The United States of America spent a hundred years building up a global leadership position. President Trump has effectively destroyed it in a mere four months.
China is adeptly stepping up to fill the void left by the United States. Last week Trump did his best to alienate America's long-standing European allies, who now feel that they are on their own against Russia's expanding European power plays. So Europe is turning to China as well.
Chinese and European leaders have scheduled a meeting tomorrow to state how they intend to expand efforts to fight climate change. Meanwhile, USA is isolating itself with Syria and Nicaragua as the only three countries to stay out of the Paris accord.
Perhaps the US isn't a good global leader. It is, after all, only the aftermath of WW2 that left enough of a power vacuum for two countries at the edges of "proprer civilisation" like the USA and Russia to take the central position as the world superpowers.
I wouldn't be sad if the USA returns to a position of only interfering within its sphere of influence in North and South America.
Being a global leader isn't merely about the power to do so, but about caring about other countries to the point that you see them as directly intertwined with your own. The USA, for better or worse, has always viewed other nations as 'other'.
The US is a nation of immigrants. It doesn't see other nations as "other" any more than any other nation, and probably less so because we're very culturally diverse.
But yeah, if you want to go back to the days where benevolent places like the British Empire, Imperial Germany, and the USSR ruled the world, have at it. Because they were benevolent, right?
The US isn't doing a great job, but if American power gets rolled back, are you ready for Russia to come rolling into Eastern Europe? You ready for the Chinese to invade Taiwan? The US is the only thing preventing that.
I think the point was the "America First" policy is antithetical to the idea of helping developing nations. For example, giving aid to combat malaria does not put America First, but it does save lives and build good will across the world.
A great world leader should have no problem using their wealth and power to perform reasonable acts of charity and kindness to fellow nations without an expectation of reciprocity.
Coming from a (very friendly to America) third world country, lemme just say that nobody likes America for it's aid, or any such stuff. Nearly all the goodwill America has is because of it's private sector (which brings prosperity in their own countries) and culture.
All these countries understand that there is no such thing as free lunch, and what America will get by helping is not going to be worth the aid they receive.
You can hear the same sentiment from Israelis to Indians to Egyptians.
Benevolence doesn't make a global leader. Having your fate intertwined with that of others makes a leader. The USA has always had a desire for self-sufficiency, and an economic approach that views any gains made by other countries as a competitive loss.
It is not to say that the USA is a terrible country, or that it is 'evil' or anything so silly. It is simply that the USA does not want a global leadership role, appears uncomfortable with it thrust upon it, and approaches global treaties as something it should either accede to or reject rather than change.
The Paris accords, ought to have heavily influenced by the 'global leader' so the preeminent power would view the treaty as one that benefitted its world view. As it is, the US world view is absent from the Paris treaty---why is that? I'd say it's because the US abdicated its leadership position to the point where European interests and American interests no longer seem to align.
> The US isn't doing a great job, but if American power gets rolled back, are you ready for Russia to come rolling into Eastern Europe?
I think it is a mistake to completely discount the military and economic power of Germany, France, and the United Kingdom. One should remember that historically the German military alone was enough to overrun Russia to the point that the Eastern Front was the site of the most horrific battles and loss of life of the entire war.
> You ready for the Chinese to invade Taiwan? The US is the only thing preventing that.
This is a bit of a tangent. Taiwan is a small island off the coast of the mainland whose government considers itself "Real China" and the far more populous mainland to be the 'rebel forces'. The continued existence of Taiwan is because China finds it useful, not because of any US intervention. If war sparked out, the USA and Europe would likely do the safe and sensible thing by treating it as a civil war within a nuclear power.
All these tangents boil down to "What if World War 3 breaks out?".
I hope for all that is good that WW3 does not break out between nuclear powers, and if it does that the USA will finally stay out of a continental conflict that is nowhere near its borders.
Not sure why this is getting downvoted. Maybe this doesn't hold as much water now, but compared to most countries, the US is pretty light on ethnic nationalism. I trust the US as a hegemon more than most countries.
>The US isn't doing a great job, but if American power gets rolled back, are you ready for Russia to come rolling into Eastern Europe?
Jesus fucking Christ I am not ready, and neither is Eastern Europe. I think everyone remembers what happened last time Russia was in charge over there...
Imperial Germany never had much of a global empire, only a central European one. Places like Namibia and New Guinea weren't exactly powerhouse colonies.
I think you overstate the case when you say that the US's leadership position has been destroyed. It has certainly been damaged, but the US is still one of the largest, most populous and richest countries in the world. It will have a big seat at the world negotiating table for quite some time no matter what.
The USA will certainly have a seat at the table, just not at the head of the table.
This loss of influence isn't going to be readily apparent, it's precipitation will be subtle and over the long term. It may start as a preference for German or Chinese military equipment, then slowly it preference will begin to shift in areas of finance, agricultural products, energy, etc.
If the USA is no longer able to negotiate favorable trade deals, because of their mercurial nature, then we'll probably see corporations move to foreign countries of influence.
The effects are subtle and long term. The destruction happened already.
The US has made it very clear that its populace is willing to elect an uneducated populist buffoon, who is happy to break any and all international commitments if it appeals to his base.
Any politician outside the US, from this point onwards, will assume that the US is not a country that can be trusted with any long term plans. (Or, as far as our allies are concerned, with intelligence materials either). It will likely take decades to repair that reputation hit, if it isn't irreparable.
We're not feeling the consequences of it yet, but we will. That's inevitable. You don't suddenly walk into a ballroom, shit on a table, and hope everybody forgets it next week.
The point is that if we elected Trump once, we might do it again. No one is going to trust us on this stuff in the future. China has a "big seat" at the negotiating table too because of their size, but they're not a leader because we don't trust them.
>The United States of America spent a hundred years building up a global leadership position. President Trump has effectively destroyed it in a mere four months.
I'm no Trump fan, but the slide in American global leadership has been underway since well before Trump. Probably the first big blow was our unilateral invasion of Iraq under Bush. But even under Obama we didn't exactly right the ship.
And while Clinton would have tried to restore our image, in the long run I don't think she would make a big difference.
Countries used to look to America as the leader of liberal globalism because there basically was no alternative. Now there's a few alternatives.
How is Obama received as a public figure ? he showed immense human qualities over his terms, and tried to be honest in his speech regarding other countries. That's a nice part.
I think even Trump doesn't understand, how big a deal being the global leader is. With power comes the responsibility, however, the opposite is true also. U.S. is steady on the track to lose its influence. It will be interesting, how much other nations/entities could stand up and fill the void. It is however a lesson to all, that it is dangerous to believe and hand over too much power to one single nation, only on basis that of shared values.
Anyhow, the rest of world needs to prepare itself with an uncooperative/isolationist US. I think U.S. is not necessarily a bad leader, but it is a clear fact that it doesn't have the willingness and ability to lead anymore, and the world has to move on.
You're overreacting and falling into what China would love people to believe, that 4 years of bad leadership is equivalent to decades of autocracy.
When Trump is gone in 3 years, it's not gonna be so dire. Stupid short-sighted decision, but it's just a road bump. The Germans and Japanese recovered from WW2, pretty sure the US can recover from Trump.
They recovered be the US saw that supporting these countries and creating strong democracies would be of direct benefit to the US. You know, America First.
I can imagine what would have happened if Trump was around after WW2 - "What - spend all that money on those countries. Forget it. Let take all that capital and reduce corporate taxes".
The fact Trump could become president does pose its own problem to other nations. There is serious issue undergoing in this country. What about a Trump V2? Can people still trust America for leadership, if it cannot contain its internal turmoil?
China is adeptly stepping up to fill the void left by the United States. Last week Trump did his best to alienate America's long-standing European allies, who now feel that they are on their own against Russia's expanding European power plays. So Europe is turning to China as well.
Chinese and European leaders have scheduled a meeting tomorrow to state how they intend to expand efforts to fight climate change. Meanwhile, USA is isolating itself with Syria and Nicaragua as the only three countries to stay out of the Paris accord.