Midterms may herald new Trump foreign policy focus

Recent history has shown that a divided government in Washington is likely to stymie US president’s domestic agenda

Donald Trump, the United States President, finished up yesterday a two-day trip to France to attend centenary events for the 100th anniversary of the armistice that ended the First World War. His European tour will be followed later this month by a trip to South America, including a stop-off in Argentina to attend the G20 summit, which could well be a sign of things to come.

Last Tuesday’s capture of the House of Representatives by Democrats brings a new era of divided government in Washington, which may well stymie Trump’s domestic agenda in 2019 and 2020. While the midterm results are by no means the end of Trump’s presidency, it could now increase his focus on foreign policy.

Looking back at history, there is significant presidential precedent for Trump undertaking this month’s presidential travel after tough midterms. For instance, former president Barack Obama visited India, Indonesia, South Korea, Japan and Portugal in November 2010 after bruising losses for Democrats. Meanwhile, another former president George W. Bush also went on a foreign tour in November 2006 — to Russia, Singapore, Vietnam, Indonesia, Estonia, Latvia and Jordan — after Republicans lost control of the House and Senate.

Beyond this month, on the broader policy front for the next two years, Trump has multiple priorities, including pursuing a potential second summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un early next year. He is also seeking in coming weeks to conclude Nafta trade re-negotiations with Mexico and possibly Canada too; not to mention manage the ongoing trade spat with China, which he will discuss at the G20 with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

It has been the case for several other recent presidents, from the vantage point of domestic policy, that their first two years are the most productive. During this initial period in the White House, presidents usually succeed in enacting core priorities (as Trump did, for instance with his tax cut package).

To be sure, Trump may achieve further domestic policy success over the next two years. However, numerous other recent US presidents have found it more difficult to acquire momentum behind an array of significant new legislative measures after their initial phase in office.

In part, this is because several presidents in the post-war era have held a weaker position in Congress over time. For instance, both Bill Clinton in 1994 and Obama in 2010 saw — two years into their presidencies — striking gains by the Republicans who picked up the House in both these midterm ballots from Democrats, and also the Senate in 1994.

Yet, in both cases, Clinton and Obama went on to win reelection victories in 1996 and 2012, respectively. This underlines that Trump, who gives every indication that he will stand again in 2020, may potentially still have a glide path to re-election, running against a Democratic House.

A second potential reason for greater stress on foreign policy by Trump in the next two years could be his desire to establish a legacy in the event that he fails to be re-elected in 2020, unexpectedly decides not to seek a second term, or is potentially impeached. Previous presidents have often seen foreign policy initiatives as a key part of the legacy they wish to build.

For instance, former president Richard Nixon scored a string of foreign policy successes in the two years of his second term in office from 1971 to 1973. This included his landmark meeting with Chairman Mao in China in February 1972, before signing two nuclear agreements with Moscow to limit nuclear weapons. George W. Bush too placed heavy emphasis on foreign policy in the second half of his first term as he sought to spread his self-proclaimed freedom agenda after the 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington.

Taken together, this underlines the significant possibility that Trump will increasingly turn to the world stage in advance of 2020. This will be especially likely if he perceives potential foreign policy opportunities on the horizon, including de-escalating tensions in the world’s last Cold War-era frontier through the prize of verifiable and comprehensive Korean denuclearisation.

Richard Nixon scored a string of foreign policy successes in the two years of his second term in office from 1971 to 1973. This included his landmark meeting with Chairman Mao in China in February 1972, before signing two nuclear agreements with Moscow.

■ Andrew Hammond is an Associate at LSE IDEAS at the London School of Economics.