Donald
Trump has diplomats abandoning vows of silence
The
Republican US presidential candidate’s international insults are
making it tough for envoys to stay quiet as diplomatic custom
requires.
By
Nahal Toosi and
Benjamin Oreskes
9/19/16, 7:56 AM CET
NEW YORK — There’s
a longstanding custom among the world’s diplomats: You don’t
trash-talk candidates running for office in a foreign country.
Donald Trump is
close to destroying that tradition.
As thousands of
diplomats gather for the U.N. General Assembly here this week, many
are struggling to hold their tongues about the brash billionaire
running for the White House, a man who has managed to tick off much
of the planet.
“If you represent
one of these countries that has been insulted or attacked, you tend
to react,” said one Latin American diplomat attending the General
Assembly. Speaking of his own background, he told POLITICO, “We are
very passionate, and our blood is pretty hot. But we have to play it
cool and understand that this is a campaign, and an election, and
that we are diplomats.”
To be fair, Trump’s
candidacy is testing the norms of plenty of professions, including
journalism and psychiatry. But perhaps nowhere are the stakes higher
than the realm of international relations.
Analysts struggle to
recall another U.S. election where so many foreign leaders have so
directly weighed in on the merits of a particular candidate. Even in
2004, when much of the world detested George W. Bush due to the
debacle in Iraq, foreign leaders and their envoys generally held back
during the campaign.
But in 2016, the
Mexican president has compared Trump’s rhetoric to that of Adolf
Hitler; the German foreign minister has warned that the Republican’s
fear-driven brand of politics would be “dangerous” for the whole
world; and the French president has said the real estate mogul’s
“excesses” provoke a “retching feeling.”
“It is weird. It’s
definitely weird,” said Jeremy Shapiro, research director at the
European Council on Foreign Relations. “Two elements are necessary
for this: He’s been incredibly insulting to allies, and they don’t
think he will win. They wouldn’t do this if they thought he was
going to win, because they’d have no back-up plan. They must take
the view that there’s no working with Trump so they don’t have
that much to lose.”
The U.N. General
Assembly is a minefield for diplomats trying to keep their feelings
in check. Not only are there an enormous number of events and
meetings directly tied to the world body, there also are a slew of
gatherings on the sidelines. Some gatherings tackle issues that are
sensitive topics in U.S. politics, such as what to do about climate
change. And reporters are everywhere, eager to get the latest
international views on the U.S. presidential race.
Hillary Clinton is
taking advantage of the setting to arrange a series of meetings with
foreign leaders; she’s expected to meet with the Ukrainian and
Egyptian presidents, among other international representatives.
Trump’s team has not said if he will use the occasion to shore up
his foreign policy bona fides. Both candidates are based in New York,
so it wouldn’t be a long trip for either candidate to make; Trump’s
name even graces a residential tower that literally looms over the
U.N.’s headquarters.
Foreign leaders
invited to meet with either candidate will likely show up: it would
be undiplomatic to appear to snub the potential future leader of the
world’s most powerful country.
The customs
governing diplomats have evolved over centuries as envoys of various
sovereigns were accorded special privileges and responsibilities.
Many of the customs were codified in the 1961 Vienna Convention on
Diplomatic Relations and Optional Protocols, which says diplomats
serving abroad “have a duty not to interfere in the internal
affairs of that State.” That bit has generally been interpreted to
mean diplomats shouldn’t wade into foreign elections.
That’s not to say
countries all interpret that section exactly the same way. The U.S.
routinely comments on questionable election processes in countries,
such as where dictators clearly rig the vote. And international
election monitors are frequently present in fragile states trying to
build their democracies.
The sensitivity
arises when a foreign leader appears to side with a particular
candidate.
Four years ago, for
instance, critics of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
accused him of crossing the line, saying he seemed to be pushing U.S.
voters toward Mitt Romney through his praise of the Republican
nominee. This year, Netanyahu has been conspicuously quiet.
Adding to the
complications is that U.S. elections are increasingly followed
intensely by people overseas, whether it’s via Facebook or CNN
International. So when a U.S. presidential candidate slams a foreign
country as Trump has so often (with Mexico, Japan, China, members of
NATO, and on and on) representatives of those countries feel unusual
domestic pressure to respond.
When Trump suggested
he might not lend U.S. assistance to the Baltic states if they are
attacked unless those small countries have paid their fair share to
NATO, leaders of those countries took exception. But even as they
defended their contributions to the military alliance, they were
careful not to appear to take sides in the presidential race.
The British
Parliament, whose lawmakers aren’t technically diplomats, even
debated whether to ban Trump from the United Kingdom. The debate,
which did not yield any binding decision, was spurred by an online
petition.
Trump has some fans
in the international realm: the prime minister of Hungary, whose
government has been deeply hostile to refugees, has said he supports
Trump. (Russian President Vladimir Putin is believed to be using
Kremlin-supported media to boost Trump, but he’s stopped short of
flat-out saying he wants Trump to beat Clinton.)
Embassies contacted
by POLITICO in recent months say they have tried to establish
contacts with Trump’s campaign as well as that of Clinton’s. It
doesn’t help, several foreign diplomats have privately said, that
Trump’s campaign structure is so opaque and his policy positions so
mercurial.
“For our people in
Washington, Trump is an enigma. When they look at his foreign policy
views and advisers they’re scratching their heads,” a U.N.-based
European diplomat said.
At a recent
gathering in Washington, D.C., a handful of European diplomats were
urged to share their true feelings about the U.S. presidential
candidates.
David O’Sullivan,
the European Union’s ambassador to the United States, quipped that
his confidential cables to his superiors back home about the election
“will have to remain something that only future historians will
read.”
But, he added:
“There’s a sense that this election is different from previous
ones. But maybe there’s a temptation always to think that about
every election.”
Authors:
Nahal Toosi and
Benjamin Oreskes
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário