sheng102_Chip SomodevillaGetty Images_trumpangry

The American Muddle

Jun 26, 2020 Andrew Sheng , Xiao Geng

Longstanding and bipartisan pretensions of American exceptionalism, rising domestic concerns, and a lack of policy clarity suggest that, even if Donald Trump is voted out in November, the US-led cooperation the world needs will not soon emerge. But another four years of Trump would almost certainly make matters worse.

HONG KONG – Former US National Security Adviser John Bolton’s new book The Room Where It Happened bills itself as “the most comprehensive and substantial account” of President Donald Trump’s administration. And, indeed, it has quickly become a critical resource for those seeking to understand Trump. But, despite Bolton’s juicy revelations about Trump’s conduct of foreign policy (which his administration tried in vain to keep off bookshelves), the book does little to answer the fundamental question facing the US: Is its current foreign-policy muddle Trump’s fault, or the result of something deeper and more structural?

There is no doubt that Trump’s leadership is problematic, even dangerous. A longtime Washington insider, Bolton assumed that, as national security adviser, he would be responsible for ensuring that the president “understood what options were open to him for any given decision,” and that the decision would then be “carried out by the pertinent bureaucracies.”

But Trump was not interested in an orderly calculation of policy priorities and trade-offs. Nor was he much interested in policy implementation. Managing the different agendas, interests, and egos of America’s complex bureaucratic machinery – including the State Department, the Pentagon, the Treasury, and intelligence agencies – is barely on his radar.

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Already have an account? Log in

Support High-Quality Commentary

US President-elect Joe Biden may have promised a “return to normalcy,” but the truth is that there is no going back. The world is changing in fundamental ways, and the actions the world takes in the next few years will be critical to lay the groundwork for a sustainable, secure, and prosperous future.

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world’s foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Subscribe Now

Andrew Sheng

Writing for PS since 2011
108 Commentaries

Andrew Sheng, Distinguished Fellow of the Asia Global Institute at the University of Hong Kong and a member of the UNEP Advisory Council on Sustainable Finance, is a former chairman of the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission. His latest book is From Asian to Global Financial Crisis.

Xiao Geng

Writing for PS since 2012
98 Commentaries

Xiao Geng, Chairman of the Hong Kong Institution for International Finance, is a professor and Director of the Research Institute of Maritime Silk-Road at Peking University HSBC Business School.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 6 in all 6 Comments on this article

j. von Hettlingen Jun 29, 2020

Andrew Sheng and Xiao Geng asks whether Trump is to blame for his country’s foreign-policy “muddle” as revealed in John Bolton’s new “juicy” book, or it is “the result of something deeper and more structural.” No doubt Trump’s “temperamental, transactional approach to foreign affairs” has been an asset to America’s foes – China, Russia – that seek to unravel the US-led rules-based international order.
Trump’s excessive admiration for authoritarian leaders, and the desire to destroy his predecessor’s legacy, by abrogating multilateral agreements, and trashing America’s staunchest allies and partners, had inflicted irreparable damage to the country’s image. Resorting to his megaphone on Twitter and sending “wild threats whenever he has felt cornered”, has caused enormous confusion at home and abroad. He is merely a self-serving, wannabe dictator.
No doubt America’s “global standing was weakening long before Trump arrived.” The country has “its economic influence, technological prowess, financial dominance, and military might” to thank for Its position as a superpower. But the authors say, “its interest in – and approach to – global leadership has always been shaped by its self-perception as a moral authority, bearing universal values that others should adopt as their own.”
Far from making America “great”, his slogan means poverty, misery and death form many Americans amid Covid-19. Given “longstanding and bipartisan pretensions of American exceptionalism, rising domestic concerns, and a lack of policy clarity” suggest that, even if Trump is unseated in November, “the US-led cooperation the world needs will not soon emerge. But another four years of Trump would almost certainly make matters worse.”
The authors claim that “most nations don’t adhere to American moral standards,” especially China, “which has its own set of values and priorities.” But they fail to mention that George Friedman sees this as one of the “clear cycles” through which the US has developed, upheaved, matured, and solidified” – its strength ebbs and flows with leadership. That the US sees China as its “main strategic rival” has less to do with “divergence” but more with Beijing’s aggression and unfair trade practices.
Even Barack Obama had realised America’s diminishing global clout after two disastrous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan under George W. Bush. He managed the US decline, while it goes into a free fall under Trump. Obama knew that China’s rise was not going to be peaceful, and pivoted to Asia with his Trans-Pacific Partnership pact, though he was “far-less combative” than Trump, who demonises Beijing, preventing it from overtaking the US as the global leader in technology. Obama also sought to de-escalate tensions in the Middle East by curbing Iran’s nuclear ambition with the 2015 nuclear deal, from which Trump withdrew in 2018.
Trump’s presidency constitutes one of the worst chapters in American politics and history, now that it faces a number of serious challenges at home. For the first time in decades, the world can not expect US leadership amid a global crisis, according to Richard Haass. The authors are right about Joseph S. Nye the world having shifted toward a multipolar order, that the US may not be able to “recapture the hegemonic global leadership of the past, and it shouldn’t try.”
As the world is facing increasingly complex challenges that warrant global cooperation, because one country alone will not be able to tackle them, the “rational response” for the US to deal with the new reality “would be to lead a cooperative effort to address shared challenges, including the looming recession, technological disruption, and climate change. For this to work, all stakeholders – including US rivals like China, Russia, and Iran – must be involved.”
No doubt Trump is a disaster for humanity and the world will breathe a sigh of relief if he loses his bid for reelection in November. Perhaps a new administration under Joe Biden would repair the damage inflicted by Trump. But the authors are not optimistic about the US leading the world again to resolve global problems. Perhaps not in the near future. Nevertheless the future looks brighter for the US, than for China. What would happen to the country if the communist regime fell one day? It could take years or decades for China to regain stability.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Akhurst Jun 29, 2020

Whilst criticism of Trump is wholly justified on what basis does the world need ‘US-led cooperation’? The authors fail to make a case for returning to US leadership, relying wholly upon a critique of Trump’s failings.

As the authors suggest the gap between the US and other powers has been growing. Under Obama and prior Presidents it could be argued that this was part of post-Cold War realignment and in part driven by the emergence of the Asian powerhouses. Under Trump the gap is becoming an earthquake sized chasm driven by Trump’s ego rather than any particular strategy. The fact that China more than any other powerhouse has stepped up to fill the gap is not an argument for a return to US leadership, which can at best be said to have achieved mixed results.

Europe could and should step into the gap. In terms of structure the EU is similar to China with strong institutions. Therefore, the EU is likely to be able to respond to China with a better understanding than the US with its fractured systems ever can.

Leadership has to be earned. Over the past three and half years the USA has thrown away the right to leadership that it earned from WW2 onwards. China, quite understandably, has stepped-up. The question is will the EU do like wise, be pulled down by remaining to close to the USA or acquiesce to world dominated by China?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
vivek iyer Jun 29, 2020

Bolton was considered a dangerous super-hawk by the very people who consider him an oracle because he has turned on Trump. This article makes two claims-
1) the world needs US-led cooperation though it has been a disaster- endless, unwinnable, wars in pursuit of 'regime change' on the military front ; financial meltdowns by reason of poor regulation and foolish policies on the economic front ; racist savagery by police departments and a rapacious prison-industrial complex on the domestic front which is causing 'BLM' agitations to spill over into Europe ; bizarre zig-zags in diplomatic policy such that Pakistan, which sheltered Osama and whose Premier now praises him a 'Martyr' was repeatedly rewarded for exporting nuclear tech and terrorism ; the list is endless.
2) Trump makes things worse though, unlike Obama or Bush, he hasn't started any new wars and, clearly, has a transactional approach which means he never commits to a truly foolish policy. If tasked with having gone back on his word, he will shout fake news and dash off a few nasty tweets. That is a good thing. Trump has shown that Presidents needn't fear the Press or 'Public Opinion' because journalists and public intellectuals are despised by the public.

The authors speak of 'an orderly calculation of policy priorities and trade-offs'. Yet they themselves show they believe the policy space to be multi-dimensional. By the McKelvey chaos theorem, this means Agenda Control has salience. Trump does Agenda Control very well. If anyone else tries to set the Agenda, he says nasty things about them and they burst into tears and start babbling about Fascism. This 'Mean Girls' approach is highly effective. It prevents the bureaucracy from gaining an interessement mechanism in the name of protecting the President from flak. Thus the President isn't the hostage of his flak-catchers. There is no point 'Mau Mauing' him. He will tweet at you till you burst into tears and go running to find a safe space as a tenured Professor of something oxymoronic on a plush Campus.

The authors say the 'world is shifting to a multipolar order'. They believe America was hegemonic. Why? This has never been the case. It was so weak, Al Qaeda thought it worthwhile to attack it. They rightly calculated that America would bleed blood and treasure and take out their own bete noire- Saddam- along the way. Don't forget Osama wasn't just helped by Pakistan. Iran too sheltered some of his wives and kids. The US spent a trillion dollars helping those who slaughtered its people on its own soil. General Hamid Gul, of the Pakistani ISI, gleefully explained to the BBC that the Taliban strategy was to draw in the Americans, profit by their presence, and rearm themselves from the arsenals they would leave behind after they fled. 20 years later, Gul appears to have been a true prophet. A lot of his pals have gotten very rich out of the 'War against Terror'.

The authors think America should first help China, Russia and Iran before 'leading cooperative effort'. But China, Russia and Iran are, for good reason, hated by their neighbors. Why not simply say 'America must first ruin its friends, and empower its enemies, before we, exalted Academics, consider it worthy of praise as a 'rational' actor?'
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
David Lentz Jun 28, 2020

from the authors
“No power – not even China or Russia – can defeat the US economically, technologically, or militarily. “
What about cooperating? It appears your view is that relationships are about dominance of one party over another. Some call that Realism. But
also in the 1800s a fellow named Freidriche Nietzsche in a book called Beyond Good and Evil proved that values are not universal but are subjective
so is Realism subjective
Hilarious
Climate change on a massive scale is coming by 2026 due to methane gas eruptions from the permafrost. Humans need to cooperate world wide as they face extinction
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jun 28, 2020

Haass notes are accurate.
The muddle has deepened and spread.
It's really getting closer to the election date.
So, of course, escalation of emotional reactionary responses has been further strategized.

Anger is now at the boiling point. Anger has always been one of
the best tactics to divide, agitate, suppress, repress, and control a work force.
Escalation of anger has always been used by Corporate tacticians effectively
to establish power. The present administration has been working arduously to accomplish the only goal of the POTUS "PERSONAL POLICY" rather than any
national policies. 2020 is past the bend, and now the race is into the final stretch.
The race is on. Only one race has counted since 2016. After getting into the door, it's keep the door open as long as he can for himself. Presently, both real races in the real world just aren't quite comprehending what the race is all about.

Keep the dumb dumber, and inflame the anger. Task accomplished!

I end my comment with an appropriate quote from:https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/06/24/_2020_election_will_be_a_contest_of_the_angry_143533.html

"The angry and the demonstrating are loud and visible; their opponents are angry and quiet.
The election will reveal not just who is more numerous -- but sadly also who is the angriest."

My take away from the quote is that Victor David Hanson does a fine job of accomplishing a group task, with just the right twist. I doubt if he is personally the least bit sad about any body being angry at all.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Daley Jun 27, 2020

Good article. But what do you do about America's moral values. I'd suggest greater federal oversight of a two-party system that's gone sour, and that has begun to drift into zero sum politics, where your opponent's loss is your gain, even if the public interest suffers in the process. Elizabeth Warren has talked about Federal charters for all companies doing interstate business, in addition to whatever other state charters they may hold. That same tool might be used to impose reforms like open primaries on all political parties that operate on a nationwide basis, or to break up a poisonous duopoly that seemingly cannot, or will not deliver public goods at reasonable prices to the public they supposedly serve.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/i1NRKI4

Cookies and Privacy

The American Muddle

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

The World Waits for No Country

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

Cookies and Privacy

The American Muddle

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification