Quick Take: Trump's foreign policy legacy - the wins

Ian Bremmer's Quick Take:

Hi everybody. It is the last day of the Trump administration. Most of you, probably pretty pleased about that. A majority of Americans, though not a large majority, but certainly a majority of people around the world. And given that that's a good half of the folks that follow what we do at GZERO, that counts to a majority. And look, I ought to be clear, when we talk about the Trump administration and their foreign policy legacy, "America First" was not intended to be popular outside of the United States. So, it's not surprising that most people are happy to see the back of this president. But I thought what I would do would be to go back four years after say, what are the successes? Is there anything that Trump has actually done, the Trump administration has done that we think is better off in terms of foreign policy for the United States and in some cases for the world than it would have been if he hadn't been there? And I actually came up with a list. So, I thought I'd give it to you.


I'm more than happy to be critical of Trump as need be, you all know, but it's at the end of the administration. And I'm an upbeat kind of guy, I thought it'd be nice to leave with some of the successes. And before I get into the list, let me be clear, there are, I think, three reasons why you get successes in the Trump administration. The first is that some of Trump's own impulses were actually right. I mean, the fact that he wanted to end wars, for example. That's generally speaking a pretty useful impulse that the foreign policy establishment just hadn't been able to get its head around. Secondly, whatever you think of President Trump himself, a lot of the members of his administration were capable, were professional and tried to do their jobs, and that actually comes through. And then finally, and perhaps this is most important, when you're running the most powerful country in the world, you get luckier because other countries, even if they don't like what you're saying or you're doing, recognize the consequences of not going along are really costly. And that helps any president become more successful than they otherwise would have been and certainly played to Trump's advantages over the course of his four years. So, let me go through the list and I'll start with what I think are the most important.

First on US-China policy and most importantly on technology. I mean, this had been really a non-issue or even in some cases, a fait accompli where most allies were mistrustful of the United States after the Snowden disclosures and looking to hedge towards a cheaper, faster rollout to Chinese 5G. And instead, you now have most of the world's advanced industrial economies deciding to work together on Western solutions for the next generation of data technologies and anything with a chip in it. That started with the Trump administration saying, "Chinese 5G is not okay. It's dangerous to US national security, dangerous for allies as well." That's probably their most significant success, and by the way, one that the Biden administration is completely aligned with. When Biden first threw his hat in as presidential candidate, he said, "What do you mean? China's not a significant threat. They're not a competitor. I mean, what are you talking about? It's all about Russia." Very quickly, Biden had blowback, realized that he was out of date on this stuff. He got up to speed and now the Biden administration is almost completely aligned with the Trump administration in their key aspects of China policy.

Secondly, the Abraham Accords, the normalization of Israel diplomatic relations with a series of Arab states, the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan, other countries moving towards normalization. We see that with Oman, and we see it with even Saudi Arabia. This is a big deal, and it was a big deal that was basically a recognition on the part of the Trump administration that the geopolitics of the region had changed. Started with their first trip ever, when Trump became president, was to Saudi Arabia and Israel. Radically different from what other presidents would have done. Previous administrations, even Secretary of State John Kerry said, "Unless you do Israel-Palestinian peace, you will never get peace between Israel and other states." Actually, the Palestinian issue is becoming less important, the Iran issue much more so. Energy production in the region was becoming more problematic in terms of their national security. Prices were going down; the US had more influence. They used it. That was what allowed those countries to normalize that relationship.

Some trade wins. Most of the coverage of trade on the Trump administration has been about deficits and Trump wielding tariffs when he doesn't get what he wants. And admittedly, trade today is higher tax and more disrupted on balance than when Trump took office, but there have been significant successes. The most significant, I'd say two; KORUS, which is the South Korea-US trade deal. The US got South Korea to rewrite a lot of their own laws to satisfy Washington without the US having to give any major changes or having to go through Congress to gain approval. The USMCA, the new NAFTA is in many ways a smaller, less controversial piece of the Trans-Pacific Partnership that Obama couldn't get done and Trump then killed. It does make much more of the entirety of trade between the US, Mexico and Canada covered by a trade agreement, including things like data, intellectual property, services, it modernizes the relationship. You have the opening of a US-Kenya trade agreement. And for all of the flak that Trump got on calling African states shithole countries, it's interesting that he's only the second president that's ever opened a trade agreement with an important African country, especially because it helped stop their alignment with China and creates a new template for post-African growth and an opportunity act trade regime with Africa that the Biden administration will move on.

The war on ISIS. I mean, there's no question that the Islamic state came to an end as a territorial unit with local governance following an aggressive and effective Trump campaign to incapacitate the organization and weaken its threat to the US and allies. The war was started under Obama, ISIS had lost about half of its territory in Iraq, a little bit less than that in Syria before Trump's inauguration, but the Trump administration actually ramped it up. They've really been defeated as a consequence. Also, let's not forget the US killing of former ISIS head, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was a big symbolic win also under the Trump administration.

Mexico immigration. Believe it or not, for all of Trump's talk about building the wall on the border with Mexico, that Mexico was to pay for, which was always a big joke, no, instead, President Trump did get a wall built. He got much tighter security on Mexico's Southern border. He threatened Mexico with heavy tariffs if they didn't close the Southern border and effectively police illegal immigrants, and they did. There were decades of problems on this issue and President AMLO, Lopez Obrador took significant political and economic costs at home to police their border more effectively with Central America. Within six months, border flows into the United States were down over 50%, actually a pretty big deal. Kind of funny it's not one Trump ever talked about because he was always so focused on the wall, that was a big part of his campaign with the US Southern border.

OPEC. I would say that given that the US energy production has been so much higher under Obama and then under Trump, Trump was able to weaponize the American relationship with OPEC's strongest members, Saudi Arabia, like no other president. That meant that OPEC was more responsive to Trump's complaints of oil prices being too high early in the administration, and also got to that big, historic really, oil cut agreement among the COVID dislocations that was in no small part due to pressure from the White House.

I mentioned at the beginning the fact that Trump talked about wanting to end wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. You did see continued drawdown of troops in both of those countries and a foreseeable end to the Afghanistan war, the longest war in American history. Controversial decisions, but let's be clear that the foreign policy establishment said that if that was going to happen, you would have outside players monopolizing these power vacuums, taking over. That didn't happen. No one player has done that. And it also makes the pivot to Asia much more feasible when the United States is less bogged down in the Middle East.

International organization victories. I mean, the US has left a lot of organizations under Trump. That gets a lot of attention. I would mention that a meaningful one is the World Intellectual Property Organization, where the US and China were in a direct fight over its future. And the Trump administration actually cultivated alliances, isolated China, helped get a Singaporean as the new director general over a Chinese candidate, it gives a lot more influence to the US in an area that actually matters, especially the future of technology and governance for corporations going forward. Had a very successful US led World Bank funding round that was orchestrated by David Malpass, who runs that organization. And I'd also mentioned a fight in the International Atomic Energy Agency, where the Trump administration got the preferred American candidate in, which especially matters given the need to get more support after the US pulled out of the Iranian nuclear deal, they got it from the IAEA.

A number of US allies did get stronger, relationships with the US under Trump, things that we talk about a fair amount. Brazil under Bolsonaro, India under Modi, and the new Indo-Pak agreement, which you'll see continued under Biden. Certainly, Israel under Netanyahu who had been more deteriorated somewhat under Obama. And the Gulf Arabs. I'd also mentioned Poland in that list.

NATO cost sharing. Despite the fact that Trump said he was opposed to NATO in rhetoric, the reality was the Trump administration continued to push for NATO countries to pay more in defense. They were doing more under Obama and they did even more under Trump. That direction will likely continue.

I'd mentioned Sudan. It's hard to say that all of this is just the United States because there were a lot of countries that were looking for influence after Omar al-Bashir was no longer in power, but the Trump administration did help to push back an effort by the Sudanese military to sweep aside civilians and worked with both inside and outside actors, including the UN to help ensure democratic transition that has a real shot at success after decades of dictatorship.

So, if you put it all together, there is a list of things that the Americans got done in foreign policy under the Trump administration. And four years out, and we don't have to deal with him as president anymore, it's nice to look back and say it wasn't all horrible. I'm willing to do that. Maybe it brings us tiny bit closer together. So, there it is. We've now got President Biden and I'll see you all real soon.

Emily Ademola lives in an area of Nigeria that has been attacked by Boko Haram militants in the past. Looking for water was very risky, and without access to water, the community – especially children – were at risk of waterborne diseases. Eni, in partnership with FAO, built a water well in Emily's community in 2019.

Watch Emily's first-hand account about how access to water "close to our doorsteps" has improved the quality of life for her community and her family.

There's never a great time to impose higher taxes on funeral services — but doing it in the middle of a raging pandemic is an especially bad move. Yet that was one of a number of measures that the Colombian government proposed last week in a controversial new tax bill that has provoked the country's largest and most violent protests in decades.

In the days since, the finance minister has resigned, the tax reform has been pulled, and President Iván Duque has called for fresh dialogue with activists, union leaders, and opposition politicians.

But demonstrations, vandalism, and deadly clashes with police have only intensified. Two dozen people are dead, 40 are missing, and the UN has criticized Colombian police for their heavy-handed response.

More Show less

While residents of wealthy countries are getting ready for hot vaxxed summer — COVID is still ravaging many low- and middle-income countries. The horrifying scenes coming out of India in recent weeks have gripped the world, causing governments and civil society to quickly mobilize and pledge support.

But on the other side of the globe, Brazil is also being pummeled by the pandemic — and has been for a year now. Yet thus far, the outpouring of aid and (solidarity) hasn't been as large.

What explains the global alarm at India's situation, and seeming passivity towards Brazil's plight? What are the politics of compassion?

More Show less

Paris-London face-off at sea: France and the UK are at loggerheads in the high seas this week over post-Brexit fishing access in Jersey, an island off the English Channel. Furious at regulations that they say makes it harder to fish in these lucrative waters, dozens of French fishing boats amassed near the Channel Island, threatening to block access to the port. In response, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson deployed two naval vessels — a move critics say was an unnecessary escalation, and an attempt by the PM to flex his muscles and bolster the Tory vote ahead of Thursday's regional election. France, for its part, sent its own naval ship and threatened to cut off Jersey's electricity supply, 90 percent of which comes from French underwater cables. Fishing rights was one of the final sticking points of Brexit trade negotiations, an emotive political issue for many Britons who say that they got a subpar deal when the UK joined the European Economic Community in the 1970s. Though an UK-EU Brexit agreement was finally reached in December 2020, it's clear that there are still thorny issues that need to be resolved.

More Show less

10: Joshua Wong was sentenced along with other Hong Kong democracy activists to 10 months in prison for participating in a vigil last year marking the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre in Beijing. Wong is currently behind bars for participating in separate pro-democracy protests, and will only start this new sentence after that term concludes in November.

More Show less

What's the biggest foreign policy misconception that Americans have about the US's role in the world? According to international relations expert Tom Nichols, too few Americans believe that the US, in fact, has a critical role in the world, and that the things Americans enjoy, from cheap goods to safe streets, are made possible because of American global leadership. "Americans have become so spoiled and inured to the idea that the world is a dangerous place that they don't understand that the seas are navigable because someone makes them that way. They don't understand that peace between the great powers is not simply like the weather, that just happens," Nichols tells Ian Bremmer. Their conversation is featured on an episode of GZERO World, airing on US public television – check local listings.

Watch the episode: Make politics "boring" again: Joe Biden's first 100 Days

The cover story of The Economist declares that Taiwan is "The most dangerous place on Earth," because China might finally be ready to plan an invasion of the island. But are the consequences of such a move worth the many risks to China and its President Xi Jinping? Ian Bremmer breaks out the Red Pen to to explain why a US-China war over Taiwan is unlikely.

We are taking our red pen to a recent article from The Economist. The Economist, you ask, how could I? I love The Economist, I know, I know. But you'd lose respect if I give this piece a pass. In fact, it was the magazine's cover story this week, so I had no choice. The image and headline say it all. Here it is, Taiwan is now "the most dangerous place on earth" as US/China relations continue to sour in the opening months of President Biden's administration.

More Show less

Delhi-based reporter Barkha Dutt's decades of journalism couldn't prepare her for the horrific experience of covering the death of one specific COVID-19 victim: her own father. In a conversation with Ian Bremmer, Dutt recounts her desperate struggle to find an ambulance to take her father through Delhi traffic to reach the hospital, only for him to die in the ICU. Their in-depth discussion looks at India's struggle with the world's worst COVID crisis in the upcoming episode of GZERO World begins airing on US public television Friday, May 7. Check local listings.

Subscribe to GZERO Media's newsletter, Signal

The GZERO World Podcast with Ian Bremmer. Listen now.

GZEROMEDIA

Subscribe to GZERO Media's newsletter: Signal

Would China really invade Taiwan?

The Red Pen

India’s COVID crisis hits home

GZERO World Clips
The GZERO World Podcast with Ian Bremmer. Listen now.

GZEROMEDIA

Subscribe to GZERO Media's newsletter: Signal