US National Conventions: An Ominous Imagination

As I watched the U.S. national conventions, where Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were at the center of attention for the past two weeks, I felt the twilight of U.S. politics. The Republican runner-up did not deliver a concession speech. A slogan appeared that referenced locking up the Democratic presidential candidate. Evidence came to light that the Democratic National Committee was acting unfairly. There are traces of Russia’s suspected involvement in the Democratic National Convention, and President Barack Obama said there would be an investigation. The Republican presidential candidate pleaded with Russia to meddle more in the U.S. presidential election, which caused a controversy over his treasonous intent. Except for the Watergate scandal in the 1970’s, the U.S. presidential elections have never shown anything this shameful and ugly. Even in South Korea, it has become rare to see citizens contest the outcome of elections, create controversy over unfairness, or allege North Korean involvement in South Korean politics. U.S. politics are regressing to an age of division, extremes and hatred.

As an official slogan, Mr. Trump chose “Americanism” or “Make America Great Again,” and Mrs. Clinton selected “Stronger Together.” Meanwhile, their foreign policies are both inward-oriented and reductionist. “Great” and “stronger” are empty words. It is as if those words indicate a complex that may belong to the falling giant. At least, Hillary Clinton ended up putting an emphasis on protectionism. Donald Trump’s isolationism and protectionism, however, are morbidly destructive: He intends to entirely quit or renegotiate NATO, the rule of peace after World War II, the South Korea-U.S. alliance, the World Trade Organization, NAFTA, and the South Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement if things go awry. It is his cause that the U.S. will not tolerate any loss in terms of security or the economy. His extreme materialism, through which he categorizes the world order according to profit and loss, without realizing the world order has evolved over the past 70 years, has made both Mr. Trump and his country look petty and shabby. The U.S. he is picturing is like a huge ostrich that turns back and runs away to save its own skin. While the United Kingdom shook the world with Brexit, Mr. Trump’s U.S. is attempting to exit the world itself.

In his acceptance speech, Donald Trump cried out that he would represent those who work hard but do not have a voice, including union members, coal miners and low-income earners. His supporters were excited. His speech wormed its way into the hearts and minds of the working class, who have been on the side of Democrats for a long time. It was a speech that cleverly pre-empted one of the fortes of the Democratic Party. Empirically, when two giants clash, the party that dominates the other’s issues is usually victorious in the arena of the presidential election. Given that, Hillary Clinton is stuck with the image of a boring and stereotypical model student. While Mr. Trump’s unfavorability ratings are falling, hers are rising.

The presidential election is a game determined by the last 1 percent of swing voters. The final outcome for the two presidential candidates will be determined by a one-on-one personality match, like that of gunfighters in a western movie. Despite support from the current president and first lady, former president and her former husband, and Bernie Sanders—a U.S. politician who is getting the most attention at the moment—it is inevitable that Hillary Clinton will fall behind her opponent when it comes to personal attractiveness. Devilishness is one of her characteristics, and it is difficult to ignore the premonition of Americans falling for this trap.

South Korea is currently terrified of China because of issues surrounding the deployment of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system. The truth is, we may feel more restless in four months as a result of our fear of the U.S., which can be much greater than that of China. If Donald Trump is elected as president-elect of the U.S., he could say, “If the South Korean government either does not fully pay for the presence of U.S. forces in South Korea, or it does not join the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense System, I will withdraw U.S. troops and dissolve the South Korea-U.S. alliance.” Article 6 of the Mutual Defense Treaty between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America, which was approved in 1953, stipulates the termination of the South Korea-U.S. alliance as follows: “Either Party may terminate it one year after notice has been given to the other Party.” As stated, the dissolution of the alliance can be initiated simply by either party giving notice. Will such a divorce remain a fictional element of our imagination? I wonder what kind of answers President Park Geun-hye and future presidential candidates will give when this worst-case scenario comes true.