Jul 22nd 2018

Trump and the Reordering of World Order

by Daniel Wagner

 

Daniel Wagner is the founder and CEO of Country Risk Solutions and a widely published author on current affairs and risk management.

Daniel Wagner began his career at AIG in New York and subsequently spent five years as Guarantee Officer for the Asia Region at the World Bank Group's Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency in Washington, D.C. After then serving as Regional Manager for Political Risks for Southeast Asia and Greater China for AIG in Singapore, Daniel moved to Manila, Philippines where he held several positions - including as Senior Guarantees and Syndications Specialist - for the Asian Development Bank's Office of Co-financing Operations. Prior to forming CRS he was Senior Vice President of Country Risk at GE Energy Financial Services. He also served as senior consultant for the African Development Bank on institutional investment.

Daniel Wagner is the author of seven books: The America-China Divide, China Vision, AI Supremacy, Virtual Terror, Global Risk Agility and Decision Making, Managing Country Risk, and Political Risk Insurance Guide. He has also published more than 700 articles on risk management and current affairs and is a regular contributor to the South China Morning Post, Sunday Guardian, and The National Interest, among many others. (For a full listing of his publications  and media interviews please see www.countryrisksolutions.com).

Daniel Wagner holds master's degrees in International Relations from the University of Chicago and in International Management from the Thunderbird School of Global Management in Phoenix. He received his bachelor's degree in Political Science from Richmond College in London.

Daniel Wagner can be reached at: daniel.wagner@countryrisksolutions.com.

It has become clear over the first 18 months of the Trump presidency that what we are witnessing is nothing short of an attempted reordering of world order. Trump appears intent on shaking the foundations of the entire post-war order (which America was of course instrumental in creating). He has established himself as the Disruptor-in-Chief, but is there any point in trying to disrupt so many things at once? And, can any of what Trump is trying to achieve actually occur while there is so much opposition to him and what he is trying to do?

These are legitimate questions and concerns, but they presume that anyone actually knows two things: what is in Trump’s mind and what the outcome will be. No one but Trump (and some would argue, not even he) actually knows what is going on in his mind at any given point in time. He has said so many outrageous things only to walk them back when the inevitable negative reaction occurs that it is genuinely hard to know if anything he says will actually stick.

The truth is, the disadvantage (or benefit) of being in uncharted territory is that no one knows what comes next. Herein resides an important point: no one knows what the outcome of Trump’s antics will be. Not even Trump. On one hand, it is absurd to imagine that 70+ years of post-war order will be upended in the space of a few months just because two leaders may want it to be that way. But what if Trump and Putin were to actually begin to collaborate (to the extent that Trump can without requiring congressional approval)?

Anyone who watched the Fox News interview with Putin following the Helsinki soiree will have noticed that Putin had some really good answers to the numerous provocative questions that were thrown at him. Seen from the Russia perspective, its interference in the 2016 US presidential election is no different than the many elections the US had meddled in in the past, such as in Iran, Guatemala, and Chile. Crimea used to be part of the Russia, and a referendum overwhelmingly supported Russia’s annexation of the region. The point is, those of us in the West naturally view the world from our unique perspective and the Russians do the same. Both are right and both are wrong.

Let us look at some cold hard realities. The US has few friends in the world right now. Its influence in global affairs has been declining for the past 15 years. It has largely withdrawn from active engagement in global conflicts (with a couple of notable exceptions). Apart from Israel and Saudi Arabia, its influence in the Middle East is a shadow of what it used to be. By contrast, Russia and China’s influence is rising exponentially in the region, and beyond. So, is the US better or worse off trying to find a way to work with Russia? One could easily argue that it is actually in the US interest to do so at this time.

The question is, can US legislators jump off the Cold War, anti-Russian bandwagon long enough to see that the ground is shifting beneath them? All the things US legislators are busy screaming about - Putin’s meddling in the 2016 election, his annexation of Crimea, and Russia’s influence in Syria - are already a fait accompli. They are done! There is nothing the US or West can do about any of them, so what is the point, exactly, of continuing to cry foul about it all?

One could easily argue that the election meddling happened because US cyber defenses were too weak and Crimea happened because the US allowed it to happen. Assad and Putin’s victory in Syria happened because the US was too ineffectual and its sources of attempted influence there were too weak to counter their partnership. The West should probably be thanking them for destroying the Islamic State’s physical presence in Syria, because the West certainly could not.

While the US is busy slipping off of its precipice, many of its best known political figures are beating a rather tired old drum – the new Cold War, Russia, China, North Korea. It is boring, predictable, and dated. In the meantime, Russia and China are proceeding apace to reshape world order – without America.

Trump gets a lot of things wrong and his tactics often stink, but he is on to something here. His opponents presume that the reason he wants to make nice with Putin is that Putin has something on him. What, exactly would that be? Trump’s political base does not give two hoots about any of that and Trump’s political opponents have thus far not been able to prove a thing. Could it just be that he sees an America being diminished by its own failures and the folly of sitting on the sidelines while Russia and China pass it by?

Since no one yet knows the outcome of any of Trump’s supposed foreign “misadventures”, and since no one can predict the future, there is a chance –that an alliance with Putin could work and make America’s influence greater in the world, America’s relationship with Europe could become stronger in the longer-term as a result of Trump’s insistence that European countries begin to pay their fair share of NATO defense spending, and a lasting peace may finally be achieved on the Korean peninsula.

Only time will tell whether any of these outcomes will occur, but it would be nice if America would give itself a break, get out of its own way, and at least see if any of Trump’s bold initiatives will work. The alternative is to fall further behind Russia and China on the global chessboard.

 

*Daniel Wagner is CEO of Country Risk Solutions and co-author of Global Risk Agility. His new book on Artificial Intelligence will be out in the Fall.

This article first appeared in the Sunday Guardian.

 


This article is brought to you by the author who owns the copyright to the text.

Should you want to support the author’s creative work you can use the PayPal “Donate” button below.

Your donation is a transaction between you and the author. The proceeds go directly to the author’s PayPal account in full less PayPal’s commission.

Facts & Arts neither receives information about you, nor of your donation, nor does Facts & Arts receive a commission.

Facts & Arts does not pay the author, nor takes paid by the author, for the posting of the author's material on Facts & Arts. Facts & Arts finances its operations by selling advertising space.

 

 

Browse articles by author

More Current Affairs

Feb 14th 2009

Anyone who believes that anti-Semitism is a thing of the past needs to consider the case of Bishop Richard Williamson, the cleric who denies that the Holocaust occurred and insists that the murder of six million Jews is "lies, lies, lies."

Feb 14th 2009

NEW DELHI - Indians haven't often had much to root for at the Oscars, Hollywood's annual celebration of cinematic success. Only two Indian movies have been nominated in the Best Foreign Language Film category in the last 50 years, and neither won.

Feb 13th 2009

NEW YORK - A year ago, I predicted that the losses of US financial institutions would reach at least $1 trillion and possibly go as high as $2 trillion.

Feb 12th 2009

You'd think that the results of November's election -- coupled with the collapse of the economy -- would begin to make Republican lawmakers question the consequences of their blind commitment to right wing economic orthodoxy.

Feb 12th 2009

In the end, it does not matter all that much that Bibi Netanyahu is going to be Israel's next prime minister. I don't see much (if any) real differences between him and Ehud Barak or Tzipi Livni.

Feb 11th 2009

TEL AVIV- "The voters", said Binyamin Netanyahu in his strange victory speech, during Israel's bizarre post-election night, "have spoken." And so they have, in a multiplicity of self-contradictory voices.

Feb 11th 2009

War and violence always have a direct effect on elections. Wars account for dramatic shifts in voter preferences, and radical leaders and parties often poll much higher after a round of sharp violence than in normal times.

Feb 11th 2009

JERUSALEM - Israel's election is a victory for centrism and national consensus. Indeed, that is the key to understanding not only the vote count, but also Israeli public opinion, the next government, and its policies.

Feb 10th 2009

CAMBRIDGE - Two years ago, Barack Obama was a first-term senator from a mid-western state who had declared his interest in running for the presidency. Many people were skeptical that an African-American with a strange name and little national experience could win.

Feb 10th 2009

To make serious progress toward a final status agreement between Israel and the
Palestinians, George Mitchell must first work on restoring confidence in a peace
process that years of havoc and destruction have all but destroyed. To that end,

Feb 8th 2009

Peter Berkowitz's essay in the latest issue of the Weekly Standard provides good insight into what I think is the strategic irresponsibility of those in Israel's leade

Feb 6th 2009

The crisis in journalism has, during the past few months, reached meltdown proportions.

Feb 5th 2009

When I got stopped by the police in downtown Bordeaux for running a red light last week, I was thinking "Don't you cops have anything better to do ?" But the words that came out of my mouth were a lot more conciliatory, something like "Sorry, I thought it was green."

Feb 4th 2009

NEW YORK - For 15 years, I have attended the World Economic Forum in Davos. Typically, the leaders gathered there share their optimism about how globalization, technology, and markets are transforming the world for the better.

Feb 4th 2009

From his first Middle East tour as President Obama's special envoy, George
Mitchell must have found that not much has changed since his 2001 report. During
his previous mission on the origins of the Second Intifada, Mitchell concluded

Feb 3rd 2009

JERUSALEM - Europe's vocation for peacemaking and for international norms of behavior is bound to become the base upon which Barack Obama will seek to reconstruct the transatlantic alliance that his predecessor so badly damaged.

Feb 3rd 2009

Sunday's enthronement of Russia's first patriarch since the fall of the Soviet Union, Patriarch Kirill, was a moment of some reflection for those present.

Feb 2nd 2009

BERKELEY - When an economy falls into a depression, governments can try four things to return employment to its normal level and production to its "potential" level. Call them fiscal policy, credit policy, monetary policy, and inflation.