By now you have heard countless recaps of President Trump’s first foreign trip. You have seen the footage of President Trump moving the Prime Minister of Montenegro, Duško Marković, aside as he heads to the front of the group. We also heard his misinformed words of indignation as he ranted about NATO countries not making “payments” and burdening American taxpayers. The visibly uncomfortable and likely confused platoon of NATO heads of state stood by as President Trump railed against the machine, wondering if this was a sign that America First mean a digression to the pre-WWII America mindset of isolationism.
Increasingly, it seems as if this is the case. President Trump’s latest action, withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement, emphasizes the administration’s animosity towards international collaboration. Rather than depicting it as a globalized attempt to create a better world for future generations, President Trump and his spokespeople painted the agreement as an international subterfuge designed to undermine the autonomy of the American economy.
President Trump’s decision to withdraw not only surely boosted projected attendance for Al Gore’s next climate change movie, but it also set off a firestorm of political commentary that predicted both the end of the planet Earth and the disappearance of America's global leadership. CNN commentator Fareed Zakaria went as far as to label the date “the day that the United States resigned as the leader of the free world.”
It is easy to label this type of commentary as a melodrama, but it is a moment of pause for anyone familiar with 20th century history, arguably not the President and his advisers. As mentioned, America First appears to be a general distrust of international cooperation and an undisputed allegiance to Americanism. A similar sentiment inhabited the hearts of common Americans and policymakers after World War I. As a result, Congress did not ratify the Covenant of the League of Nations even though President Woodrow Wilson spearheaded the effort with the Fourteen Points.
One major difference between then and now is the presence of China. A popular point in the aftermath of the decision was that President Trump was handing the big stick of global leadership on a silver platter to the Chinese. Are we at the dawn American decline and Chinese global dominance? Everyone seems to think so. But before we place the crown on Xi Jinping’s weary head, it is important to explore two very simple questions. The first is a matter of desire: does China want this duty? Second is a matter of ability: can China lead globally?
China’s recent actions suggest that the answer to our first inquiry is in the affirmative. It is evident in China’s One Belt One Road initiative, an effort to create a sophisticated network of railways, roads, pipelines, ports, and telecommunications infrastructure to facilitate integration of China’s economic interests with regions in Africa, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. As a report from the Council on Foreign Relations details, China is making plays throughout Asia and Africa. Recently, China invested $50 billion in the Asian Infrastructure Bank. China’s efforts expand beyond economic incentives as the country has emphasized Chinese culture abroad.
Clearly, China’s soft power efforts are present. To answer the second inquiry, we need to see if China’s soft power is working. There is no definitive answer as data is sparse and efforts too young. Nevertheless, real questions surround China’s ability to fit into the mold of a global leader. Standing at the vanguard of the global community requires a level of transparency that might deter the Chinese Communist Party. Human rights are an arena that stifles Chinese leadership. It is necessary to promote human rights abroad and at home. Recent events pertaining to the arrest of Chinese labor activists challenge China’s soft power facade.
Meanwhile, Xi Jinping is spearheading a tightening of government activities and financial actions as he strives to consolidate power ahead of the leadership transition in the fall. Xi Jinping also faces the dynamic of declining economic growth and burdensome debt in an economy that appears addicted to credit.
Under the leadership of a fragile communist regime whose legitimacy hinges on so many aspects, it is seems like the moniker of world leader is far off in the distance for China. Until then, the Merkel-Macron duo seems like the default.
