Toronto Star

Reality show? Trump’s hair-raising foreign policy proposals,

When it comes to internatio­nal relations, the Republican candidate’s ‘promises’ seem dangerous but doomed. So what happens if he’s in the White House?

- OLIVIA WARD FOREIGN AFFAIRS REPORTER

The U.S. presidenti­al candidate’s foreign policy proposals are hair-raising. Olivia Ward on what might really happen if Donald Trump gets elected, IN6-7

It’s no secret: Donald Trump doesn’t like Mexico. And China is a giant bloodsucki­ng monetary squid. Europeans are military freeloader­s. Muslims make him reach for his (lawfully concealed) gun. As for North Korea, maybe he and Kim Jong Un will talk — or he’ll make sure the dumpy dictator “disappears.”

Foreigners of all sorts seem to be anathema to Trump. He has declared NATO obsolete and called for cuts in American funding. At the same time, he’s all for flexing U.S. military muscles against China and Iran and any other country that gets in the way of Making America Great Again.

So bizarre are Trump’s foreign-policy pronouncem­ents that even many supporters dismiss them as just another reality performanc­e aimed at winning the ratings that will deliver the keys to the White House. His foes are less confident.

“Donald Trump is temperamen­tally unfit to be president and commander-in-chief,” said presumed Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.

Sen. Angus King of the Armed Services committee agrees. With “one person deciding the fate of civilizati­on” in minutes in the event of a nuclear crisis, he told Bloomberg, that person shouldn’t be The Donald.

But in politics, as in life, you can’t always get what you want — even if you’re Donald Trump. And when the blare and blather die down, he will be up against the harsh realities of passing policies that will have vigorous opposition both in the United States and beyond.

The U.S. system of checks and balances, the power of America’s oligarchs and lobbyists, the fickleness of public opinion and the Twittersph­ere could militate against some of his more outlandish declaratio­ns.

Neverthele­ss, Trump’s reliance only on his own “gut feeling” is especially worrying to his critics, including queasy Republican­s.

“Trump has no foreign policy history and few clearly stated plans,” says Ian Brem- mer, whose firm, the Eurasia Group, publishes an annual list of top geopolitic­al risks. (“Unpredicta­ble leaders” is No. 7.) Trump has also alienated the Republican foreign-policy establishm­ent and appears to have no experience­d policy guides.

That’s made worse by Trump’s switchback­s on countries and leaders, from bile to bromance. And by his dizzying spin from embracing “unpredicta­bility” in internatio­nal relations, to emphasizin­g the “stability” of U.S. policy.

“The biggest risk comes from a crisis that no one saw coming,” says Bremmer in Politico Magazine, “whether from China, (Russian President Vladimir) Putin, North Korea, a cyberattac­k, terrorists or something else.” Even without a crisis, an “improvised foreign policy based on the element of surprise” could increase the risks of miscalcula­tions on all sides, along with the chances that the U.S. will be provoked.

In The Nation, Heather Hurlburt of the New America think tank says that Trump has only three core diplomatic principles: to “squeeze more out of other countries”; to adhere to internatio­nal law and military discipline only if it suits his purposes; and that “most alarmingly, large swathes of humanity are essentiall­y subhuman.”

Is it all smoke and mirrors? Does Trump really view internatio­nal relations as a series of zero-sum deals? Would he bring in any cooler heads to dial down the temperatur­e on his foreign-policy rhetoric if he gained the presidency?

They are questions that will keep world leaders chewing their knuckles until the November election, and possibly beyond. A U.S. president can be reined in by Congress and the Supreme Court. But he or she also has wide powers of diplomacy, trade, immigratio­n policy and military action.

“It’s hard to relate a lot of Trump’s statements to reality,” says William Hartung, director of the Washington-based Center for Internatio­nal Policy.

“But it’s the sort of risk you don’t want to take.”

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada