news
analysis
The Long
Global Trail of Resentment Behind Trump’s Resurrection
Disillusionment
with the world that emerged from the Cold War has fueled a long-gathering
revolt against the established order.
Roger Cohen
By Roger
Cohen
Nov. 8, 2024
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/08/world/americas/trump-foreign-policy-assessment.html
As the Cold
War wound down almost four decades ago, a top adviser to the reformist Soviet
leader, Mikhail S. Gorbachev, warned the West that “we are going to do the most
terrible thing to you. We are going to deprive you of an enemy.”
In the
celebrations of the triumph of Western liberal democracy, of free trade and
open societies, few considered how disorienting the end of a binary world of
good and evil would be.
But when the
spread of democracy in newly freed societies looked more like the spread of
divisive global capitalism, when social fracture grew and shared truth died,
when hope collapsed in the communities technology left behind, a yearning for
the certainties of the providential authoritarian leader set in.
“In the
absence of a shared reality, or shared facts, or a shared threat, reason had no
weight beside emotion,” said Nicole Bacharan, a French political scientist.
“And so a dislocated world of danger has produced a hunger for the strongman.”
A different
Russia, briefly imagined as a partner of the West, eventually became an enemy
once more. But by the time it invaded Ukraine in 2022, disillusionment with
Western liberalism had gone so far that President Vladimir V. Putin’s tirades
against the supposed decadence of the West enjoyed wide support among far-right
nationalist movements across Europe, in the United States and elsewhere.
Western allies stood firm in defense of Ukrainian democracy, but even that
commitment is wobbling.
The curious
resurrection and resounding victory of Donald J. Trump amounted to the
apotheosis of a long-gathering revolt against the established order. No warning
of the fragility of democracy or freedom, no allusion to 20th-century cataclysm
or Mr. Trump’s attraction to dictators, could hold back the tide.
If Russia
was humiliated by the collapse of its communist imperium, as Mr. Putin has long
asserted, it now reveled in the victory of Mr. Trump, who is dismissive of
climate change, big on male virility and who argues, like Mr. Putin, that the
West of networked elites is the place where family, church, nation and
traditional notions of gender go to die.
More dangers
abound than when Mr. Trump won in 2016. In a world of rival powers where the
post-1945 order seems largely dead, wars rage in Europe and the Middle East.
They spread and efforts to end them have proved ineffectual.
North Korea,
a nuclear power whose troops now bolster Russian forces against Ukraine, is
drawn in. Iran’s long conflict through surrogates with Israel escalates into
direct exchanges of missiles. Loose talk of nuclear war resurfaces as a
paralyzed United Nations Security Council looks on. “The Sleepwalkers” was the
title of Christopher Clark’s book on the onset of World War I. They appear to
many to be afoot once more.
To this mire
will now be added the chaotic, impulsive, high-risk approach to foreign policy
described with near unanimity by Mr. Trump’s top aides during his first term,
as well as his expressed contempt for NATO and the European Union, anchors of
postwar Western security and stability, and his threats of confrontation with
China in the form of punishing tariffs. A turbulent world and a turbulent
personality make for a dangerous mix.
During the
election campaign, Mr. Trump made much of the fact that the European and Middle
Eastern wars erupted after his first presidency and tried to portray Kamala
Harris, the Democratic candidate, as the warmonger. His adviser Stephen Miller
warned on X, that a Harris victory would mean “We invade a dozen countries.
Boys in Michigan are drafted to fight boys in the Middle East. Millions die.”
These were
totally unfounded claims. But many Americans believe that Mr. Trump, at heart a
businessman for whom foreign policy is merely a matter of transactional
resolve, will usher in an era of prosperity incompatible with the turbulence of
war. During his first term, he forged the Abraham Accords normalizing relations
between Israel and four Arab states.
Europe,
however, is worried. Thomas Bagger, the State Secretary of the German Federal
Foreign Office, said that “the shock is more profound because this time the
election of Trump is not an accident but a clear expression of what America is
and what it wants.”
Speaking as
Germany’s coalition government collapsed and uncertainty loomed before a
general election next year, he added that Mr. Trump’s victory was particularly
troubling because “the German Federal Republic is a creation of the United
States of America, the fruit of postwar enlightened American policy.”
Mr. Trump
said this year that he would encourage Russia to do “whatever the hell they
want” to any NATO members not meeting the alliance’s targets for spending on
defense, and has suggested he would cut back on critical American support for
Ukraine.
For the
international system, a Russian victory in Ukraine would affirm a principle of
might over right, and for Europe it would pose a direct threat.
Europe is
more divided and has moved rightward over the past eight years. This was aptly
symbolized by a meeting of European leaders Thursday in Budapest, where Prime
Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary, in a message on X, greeted Mr. Trump’s
re-election as a “much needed victory for the world.”
Mr. Orban’s
illiberal model, which has severely curtailed press freedom and the
independence of the judiciary, has been hailed in Mr. Trump’s entourage as a
possible template. Mr. Trump has called Mr. Orban a “fantastic” leader.
The
assembled European leaders, prodded by President Emmanuel Macron of France,
agreed the continent should take more responsibility for its defense given the
unpredictability of Mr. Trump’s America. But they were divided on sustained
support for Ukraine, which Mr. Orban opposes.
“There is no
possible good outcome in Ukraine today,” said Ms. Bacharan, the French
political scientist. “Trump wants the war over and, with Putin, will do
whatever it takes.”
With
nationalist and anti-immigrant political currents strong throughout the
continent, Mr. Trump will have more levers than during his first term with
which to undermine the 27-nation European Union. The possibility that Europe
will splinter, with each nation cutting its own deals with Washington, appears
real.
“As a nation
we don’t have a way to deal with a world where every country is only looking
out for itself,” Mr. Bagger said of Germany. “We nurtured the idea of an
international community because it was the only post-Nazi way to think of
ourselves. So where we turn in Trump’s world is unclear.”
Many nations
are asking themselves similar questions. Antonio Gramsci, the Italian political
philosopher, wrote in 1930 of a world in which “the old is dying and the new
cannot be born.” Mr. Trump could be returning to power in another such moment.
He is not responsible for the breakdown of the Western-dominated postwar order
or the diminishing magnetism of democracy for some as compared to China’s
autocratic growth model, but he will have to deal with the consequences.
The BRICS
group of emerging market nations is now a powerful counterweight to the West,
as illustrated at its meeting last month, hosted by Mr. Putin. Entrenched
Russian and Chinese hostility toward the United States will complicate Mr.
Trump’s every foreign policy endeavor.
India, at
once a BRIC member with close ties to Russia and a close friend of the United
States, enjoyed good relations with Mr. Trump during his first term. Jawed
Ashraf, the Indian ambassador to France, said he expected that to continue.
But Mr.
Ashraf added: “We are in a state of the world where people are seeking new
answers. There’s a lack of belief in the future. Economic models unable to
deliver, unfettered social media, and global volatility lead to taking it out
on immigrants and questioning of democratic systems.”
Mr. Trump’s
victory was part of this wider phenomenon. In societies atomized by the
overwhelming pace of technological change, and marked by growing inequality,
Mr. Trump had simple answers that resonated.
Those
answers were the border and the pocketbook, the former too porous and the
latter too empty. He would fix both.
“It was the
fight-fight-fight backlash,” said Pascal Bruckner, a French author and
philosopher, alluding to Mr. Trump’s words after he narrowly survived an
assassination attempt in July. “No more complex diagnosis, no more delicate
decisions.”
“God spared
my life for a reason,” Mr. Trump said at his victory speech early Wednesday.
The possibility of a sense of divine mission, backed by a clear electoral
mandate, could make the likelihood of balanced policy more remote.
Mr. Trump
has not moderated in almost a decade since embarking on his first presidential
campaign. “People want strength,” he said then. “We’re going to be so tough and
so mean and so nasty,” he said. He got the blood up. Many dismissed him as a
buffoon. But with his uncanny political antennae, attuned to humanity’s fears
and resentments, he was onto something.
China was
rising; American power ebbing; Afghanistan and Iraq were graveyards of American
glory; millions of struggling Americans felt forgotten or invisible; and the
establishment had not understood the fact-lite theater of the contemporary
world.
It was the
perfect storm for rabble-rousing. Far from an anomaly, Mr. Trump now looks like
an inevitability, the answer, not once but twice, to the shattering of hopes
for liberal democracy that accompanied the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Roger Cohen
is the Paris Bureau chief for The Times, covering France and beyond. He has
reported on wars in Lebanon, Bosnia and Ukraine, and between Israel and Gaza,
in more than four decades as a journalist. At The Times, he has been a
correspondent, foreign editor and columnist. More about Roger Cohen
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário