How Trump Plans to Change the World: An Analysis of His Statements Without Emotions

Donald Trump has not yet taken the presidential oath or returned to the White House, and his statements have already caused information tsunamis around the world. Analysts, journalists and officials were particularly active in commenting on the 47th president’s statements about turning Canada into the 51st state of the United States of America, joining Greenland to the United States of America, and returning control of the Panama Canal to the United States of America. It is worth noting that against the background of the stated intentions regarding territorial expansion, Trump’s idea of ​​renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America no longer looks like something significant.

Unfortunately, regarding Ukraine, Donald Trump repeated Putin’s narrative about the United States violating a commitment that never existed regarding the non-expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to the East. Obviously, the newly elected President of the United States of America himself could not agree to this position, so the question arises who explained to him the reason for Russian military aggression in this way and why other explanations of the Russian Federation’s attack on Ukraine did not achieve their goal. In addition, it is worth noting that no less surprising is the reaction to Donald Trump's statements by a significant number of Ukrainian experts, who, without waiting for additional arguments from the new team, hastened to assess the future that awaits Ukraine and the world, at least as a catastrophe. Indeed, it is difficult to predict the further development of events in times when the main characteristic of the moment is total uncertainty. However, it is still worth taking your time and trying to analyze Donald Trump's statements without resorting to hype and swear words. After all, we will not have another president of the United States of America in the next four years.

For example, Donald Trump's answer to the question of what to do about the fires in California, where at a critical moment there was a total shortage of water, was quite indicative. Donald Trump answered quite intelligently and reasonably. Hardly anyone in Ukraine knows that the richest state in the United States of America has a water consumption limit of 55 gallons per person per day until January 2025 and 50 gallons per person per day until 2030. And one of the reasons for this situation is that, according to Donald Trump, certain environmental projects are being implemented in the north of the state to preserve fish. The 47th president promised to fix all this quickly. Similarly, in a recent interview, Donald Trump's special representative for Ukraine and the Russian Federation, Keith Kellogg, surprisingly rationally explained Trump's statements regarding Greenland and Panama. Yes, the question of the acquisition of Greenland by the United States of America has repeatedly arisen in the past. In particular, in 1947, the United States of America offered Denmark $ 100 million in gold for the largest island in the world. To tell the truth, it was done secretly then, and now the same thing is said openly, but there is nothing you can do about it, because times are different now.

The same applies to the Panama Canal, which was built by the United States of America in 1904-1914, was under joint management for a long time and was finally transferred to Panama in 1999. At that time, Washington could not have predicted that in 2017 Panama would break diplomatic relations with Taiwan in favor of the People's Republic of China (PRC), and in 2018 it would become the first Latin American country to join the Chinese megaproject “One Belt, One Road”. Since then, the presence of Chinese companies in Panama’s port infrastructure has increased dramatically. Meanwhile, according to the so-called Neutrality Treaty, the United States of America has the right to intervene, even with the use of military force, if the “neutrality” of the canal’s management is violated. Today, the United States of America believes that this is exactly what is happening, although most of the ships using this sea route are American. It is also worth noting that the issue of changing the status quo around the Panama Canal has arisen before, and long before Donald Trump. However, as in other cases, the indecision of previous administrations has prevented the situation from being corrected.

During his first presidential term, Donald Trump repeatedly proved that he is capable of making decisions. It is worth mentioning that it was he who provided Ukraine with weapons, in particular the FGM-148 Javelin portable anti-tank missile system; it was he who gave the order to attack the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Syria with American multi-purpose high-precision subsonic cruise missiles Tomahawk, although Obama talked a lot about “red lines”; it was at his request that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization countries began to increase defense spending and pay more attention to ensuring their own security, which came in handy when the Russian Federation attacked Ukraine; it was he who introduced tariffs against Chinese goods, although the need to correct the imbalance in trade between the United States of America and the People's Republic of China (PRC) was also discussed with him. By the way, it is worth noting that despite the criticism of Donald Trump for this decision, Joe Biden did not cancel the imposed tariffs, that is, he actually recognized their expediency.

Donald Trump, a politician and businessman, is one of those people who strive to change reality and expand the boundaries of what is possible. It is also worth noting that after three years of war in Europe, which has already acquired a distinct Asian component in the form of active support for the aggressor from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) and inactive, but still support from the People's Republic of China (PRC), the world is becoming increasingly aware of the radical changes inspired by revisionist states. After the failure of Fukuyama's theory of the end of history and Huntington's concept of the clash of civilizations (totally incorrect in the case of the Russian Federation and Ukraine), Thomas Friedman's theory that "no two countries that have McDonald's have ever fought each other since they got these McDonald's" also became irrelevant. Such countries have been at war for the eleventh year in a row. What will replace these concepts is unknown, but perhaps with the coming to power of Donald Trump as President of the United States of America, these changes will become more pronounced.

One of the most important principles of the Japanese warrior's path is the maxim "live as if you were already dead." It means that in a difficult situation, when you have to make a choice or make a decision in conditions of complete uncertainty, it is important to immediately imagine the worst-case scenario (what could be worse than death?), calm down, and then "improve" your chances through reasonable and prudent actions.

This is already happening both in Europe and in East Asia, where the leaders of leading countries have finally begun to realize the very real need to revise security concepts and systems in the option "without the active participation of the United States of America." Most likely, Donald Trump's absolute priority will remain deterrence of China's actions, but in addition to the issue of tariffs, as was the case during his previous term, more attention will be paid to such a tool as the political and economic orientation of key countries towards the United States of America. It is worth noting that this will be one of the biggest uncertainties — after all, Donald Trump's strong supporter Elon Musk has powerful production facilities in the People's Republic of China (PRC) (in particular, the Tesla factory near Shanghai), and, for example, Hungary under the leadership of Viktor Orban is one of China's key partners in Europe, unlike Italy, which withdrew from the "Belt and Road". On May 10 last year, the People's Republic of China (PRC) and Hungary decided to raise the level of bilateral relations to an “all-weather comprehensive strategic partnership in a new era.” It is interesting to see how the “weather” in the White House will now affect this partnership. Given the experience of Donald Trump’s previous term, none of the politicians and businessmen can count on his eternal and unquestioning support.

Of course, Donald Trump’s position on the Russian Federation’s war against Ukraine will be of paramount importance for Ukraine, since his personal vision will now be transformed into a decision by the United States Congress. The biggest challenge is to convince him that the Russian Federation’s policy, not only in the context of the war against Ukraine, but also in the global dimension, directly contradicts the interests of the United States of America. This is in the context of “deterring” the People's Republic of China (PRC), and technology transfer to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), and threats to South Korea and Japan, since these two countries are the largest investors in the American economy. Donald Trump should be interested in their security and prosperity.

I would suggest that working with Donald Trump’s team should be very careful and carried out differently in both form and content than with the previous administration, if only because Donald Trump constantly emphasizes that he is not like the others. At the same time, it is important to gain the support of Republicans and not quarrel with Democrats, to find the right balance between strategic relations, on the one hand, with the United States of America, and on the other, in particular with Canada and especially with Denmark, which is one of the countries that most supports Ukraine. Donald Trump seems to sympathize with extraordinary political leaders who are able to make decisions and act “contrary to all the laws of physics.” However, it is worth noting that this does not mean that such sympathies are stable and guaranteed. In addition, it should be remembered that all components of the “Donald Trump personnel equation” can change, except, perhaps, family members and the closest, most loyal entourage. 

Once, during the term of the Republican president, at a New Year's reception at the State Department, the US Secretary of State told as a joke what the main principle of the foreign policy of the United States of America is. It consists of two points: the first is to formulate the national interests of the United States of America, and the second is to inform other countries of the deadlines for their achievement. Those present simply laughed at the joke. This was long before Donald Trump came to the White House, but it seems that this principle has not disappeared from Washington and is no longer a joke. The question is only in the details, namely, how to make Ukraine's interests in key issues coincide with the interests of the United States of America, but not only the United States of America. The hundred days during which Donald Trump will seek to end the Russian Federation's war against Ukraine should not turn into a hundred years of loneliness.

 

Read this article in Ukrainian and russian.