Nationalism
In ceremonies last Sunday marking a hundred years since the end of the First World War, French President Emmanuel Macron lectured on the evils of nationalism.
Nationalism, said Macron, is a “betrayal of patriotism.” He explained: “By saying ‘our interests first and never mind the others’ you stamp out the most precious thing a nation has – its moral values.”
The well-crafted speech had many layers, to be sure. Most who listened to it, however, heard a sharp rebuke to Donald Trump. Along with several dozen leaders from as many nations, the American leader sat expressionless just a few meters from the French president as he spoke.
Just weeks ago, Trump produced controversy when he described himself a “nationalist.” In the context of American political discourse, that translates into “white nationalist” – the far-right, racist and anti-diversity disposition streaking through Trump’s core political base.
At the core of that political base sits what is called the “Alt-Right”, the militant white supremacists that inherit the mantle of the old Klu Klux Klan. This was the group responsible for the violence at Charlottesville last year, violence Trump hesitated to condemn.
Trump’s “nationalism” likewise translates into “economic nationalism.” It is through this prism that explains the American president’s unilateral actions since he assumed office: his withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, his withdrawal from the Paris agreement on climate change, his recasting of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the tariffs he arbitrarily imposed on goods from America’s trading partners and his inclination to minimize US commitments to collective defense both in Europe and East Asia.
Trump’s “make America great again” mantra thinly conceals the economic nationalism that underlies his thinking. It reflects the sentiments of the poorer, more rural and less educated areas of the US where the American president draws political support for his outdated policies.
Trump’s policy disposition has led to a new episode of US isolationism. The American president has lost many friends in Europe, as we see from the cold reception he received in Paris this weekend. He has lost friends in Asia as well, a factor that explains his decision to skip next week’s East Asian summit in Singapore. He is sending his vice-president Mike Pence in his stead.
That policy inclination has led the US to abdicate its old role as lead advocate for free trade. That role has passed on, ironically, to China.
I has also led to America’s retreat from playing the lead role in fighting climate change, in defusing major flashpoints all over the world and in building international economic cooperation to reinvigorate a flagging global economy.
In the age of Trump, the world has become a more hostile place.
Anti-immigrant
Macron’s warnings about the resurgence of nationalism and the role the ideology played in the costly wars of the previous century might as well have been aimed at Vladimir Putin.
Putin consolidates his hold on power by appealing to an almost millenarian belief he could restore Russia to the grandeur it once had during the years of the empire. His is the Russian version of Trump’s “make America great again” slogan.
In defending his political hegemony, Putin has spent heavily in rebuilding Russia’s military might and brutally pursued his critics wherever they might have sought sanctuary in the democratic countries of Europe. Recently, he brandished the power of his armed forces by conducting war games on an unprecedented scale. He has been trying to build a stronger strategic partnership with China, raising the specter of a new, undemocratic axis of influence.
The poisoning of Putin critics in Europe and Moscow’s strong intervention in Syria on the side of the Assad regime outraged public opinion in Europe. Trump’s bizarre fascination for the Russian leader does not improve his acceptability to the European public.
Macron’s pointed warning about the danger posed by nationalism is also aimed at the right-wing parties that appear to be gaining support in the countries of Europe. The far-right, anti-immigrant party, for instance, has been outpolling Macron’s own En Marche party in the forthcoming elections for representatives to the European Parliament.
The rise of right-wing nationalist parties in Europe is a reaction to the flood of refugees from the Middle East and North Africa. Conservatives fear their way of life, their racial stock and their religious identity are threatened by the flow of immigrants fleeing poverty and war.
Angela Merkel, in Germany, took a more hospitable position on the immigrant tide the past few years. In recent regional elections, her party lost badly. This led to Merkel announcing last week she would not seek reelection after her current term. She understands she needed to step aside to prevent her country being overrun by the right-wing parties.
Macron might have been addressing Filipinos as well.
Although we achieved formal independence decades ago, economic nationalism has deep roots in our public discourse. This led to ruinous economic policies that left us out of the trade and investment mainstream in the region.
Among the ASEAN countries, the Philippines gets the least foreign direct investments. Protectionism has hindered our ability to industrialize. Extended to our agricultural policies, protectionism has hampered our ability to export.
If we have fallen behind our neighbors and maintained high poverty rates, a large part of the blame should go to the nationalist economic policies we maintained, including those enshrined in the Constitution. Like Trump and Putin, the political left thrives on a staple of nationalism: demands for industries to be nationalized and a constant clamor to raise protectionist barriers.