Trump victory. Even the ruling British Labour Party, for instance, had to painfully ruminate over the serious pejoratives it used to describe Trump 1.0. The rightist fringes in Europe and Israel have warmly welcomed his re-ascendence. The countries demonised during Trump 1.0, such as China, and Iran, reacted with predictable defiance.
The reactions to his elections were a foretaste of the kind of difficulties Trump 2.0 is likely to face as his ambitious agenda. While the US remains the world’s primordial superpower, her hard and soft powers are significantly lower now, making unilateral pursuit of a wish list more difficult, particularly as he promises to avoid military engagements abroad. Trump 1.0 diplomacy was more about treating the symptoms than the disease. Living in denial was an often-exercised option on softer global issues such as climate change and disarmament. These tactical approaches merely kicked the can down the road, making the hotspots more numerous, more entrenched and intractable as evinced in the South China Sea, the Urals and the Middle East. Further, the cynical transactional approaches of Trump 1.0 lacked moral underpinnings, often reducing them to exercises in cynical manipulations and/or arm-twisting. More dangerously, it often allowed Trump’s interlocutors to pander to flattery or deception to get their goals.
‘A Man Deserves A Second Chance, But…’
The US under Trump 2.0 has two divergent options: isolationism and living in denial and inverted snobbery, or getting down from the moral horse and engaging either singly or through the same multilateral institutions that were often disfranchised during Trump 1.0. If Trump 2.0 intends to go beyond the palliatives deals and resolve the stubborn global crises, it would need to reinvent and realign itself with the new realities of the China-Russia nexus, more assertive middle-rung countries, including India, Brazil, Mexico, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, France, Germany, etc. Even traditional partners such as the UK, Japan, Australia, and Israel need to be courted afresh.
With his disregard for conventions, clipped deliveries, one-liners and over-the-top High Noons too often, Trump 1.0 styled itself more as an urbane cowboy than the conventional politician. We do not know if the invocation to resonate with the WASP psyche was accidental or deliberate. As he prepares to saunter to the White House yet again, it is worthwhile to quote John Wayne, the famous Hollywood Wild West icon: “A man deserves a second chance, but keep an eye on him.”
(Mahesh Sachdev is a former Indian Ambassador. He currently heads Eco-Diplomacy and Strategies, a Delhi-based consultancy)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
