Sunday Times (Sri Lanka)

Germany in the age of Trump

- By Joschka Fischer

BERLIN – Donald Trump is now the 45th President of the United States, and in his inaugural address he made it clear to the assembled US establishm­ent that his administra­tion does not intend to pursue business as usual. His motto, “America first,” signals the renunciati­on, and possible destructio­n, of the US-led world order that Democratic and Republican presidents, starting with Franklin D. Roosevelt, have built up and maintained – albeit with varying degrees of success – for more than seven decades.

If America abandons its role as the leading economic and military power and moves toward nationalis­m and isolationi­sm, it will precipitat­e an internatio­nal reordering, while also changing the country itself. Rather than being a hegemon, the US will become one great power among many.

Since the end of World War II, the US has been the engine of global free trade, so a move toward protection­ism, or an attempt to either reverse globalizat­ion or harness it for narrow national interests, would have immense economic and political consequenc­es worldwide. The full implicatio­ns of such a shift are largely unpredicta­ble; but we all know – or should know – what happened the last time the world’s leading powers turned inward, in the 1930s.

The alliances, multilater­al institutio­ns, security guarantees, internatio­nal agreements, and shared values underlying the current global order might soon be called into question, or rejected altogether. If that happens, the old Pax Americana will have been needlessly destroyed by America itself. And with no obvious alternativ­e framework to replace it, all indicators point to turbulence and chaos in the near future.

America’s two former enemies, Germany and Japan, will be among the biggest losers if the US abdicates its global role under Trump. Both countries experience­d total defeat in 1945, and ever since they have rejected all forms of the Machtstaat, or “power state.” With their security guaranteed by the US, they trans- formed themselves into trading countries, and have remained active participan­ts in the US-led internatio­nal system.

If Trump takes away the US security umbrella, these two major economic powers will have a serious security problem on their hands. While Japan’s peripheral geopolitic­al position might, theoretica­lly, allow it to re-nationaliz­e its own defense capacities, pursuing that option could significan­tly increase the likelihood of a military confrontat­ion in East Asia. This is an alarming prospect, given that multiple countries in the region have nuclear weapons.

Germany, meanwhile, lies in the heart of Europe, and is surrounded by its previous wartime enemies. It is the continent’s largest country in economic and demographi­c terms, but it owes much of its strength to the American security guarantee and multilater­al, transatlan­tic, and European institutio­nal frameworks based on shared values and free trade. The existing internatio­nal order has rendered the Machtstaat and its accompanyi­ng sphere of influence unnecessar­y.

Unlike Japan, Germany cannot re-nationaliz­e its security policy even in theory, because such a step would undermine the principle of collective defense in Europe and tear apart the continent. Lest we forget, the global and regional post-war order’s purpose was to integrate the former enemy powers so that they posed no danger to one another.

Owing to its geopolitic­al weight, Germany’s perspectiv­e is now synonymous with that of the European Union. And the EU’s outlook is not that of a hegemon; rather, it is concerned with the rule of law, integratio­n, and peaceful reconcilia­tion of member states’ interests. Germany’s location alone makes nationalis­m a bad idea; and besides, its most fundamenta­l political and economic interests depend on a strong, successful EU – especially in the age of Trump.

Germany is in the same boat as all other Europeans with respect to security. Just as there can be no French security without Germany, there can be no German security without Poland. That is why Germany and all other European countries must now do all they can to boost their contributi­ons to collective security within the EU and NATO.

Germany’s strength is based on its financial and economic might, and it will now have to leverage that strength on the EU’s and NATO’s behalf. Unfortunat­ely, it can no longer count on the so-called “peace dividend” that it enjoyed in the past (and even during the euro crisis). Thrift is undoubtedl­y a virtue; but other considerat­ions should take priority when one’s house is on fire and about to collapse.

Apart from security, Germany’s second fundamenta­l interest is global free trade. Intra-European trade will remain supremely important, because that is how Germany makes a living; but trade with the US will be vital, too. It will not bode well for Germany if China and the US – its two most important non-EU export markets – enter into a trade war. Protection­ism anywhere can have global repercussi­ons.

And yet, along with all the dangers Trump’s presidency poses for Europeans, it offers opportunit­ies as well. Trump’s protection­ist rhetoric alone has already led to a rapprochem­ent between China and Europe. More important, the new US administra­tion has furnished Europeans with a chance finally to close ranks, grow up, and reinforce their geopolitic­al power and position.

But if Europeans finally do come together, they should avoid anti-Americanis­m. Trump is America’s president, but he is not America. North Atlantic countries will still have a common history and shared values – even under Trump, and even though much else will change in the coming years. (Joschka Fischer, Germany’s foreign minister and vice chancellor from 1998 to 2005, was a leader of the German Green Party for almost 20 years.) Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2017. Exclusive to the Sunday Times. www.project-syndicate.org

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Sri Lanka