News
Analysis
How Trump
Supercharged Distrust, Driving U.S. Allies Away
Trust is
very hard to build and easy to destroy. America and its partners are caught in
a spiral of distrust.
Damien Cave
By Damien
Cave
Damien Cave
covers global affairs and is The Times’s Vietnam bureau chief.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/31/world/trump-foreign-policy-trust.html
March 31,
2025
Updated 1:59
a.m. ET
The F-35, a
fifth-generation fighter, was developed in partnership with eight countries,
making it a model of international cooperation. When President Trump introduced
its successor, the F-47, he praised its strengths — and said the version sold
to allies would be deliberately downgraded.
That made
sense, Mr. Trump said last week, “because someday, maybe they’re not our
allies.”
For many
countries wedded to the United States, his remark confirmed a related
conclusion: that America can no longer be trusted. Even nations not yet
directly affected can see where things are heading, as Mr. Trump threatens
allies’ economies, their defense partnerships and even their sovereignty.
For now,
they are negotiating to minimize the pain from blow after blow, including a
broad round of tariffs expected in April. But at the same time, they are
pulling back. Preparing for intimidation to be a lasting feature of U.S.
relations, they are trying to go their own way.
A few
examples:
Canada made
a $4.2 billion deal with Australia this month to develop cutting-edge radar and
announced that it was in talks to take part in the European Union’s military
buildup.
Portugal and
other NATO nations are reconsidering plans to buy F-35s, fearing American
control over parts and software.
Negotiations
over a free trade and technology deal between the European Union and India have
suddenly accelerated after years of delays.
Brazil is
not only increasing trade with China, it’s doing it in China’s currency,
sidelining the dollar.
Several
allies, including Poland, South Korea and Australia, are even discussing
whether to build or secure access to nuclear weapons for their own protection.
Some degree
of distancing from the United States had already been in motion as other
countries became wealthier, more capable and less convinced that American
centrality would be permanent. But the past few months of Trump 2.0 have
supercharged the process.
History and
psychology help explain why. Few forces have such a powerful, long-lasting
impact on geopolitics as distrust, according to social scientists who study
international relations. It has repeatedly poisoned negotiations in the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It kept Cold War tensions between the United
States and the Soviet Union burning for decades.
So-called
realists — who see international relations as an amoral contest between
self-interested states — argue that trust should always be assessed with
skepticism, because believing in good intentions is risky.
But Mr.
Trump has sparked more than cautious suspicion. His own distrust of allies,
evident in his zero-sum belief that gains for others are losses for America,
has been reciprocated. What it’s created is familiar — a distrust spiral. If
you think the other person (or country) is not trustworthy, you’re more likely
to break rules and contracts without shame, studies show, reinforcing a
partner’s own distrust, leading to more aggression or reduced interaction.
“Trust is
fragile,” Paul Slovic, a psychologist at the University of Oregon, wrote in a
seminal 1993 study on risk, trust and democracy. “It is typically created
rather slowly, but it can be destroyed in an instant — by a single mishap or
mistake.”
In Mr.
Trump’s case, allies point to a sustained assault.
His tariffs
on imports from Mexico and Canada, which ignored the North American free trade
deal that he signed during his first term, stunned America’s neighbors.
His threats
to make Canada an American state and send the U.S. military into Mexico to go
after drug cartels were brash intrusions on sovereignty, not unlike his demands
for Greenland and the Panama Canal. His blaming of Ukraine for the war that
Russia started further alienated allies, forcing them to ask: Is the United
States a defender of dictators or democracy?
Relatively
quickly, they have determined that even if Mr. Trump’s boldest proposals — like
turning Gaza into a Mideast Riviera — are fantasies, the trend lines point in
the same direction: toward a world order less like the Olympics and more like
Ultimate Fighting.
Perhaps no
country is more shocked than Canada. It shares the world’s largest undefended
border with the United States, despite their wide disparity in military
strength. Why? Because Canadians trusted America. Now, in large part, they do
not.
Mark Carney,
Canada’s prime minister, said on Thursday that his country’s traditional
relationship with the United States was “over.”
“Trump has
violated the deep assumption in Canadian foreign policy that the U.S. is an
inherently trustworthy nation,” said Brian Rathbun, a global affairs professor
at the University of Toronto. “That is very threatening to basic Canadian
interests in trade and security, leading it to cast around for alternatives.”
Economic
patriotism is somewhat new for Canada, but it has given rise to a Buy Canadian
movement that urges consumers to shun American products and stocks. Canadians
are also canceling U.S. holidays in large numbers.
More
significant in the longer term, Mr. Trump’s threats have forged a surprising
consensus around a policy that had been contentious or ignored: that Canada
should be building pipelines, ports and other infrastructure east to west, not
north to south, to reduce its reliance on the United States and push its
resources outward to Asia and Europe.
Europe is
further ahead in this process. After the U.S. election, the European Union
finalized a trade deal with South American countries to create one of the
world’s largest trade zones, and it has worked toward closer trade ties with
India, South Africa, South Korea and Mexico.
Japan,
America’s largest ally in Asia, has also been prioritizing new markets in the
global south, where fast-growing economies like Vietnam’s offer new customers.
“There has
been the emerging perception in Japan that we definitely have to change the
portfolio of our investments,” said Ken Jimbo, a professor of international
politics and security at Keio University in Tokyo. For the current
administration and those that follow, he added, “we have to adjust our
expectations of the American alliance.”
On the
defense front, what some call “de-Americanization” is more challenging. This is
especially true in Asia, where there is no NATO equivalent, and reliance on
American support has somewhat stunted the militaries of countries that the
United States has promised to defend (Japan, South Korea and the Philippines).
On Friday,
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was in Manila, promising to “truly prioritize
and shift to this region.” But many of America’s partners are now working
together without the United States, signing reciprocal access agreements for
each other’s troops and building new coalitions to deter China as much as they
can.
Europe, too,
is years away from being able to fully defend itself without the help of U.S.
weaponry and technology. Yet in response to the Trump administration’s tariffs,
threats and general disdain — as in the leaked Signal chat in which Mr. Hegseth
called Europe “pathetic” — the European Union recently announced plans to ramp
up military spending. That includes a 150 billion euro loan program to finance
defense investment.
The
27-nation European Union is also increasingly collaborating with two
nonmembers, Britain and Norway, on defending Ukraine and on other strategic
defense priorities.
For some
countries, none of this is quite enough. Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk,
told Parliament in early March that Poland would explore gaining access to
nuclear weapons, fearing that Mr. Trump could not be trusted to defend a fellow
NATO nation fully.
“This is a
race for security,” Mr. Tusk said.
In February,
South Korea’s foreign minister, Cho Tae-yul, told the National Assembly that
building nuclear weapons was “not on the table, but that doesn’t necessarily
mean that it is off the table either.” By some estimates, both South Korea and
Japan have the technical know-how to develop nuclear weapons in less than two
months.
Bilihari
Kausikan, a former Singaporean diplomat, said that a little mistrust can lead
to healthy caution, noting that Asia has been skeptical of America since the
Vietnam War. He said the end result of the Trump era could be “a more
diversified world, with more maneuvering space” and a less dominant United
States.
But for now,
distrust is spreading. Experts said it would take years and a slew of costly
trust-building efforts to bring America together with allies, new or old, for
anything long-term.
“Trust is
difficult to create and easy to lose,” said Deborah Welch Larson, a political
scientist at the University of California, Los Angeles who wrote a book about
mistrust’s Cold War role. She added, “Mistrust of the United States’ intentions
and motives is growing day by day.”
Reporting
was contributed by Matina Stevis-Gridneff from Toronto, Jeanna Smialek from
Brussels, Choe Sang-Hun from Seoul and Martin Fackler from Tokyo.
Damien Cave
leads The Times’s new bureau in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, covering shifts in
power across Asia and the wider world. More about Damien Cave
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário