Photo by Marek Studzinski on unsplash
So I was struck by this piece by Ed Wong in the New York Times who reports on global affairs, U.S. foreign policy and the State Department for The New York Times.
Now, the starting point, I think, to give current context to Trump foreign policy is a summary of the Xi-Trump Summit by Brookings experts titled, “What did the Trump-Xi summit actually accomplish?” As I’ve suggested recently, given this President, it may be better to advance less, than more. As Ryan Hass wrote in his review in the Commentary:
“Lost amidst the visit’s pomp, Trump failed to deliver on the business at hand. The White House summit readout offers no details or sense of movement on a principal objective of the visit—removing impediments to the regularized flow of critical minerals that China leveraged since Trump’s announcement of the Liberation Day tariffs.”
“Trump’s performance will raise fresh concerns among America’s allies about Washington’s continuing reliability. It also will raise eyebrows in Beijing about the Trump administration’s overall competence. Neither of these outcomes put America on a stronger footing for navigating future challenges with China, whether over security issues, trade imbalances, human rights, or artificial intelligence.”
As Melanie Sisson wrote in her commentary piece, “China benefits from Washington’s lack of strategic vision”, China benefits from Trump’s lack of strategic vision:
“Trump is a man in perpetual pursuit of instant gratification, and the brief extension of the trade truce announced by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent
gave Trump enough of it that he could spend his time gleefully showing Xi all
his new toys.”“The good news is that the visit is another data point suggesting that Xi prefers anemic stability to no stability at all, and therefore he is not inclined to test limits and run risks.”
That may be the best for the moment. Now back to Wong and his description of the remarks of the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio:
“Secretary of State Marco Rubio called on Wednesday for Western nations to rejuvenate their civilization so they can maintain their dominance in a world of wars, economic uncertainty and technological change.”
““The next decade will write the story of the next century,” he said. “The course we take will determine whether the West maintains its place at the head of the world, or resigns itself to a future of atrophy, servitude and decline. We’ll either choose to act now, or lose the choice to act at all.””
“Mr. Rubio’s speech sought to highlight the ideological tenets of an American conservative movement whose adherents see President Trump as their leader.”
And Wong suggests at the conclusion of his article Rubio’s conclusions:
“Men of ancient Greece, Mr. Rubio said, “knew that there was nothing selfish or wrong about loyalty to your nation, nor in fighting to defend its interests above all else.””
““They believed — fiercely — in the ideal of the ‘great man’: the exceptional individual who obtains immortality through his own deeds,” he added.”
“His remarks in Athens echoed lines he delivered to European leaders in a February speech at the Munich Security Conference, where he spoke of the possible “civilizational erasure” of Europe. However, in the new speech, Mr. Rubio did not use that contentious phrase — one embraced by far-right American and European
nationalists pushing for strict limits on immigration.”“We believe that Europe can awaken from its long slumber and rekindle the fire that was here millennia ago,” he said.
“Nations, he said, must have “the ability to wield force when prudence and diplomacy fail.””
Maybe. But let’s try diplomacy first. It is just as hard and requires insights in the major and middle power states. Clearly, this administration and Trump, himself, has little insight, it seems, into how to successfully manage the geopolitical frictions in the global order.
