Trump’s Isolationism Will Be Next American Pitfall

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 27 June 2016
by Yawei Liu (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by William Torres. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.
In Europe, the remarkable British referendum known as Brexit has finally won. Some say the referendum came with a lot of support from the Populist Party. Nevertheless, Brexit won and England is now headed down a very uncertain road. On the other side of the Atlantic, the famous and wealthy Donald Trump applauds Brexit’s success. Is it possible that the strength of populism can be used in this year's American general election to defeat Hillary Clinton? This is presently one of America’s hottest topics. How will the headstrong Donald Trump change the United States if he comes to power?

Can Isolationism Seriously Develop in America Again?

In 1797, first U.S. President George Washington gave his farewell address, in which he provided guidance for his colleagues and fellow Americans. Washington believed that the strategy to preserve favorable conditions in America fell upon two fundamental principles that must be followed: suppression of political party struggles and maintaining a closed door foreign policy. John Adams, Washington’s successor, tried to continue Washington’s legacy, but party struggles continued to grow. These political lines solidified when Thomas Jefferson was elected and national policy with England led to the War of 1812.

In 1919, the United States responded without delay in commanding allied countries in World War I to victory. President Woodrow Wilson was determined to make World War I “the war to end all wars," and for that he was revered by that generation as a global leader. The success of Red October, which signified the rise of fascism and the global economic crisis, caused Americans to grow incredibly dissatisfied with internationalism. In response, Congress led America into a period of isolationism. It was not until 1941 when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor that the United States opened its eyes toward globalism, and from that point forward continued to take steps to becoming a global superpower.

Presently, it seems America may enter its third period of isolationism. According to many Americans, Republican Donald Trump appears to be nothing more than an inconceivably parochial nationalist. In the recent presidential primaries, Trump won a surprising number of votes and rose victorious as the presumptive Republican Party presidential candidate. Thus far, Trump has said that if he is elected he will carry out the following changes: He will impose a 45 percent tariff on Chinese imports; he will withdraw American troops from Japan and Korea; he will permit Japan to develop nuclear weapons; he will leave Europe to defend itself by seceding from NATO; he will prohibit citizens of Muslim countries from entering the United States; and he will build a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border, making the Mexican government pay for it.

Trump’s Capabilities Are Limited

If Trump becomes the next United States president by winning the election this November, and if he is not two-timing Americans by saying one thing during his election, only to do something completely different once he is in office, how will he change the national policy of a global superpower like the United States?

We must recognize that American presidents are among the world’s most powerful leaders. Although power in the American democratic system is separated among the legislative, executive and judicial branches through a system of checks and balances, the president can still propose bills, make executive orders and appoint government officials to carry out his will. For instance, Trump can use his power as president to appoint his business partners as foreign ambassadors to advocate his political views. He may also exploit his social media presence in an attempt to sway the country, as well as propose budgets to manipulate foreign policy.

But no matter how much power the constitution gives the president, Trump cannot undermine America’s desire to have a hand in major global affairs and its duty to uphold world peace. Regardless, Congress would most likely stop Trump before he could abuse his power. During Richard Nixon’s presidency, he [Nixon] secretly sent American troops to Cambodia and seriously upset members of Congress. Shortly afterward in 1973, the War Powers Act was enacted to greatly restrict the president’s power to deploy troops within American territories and overseas. During a time of poor Sino-American relations, members of Congress made many attempts to thwart diplomatic relations regarding the Republic of China in Taiwan. It was not until after Nixon’s historic trip to China that a foundation of foreign policy was formed. Congress’ embargo against Cuba was a huge obstacle in the way of normalization of relations with the Cuban government. As a last resort, Congress has the power to impeach the president. Nevertheless, United States foreign policy does not rely solely on the White House and Capitol Hill to make decisions. American companies, media outlets and all kinds of lobbyists can use their power to influence U.S. foreign policy.

During Dwight Eisenhower’s farewell address in 1961, he advised America about the importance of cooperation between the legislative and executive branch and about sustaining the ever-vigilant United States military. If the National Rifle Association can use political donations to manipulate Congress’ stand on firearm regulation, other interest groups can certainly do the same. Although Trump is relying on his own wealth and free media publicity without taking on political debt, interest groups can still use their influence on Congress to thwart Trump.

Just recently, Trump’s campaign decided to bar The Washington Post from covering his campaign events because of the Post’s supposed “inaccurate coverage.” The Post once regarded Nixon as a “sinister force,” and it will spare no effort when it comes to Trump. The joint attack of American media outlets will certainly make Trump reconsider his actions.

Allies Are Concerned Policy Change Will Go Too Far

This year is not 1797, nor is it 1919, but since 1945, the United States has continued to build an international machine — with itself as the engine and the control panel. America’s exit may plunge this machine into chaos and simultaneously provide a variety of extremist groups a rare opportunity to bend the world to their will. While the international machine continues to grow, so do its parts. Many of these parts (regional organizations) require special attention and no substitute would be as powerful a control panel as Washington. For the sake of America’s safety and world peace, it must establish collective safety relationships with other countries. America’s secession from these relationships will only increase the number of threats. In other words, allies are concerned policy changes will go too far.

In short, regardless of how likely Trump is to change foreign policy, his ability is greatly limited. Even if he bursts like a bull into the china shop that is U.S. foreign relations and suppresses American interest groups with his unconventional system, he will only be bashing his way around for four years. Of course, four years of destruction may take 40 years to recover.

The author is Peace and Development co-director for the U.S. Carter Center - International Institute of Xi’an Jiaotong University.


刘亚伟:特朗普会让美再陷“闭关锁国”吗

2016-06-27 02:37:00环球时报 刘亚伟 分享 79参与

  令人瞩目的英国脱欧公投最后以“脱欧派”险胜而告终,有人说民粹汹涌之下,英国被推上一条充满不确定性的道路,前途难料。而在大西洋的彼岸,特朗普为英国“脱欧”拍掌叫好。这位以反建制、反精英而闻名美国富豪能否在今年的美国大选中借民粹主义力量击败希拉里,是人们关注的最大话题。那么,一旦“任性”的特朗普上台,他将改变美国吗?
  孤立主义会不会在美国重演
  1797年,美国第一位总统华盛顿告老还乡时发表演说,循循善诱地告知他的同事,在他看来,捍卫美国“战略机遇期”的两大法宝是,对内压制党争,对外闭关自守。以亚当斯为首的华盛顿的接班人试图发扬光大华盛顿的政治遗产,但党争随着杰弗逊的当选而日益固化,而不与欧洲打交道的“国策”也被1812年的美英战争打破。
  1919年,美国因参战及时率领盟国获得第一次世界大战胜利,立志“用战争消灭战争”的威尔逊总统一时成为世人敬仰的世界领袖。然而,十月革命的成功、法西斯主义的崛起和世界经济的低迷使得美国人对本国的国际主义胸怀和力挽狂澜的所作所为大失所望。在国会的主导下,美国进入全面孤立主义。直到1941年日本偷袭珍珠港,美国才终于睁开眼睛看世界,从此一跃成为超级大国。

  2016年,美国似乎又要进入第三个 “闭关锁国”的周期。共和党人特朗普以其在很多美国人看来不可思议的狭隘的民族主义主张,获得各州初选选民踊跃的支持、出奇制胜,成为共和党的总统候选人。从迄今发表的政策言论看,如若当选,特朗普会对中国的进口商品强征45%的关税;从日本和韩国撤军,并允许日本发展核武器;美国退出北约,欧洲的安全由欧洲人自己负责;禁止伊斯兰国家的公民踏上美国的土地;在美墨边境修建高墙,所需费用由墨西哥政府承担。
  特朗普没那么大能量
  假设特朗普在今年11月能赢得大选成为美国新任总统,假设特朗普不是那种竞选时说一套当选后做另一套的“两面派”,他在多大程度上可以改变美国作为世界唯一超级大国的一些基本国策呢?
  首先,我们必须承认美国总统是世界上权力最大的人。尽管美国政治制度的主要柱石之一是三权分立和制衡,总统还是可以通过法律提案、行政命令、国会休会任命等一系列手段推行他认为有利于美国利益的政策。比如,特朗普可以把他所熟悉的企业朋友提名为部长和驻外大使,让他们去宣扬和推介自己的观点;他也可以利用自己在社交媒体巨大的影响力尝试“以‘推’治国”;他还可以通过预算提案修改美国外交政策的重心。
  其次,仅凭宪法赋予总统的权力,特朗普并不能从根本上颠覆美国要参与世界主要事务并捍卫世界秩序的职责。美国的国会山是制止白宫可能滥用权力的“撒手锏”。当年尼克松总统秘密出兵柬埔寨,国会“一怒之下”在1973年通过了“战争权力决议”,大大限制了总统在海外动用国家武装力量的权力。中美断交期间,一些国会议员不顾白宫和台湾院外活动集团的阻挠频频举行听证会,为后来尼克松的破冰之旅奠定了舆论基础。美国一直不能跟古巴关系正常化的主要障碍就是国会对古巴禁运的立法。而且,在万不得已的情况下,国会也可以弹劾总统。
  第三,决定美国外交走向的不仅仅是白宫和国会山,美国的企业、媒体、各种院外活动集团和美国人民都可以用自己特有的方式影响甚至左右美国的外交政策。1961年艾森豪威尔总统离任之前警告说,美国的军事-国防工业集团已经在左右美国的外交政策了,立法和行政机构必须提高警惕,不做傀儡。如果一个非政府的全国步枪协会可以通过政治捐赠操控国会对禁枪立法的走向,其他利益集团肯定也是“八仙过海,各显神通”。就算特朗普在竞选中主要依赖自己的钱财和免费媒体报道胜选,而不需要政治“还债”,这些利益集团还是可以通过影响国会议员和民意钳制特朗普。
  不久前,特朗普的竞选班子决定不允许《华盛顿邮报》再参加任何自己的竞选活动,理由是《邮报》报道没有“正能量”。《邮报》当年作为尼克松眼中的“邪恶势力”搬倒了尼克松,它会更加不遗余力地继续问责特朗普。美国媒体的联合攻击也会使特朗普重新考虑自己太出格的决定。
  盟国不希望华盛顿政策太离谱
  2016年不是1797年,也不是1919年,美国现在仍是自己从1945年开始营造的一个巨大国际机器的“发动机”和“控制台”,它的退出可能会让这台机器陷入混乱,并为试图按照自己意志改变世界的各种极端组织提供千载难逢的机会。与此同时,这台国际机器越来越大,零部件越来越多,作为发动机,华盛顿有点力不从心;作为控制台,要求特殊关照的国家或地区组织越来越多,一言堂的局面正被打破。美国为了自己的安全和世界和平,必须跟其他国家进入集体安全的关系。它的退出会使自己的安全受到更大的威胁。换句话说,美国的盟国也不希望华盛顿的政策太离谱。
  总而言之,无论特朗普有多不靠谱,他改变美国的外交政策的能力是有限的。就算他是冲进瓷器店的公牛,就算美国的其他钳制性机制都因为特朗普的特立独行而失灵,他在那里横冲直撞的时间最多也就是四年。当然,四年的破坏也许40年都不能弥补。(作者是美国卡特中心-西安交通大学国际和平与发展研究所共同主任)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Germany: Peace Report 2025: No Common Ground with Trump

Canada: Trump vs. Musk, the Emperor and the Oligarch

Ireland: The Irish Times View on Turmoil in Los Angeles: Key Test of Trump’s Power

Topics

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Canada: Trump vs. Musk, the Emperor and the Oligarch

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Germany: Peace Report 2025: No Common Ground with Trump

Australia: America’s Economic and Political Chaos Has Implications for Australia

Ireland: The Irish Times View on Turmoil in Los Angeles: Key Test of Trump’s Power

Related Articles

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Poland: Donald Trump — Elon Musk’s Worst Investment Yet

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Canada: Trump vs. Musk, the Emperor and the Oligarch

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*