Can Trump 2.0 reshape the world order?

Donald John Trump, 78, the grandson of a Bavarian who migrated to the US in 1905, has trumped vice-president Kamala Harris, the Democratic candidate nominated by President Joe Biden after his disastrous performance in a debate with Trump in June.

Trump’s is a landslide win, considering that most poll pundits, perhaps misled by the mainstream media working openly against him, had projected a ‘dead-heat’ race.

He won 52% of the popular vote, his party captured the Senate, and is poised to capture the House of Representatives. He also holds a 6 to 3 majority in the Supreme Court.

Why Trump won

First, Trump put his personal stamp on the Republican Party, making it more his victory than the party’s.

Second, Trump should thank Biden as Harris’ defeat was influenced by the burden of the Biden legacy she was carrying. She unwisely told voters she agreed with Biden on all policy issues.

She failed to distinguish herself as a leader with her own ideas to tackle key voter concern about inflation as experienced at the gas station and the grocery store.

The argument that the rate of inflation under Biden was lower than under Trump does not hold, as inflation is cumulative.

Third, Trump emphasized the threat of “outsiders” crossing the border and drew attention to Harris’ record of inaction.

Fourth, Trump did utter lies and resorted to atrocious exaggerations. It seems that a good part of his supporters liked it.

Fifth, by not differentiating herself from Biden’s policy on Gaza, Harris lost Michigan (15 electoral college votes) with a sizeable Arab American voters, where Trump improved his score from 155,000 votes in 2020 to 279,599 this year.

How Trump 2.0 will differ from his first term

Many pundits have inferred what he would do as president from his pronouncements as a candidate. Similarly, there is a tendency to extrapolate into the second term from what he did in his first term. We cannot assume that such inferences are always correct.

Trump’s style of decision-making might not change. However, he does not have to worry about re-election and might be tempted to leave a good legacy.

Will he risk mass deportation?

It is unclear what he might do about the estimated 11 million undocumented people in the US, many of whom are employed.

First, how to locate them? By raiding workplaces and taking them away?

Employers might approach the courts and Trump could become unpopular, and prices might rise if there is a labor shortage because people have been deported.

Second, it might be a logistical nightmare to deport as many as 11 million to different countries, especially if those countries do not cooperate.

Trump might opt for symbolic deportation and declare victory.

How about igniting a trade war redux?

Candidate Trump threatened to impose 60% tariffs on imports from China and 10-20% on imports from other countries. On 4 November, he threatened Mexico with a 100% tariff unless it closed its borders with the US.

Obviously, Trump cannot start a trade war with all exporting countries simultaneously as they might retaliate, causing chaos and driving up inflation in the US. He might tackle them one by one. Even then, he would have to consider the impact on US consumers.

Trump considers himself as an exceptionally smart dealmaker and after making threats he might negotiate deals to avoid actual enforcement.

Can Trump pull the plug on NATO?

Europe has been engaged in ‘Trump-proofing’ for some time. Europe fears that Trump might walk out of NATO. France, Poland, and Luxembourg have discussed the need for a European Army to defend Europe.

Reflection shows that Trump, the most enthusiastic salesman of the powerful military-industrial-congressional complex in America, will not leave the NATO. He might threaten to do so, only to compel Europe to spend more on defense, meaning buying more arms from America. If Trump were to leave NATO, Europe might stop buying arms from the US.

Is a reset in US-Russia ties on the horizon?

The American media have attached some significance to Putin not calling Trump to congratulate him after his victory.

Kremlin press secretary Dmitry Peskov said at a Wednesday briefing that he was not aware of any plans to congratulate Trump and made clear that relations with the US were at a historic low.

“It is practically impossible to make relations between the United States and Russia any worse as they are already at their lowest point in history,” Peskov said, according to Russian state-run media outlet TASS.”

In 2018, when Putin was re-elected as president, Trump did not immediately call him.

It is possible that both Trump and Putin are playing a game. They might have been in touch through safe channels.

Two days after Peskov spoke, Putin publicly hailed Trump’s victory and praised him for saying he would end the war “in 24 hours” after election.

What will it mean for Ukraine’s future?

Trump is likely to announce his policy on Ukraine even before formally taking office as President on 20 January. He might state his policy in response to a question at a press conference.

Already Hungary and Slovakia, both EU members opposed to sending arms to Ukraine, have urged Trump to stop the war.

The crux of the matter is that Ukraine has not been able to resist Russia with all the help it has received so far. Russia will capture more territory unless ceasefire talks begin.

A war that Biden hoped would destabilize Russia is likely to become a monumental error of judgment on Biden’s part.

And the China-Russia nexus?

Trump is likely to threaten China with increased tariffs. Equally likely that he might look for a deal.

He is also likely to recognize Biden’s mistake in simultaneously confronting China and Russia, thereby deepening the nexus between them.

Trump might attempt to weaken the Russia-China nexus. Eventually, the Russia-China-Iran axis might get stronger, not necessarily to America’s advantage.

Whether Trump will succeed is another matter.

How about the Middle East?

Trump is not a warmonger. He would like to take credit for ending wars. He is likely to ask Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to start a war with Iran.

One possibility is that he might ask Netanyahu to agree to a ceasefire against freeing the hostages and even a temporary withdrawal from most of Gaza, hinting to Netanyahu that he could proceed with his plans later, after normalization with Saudi Arabia.

Although candidate Trump said that Israel should target the nuclear sites in Iran, President Trump will be advised of the risks involved.

And his approach in the Korean peninsula, Japan and Taiwan?

Trump is likely to demand payment for the protection the US provides to South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan.

China might think twice before provoking Trump by taking military action to capture Taiwan.

Regarding North Korea, Trump might try to reach an agreement with Kim Jong Un to limit its nuclear weapons and missiles in exchange for normalization of relations.

This approach makes sense as the policy of sanctions and isolation has not worked. Further, North Korea is aligned with Russia and China, and Trump might see some advantage in trying to weaken that alignment.

What’s the UN’s future?

Trump might make life more difficult for the UN and its agencies. He might succeed partially.

And, finally, India?

His personal chemistry with Prime Minister Narendra Modi is good and might even get better. Both leaders attach much importance, perhaps undue, to such chemistry.

Nevertheless, Trump, who has called India a “trade abuser”, might be tough on trade issues. We may recall the fuss he made about the raised tariff on Harley Davidson bikes from the US in 2019.

There are Trump Towers in Mumbai, Pune, Gurugram, and Kolkata. We might see more of them.

The defense cooperation is likely to get stronger. Trump will be eager to sell more weapons and might be more lenient about technology transfers.

Regarding the dispute between Canada and India, Trump might nudge both parties to resolve it.

All told, Trump has a historic opportunity to go down the annals as one of the best presidents. Whether he will seize this opportunity in the best possible manner is another question.

The political skills needed to capture power differ from those required for delivering good governance.

As the ancient Greek dramatists said, “character is destiny”.