CALM RESPONSE RIGHT FOR CANADA
DULL IT MAY BE, BUT A DISCIPLINED APPROACH TO TRUMP IS THE WAY TO GO
The Trump administration has been likened to a “team of rivals,” borrowing from the Pulitzer- winning book about Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin. But in practice this White House is beginning to look more like a team and a rival — the latter being the president himself.
In important areas, Trump’s expressed views starkly diverge from those of key members of his nascent cabinet. The most recent example is Defense Secretary James Mattis, whose assertive reiteration of America’s traditional security pacts with Japan and South Korea this week could hardly be more at odds with remarks his new boss made during last year’s primaries and presidential campaign.
In the spring of 2016, candidate Trump was telling the Japanese and South Koreans to pay up for the privilege of U. S. naval protection, or do that work themselves. Somewhere along the way, lost in the storm of presidential tweets, the new White House has taken an enormous step back towards a conventional Republican stance of enforcing the 70- year- old Pax Americana.
This has implications for Canada, and Ottawa’s response to Trump’s most controversial move so far — a 90-day ban on visits to the United States from seven Muslim- majority countries, together with a 120- day freeze on refugee admissions and an indefinite halt to refugee admissions from Syria. This executive order is now on hold, by court order, for an undetermined period.
In the spring of 2016, during work visits to Japan and Taiwan, I encountered a wave of official and popular unease not unlike the sentiment in Canada today.
What will Trump do, if given power? How can the actions of such an erratic personality be anticipated? Would he pull the U. S. Navy out of the Western Pacific? Would longstanding global security relationships dissolve overnight, leading to chaos, or war? Then, as now, it was all Trump — all the time. And yet, a year on, as I scan reports from Japan and Taiwan, the prevailing mood is one of dawning relief. Mattis’s statements leave no room for interpretation. He has re- asserted that the Senkaku Islands, subject of a dispute between Beijing and Tokyo that began years before Trump came on the political scene, are under U. S. protection, inasmuch as they are administered by allied Japan.
Though the Obama administration also hewed to this view, it was far more circumspect about stating it. This means de facto that China, which currently owns just one aircraft carrier, would face war with the U. S. if it sought to seize territory in Japan’s Ryukyu Archipelago, or made any aggressive military move on Taiwan. Though nothing is certain, the clarity of Mattis’s position restores some modicum of stability.
Trump is, of course, unlike any other American president. But in one respect he has something in common with President Ronald Reagan: He’s a delegator, who apparently doesn’t fear putting strong personalities in key roles, even if they at times disagree with him. And he occasionally does what they want him to do.
The Canadian perspective is simply this: Though the president himself is a loose cannon, his defence and foreign policy team, led by Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, is not — and their views appear to hold some sway.
It seems reasonable to surmise that, as they hold to more conventional Republican positions about Asia- Pacific security, Russia and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Mattis and Tillerson will do likewise closer to home. That may have a bearing on the trilateral relationship between the U.S., Mexico and Canada.
According to media reports quoting anonymous insiders, Trump and his advisers are in a wounds- licking phase, reviewing the chaotic rollout of executive orders in their first two weeks.
It seems likely that very soon, if it hasn’t happened already, figures such as Mattis, Tillerson and UN Ambassador Nikki Haley will inform the president he can’t keep America safe by infuriating all its friends. At that point, the individuals who make up the body of the U. S. government will be searching for pragmatic partners among traditional allies — Canada first among them.
The temptation for Canadian MPs (with the New Democratic Party ranging well ahead of the pack) to lash out at Trump and his immigration policies is understandable. The net effect of such venting would be to undercut the more traditionalist voices around the president who are most likely to be Canada’s allies, in the event of a major disruptive event such as the collapse of the North American Free Trade Agreement. And, as we saw this week in Japan, the Trump administration can still surprise to the upside.
The Liberal government has so far struck a disciplined tone, asserting Canadian values while protecting Canadian interests. It’s the right tone, unsatisfying though it may be to anyone seeking more dash and drama in Ottawa.
TRUMP IS, OF COURSE, UNLIKE ANY OTHER AMERICAN PRESIDENT.