What Donald Trump is proposing in the domain of foreign policy should he be elected US President needs careful assessment.
In an interview in the New York Times (21 July) he claimed that if extremely rich countries cannot properly reimburse the USA for the tremendous cost of protecting them “I would be absolutely prepared to tell those countries, congratulations, you will be defending yourself.”
At face value this looks like a fair argument, a plea for fairer burden sharing. It strikes a responsive chord with ordinary Americans. As Trump observes, the USA economy may have outrun its ability to continue to provide free assistance. He mentions the USA’s fiscal deficit which might soon touch 21 trillion and the external trade imbalance.
It may also be the opening gambit in a negotiating game with America’s allies to entice them to contribute more and directly into the US coffers for their own defence costs. For Trump also wants to modernise the USA’s nuclear forces.He wants to spend more on defence, butmost of all to make America safer.
One of the implications of Trump’s plan is that American alliances in various parts of the world will have to be reconfigured. Take Japan. One can imagine Japan choosing to build its own defence capabilities instead of hiring US protection. This will not necessarily lead to an end of its alliance with the USA. It will just have to be of a different kind.
Europe might have to face a similar choice.
Should Trump’s plan materialize, a downsizing of American influence and leadership might follow. The allies will have to step in where America steps out.
The speculative question is whether Trump will in fact become President of the USA and whether he will be able to carry out his plans. Some speculate that President Trump will have to renounce some of the vote catching proposals made by candidate Trump in the heat of the election campaign.
But Trump’s proposals should set European minds thinking as to whether they need to shake up their efforts at creating a security and defence union. This has been on the EU’s agenda since the start of the process of European integration, with comparatively little progress to show.
It is easy to dismiss Trump’s proposals as the ravings of an inexperienced populist or to mistake their simplicity and candidness as a sign of their cockiness. I am more inclined to think that they may reflect a deeper and more widespread American feeling that is most likely to surface as a policy line whether Trump becomes President or not.
The stars seem all lined up for this to happen.
My reading of what Trump said to the New York Times is that his first wish is to maintain existing alliances, though at a price. For the EU the issue will turn on whether it would prefer paying the USA for protection instead of investing in its own defence structures.
The latter choice makes better economic and political sense.The main question is whether the EU member states have the political will to agree on a common course of action. What often appears as the most rational choice for Europe is usually the most divisive.
Prof. Roderick Pafce is director, Institute of European Studies, University of Malta