Editorial 1: In America, surviving the messiah

Context

The election results reveal a slow but potentially tectonic change in what Americans want from their leaders

Introduction

America has spoken. The 2024 United States presidential election has delivered an outcome that, once again, belied the polls, which, until the day before the results came, insisted that the prospects of the two candidates in the fray, Republican and former U.S. President Donald Trump and Democrat and current Vice-President Kamala Harris, were poised on a razor’s edge. Instead, November 5 turned out to be a day of reckoning for the Democratic Party, as it watched one swing State after another slip out of its grasp and tip the election map of the country into deep red territory.

The Key Points of Mr. Trump’s acceptance speech

• Acknowledgment of the MAGA movement: spoke of the “incredible” MAGA movement that had put him back in the seat of power to “help the country heal”.
• Controversial remarks on U.S. Media: in the same utterances, referred to certain U.S. media as the “enemy camp” and promised to “seal up those borders”.
• Persona of Trump: But will he be a Trump to fear even more than what he was in early 2017, when he delivered a dark and tempestuous speech on Inauguration Day, now known as the “American carnage” address? Time will tell, of course, but there are some clues.

What are the broader political Trends and implications?

• The election results: reveal a slow but potentially tectonic change in what Americans want from their leaders.
• The global mood: of transactionalism, individualism, nativism and populism — which the U.S. was at the forefront of articulating in 2016 — appears to have come full circle over eight years and seeped deep into the viscera of the voting public in the country.
• Swing state wings: This might well explain the fact that Mr. Trump appears to be on track to not only win the popular vote by close to five million votes, and find victory in every swing State.
• The Red-Shift effect: Trump consider himself to be the architect of a “red shift” in more than 90% of the 2,367 counties reporting complete results at the time of writing.

Explaining the inexplicable

• Biden-Harris economic achievements: at the end of four years of toiling through the once-in-a-generation devastation of the COVID-19 pandemic and its debilitating economic fallout, the 46th President and his team had
  • brought unemployment down to a comfortably low point,
  • wages were growing fast, and
  • stock markets were at record highs.
• Inflation control: The price of milk and similar “household basket” goods was too high, some analysts have proclaimed — if so, was there a thought spared as to how the Biden White House brought inflation down to 2.4%, which is less than the long-term average, despite the heavy-lift of the post-pandemic economic stimulus.

What was the voter perception of Trump’s record?

• Acceptance of Trump’s legal and social issues: voters in ever greater numbers and drawn from an ever-wider range of socioeconomic and regional cohorts were comfortable overlooking the fact that
  • Mr. Trump faces four criminal indictments,
  • is a convicted felon in a sordid saga of sexual involvement with an adult film star, and
  • was impeached twice over charges relating to the obstruction of justice, to inciting insurrection and more. T
• Tolerance of Voters: Voters were willing to set aside his routine denigration of minorities of all hues and his degrading comments on women.
• Trump’s Role as a Disruptor: And they appreciated, nay, still welcomed, as they did in 2016, the fact that he was a disruptor and political fire-starter as much he was a poseur and a specialist in gimmickry and theatrics —
  • all because Washington elites could not get their act together and expediently embark on a project of de-globalising the economy to save blue-collar jobs in the rust belt.

Unfinished agenda

• Unequivocal mandate for Trump: If Mr. Biden could do no right, Mr. Trump could do no wrong, voters appear to say, in their unequivocal mandate of Tuesday.
• Potential trifecta of power: Now, possibly armed with a trifecta of power in the federal government should the House of Representatives join the White House and Senate and end up in Republican hands, Mr. Trump is free to coast on that mandate of trust and transform the edifice of U.S. policy and institutions in line with his paradigm, if it can be called that.

What are the key aolicy Areas under Trump’s agenda?

• Immigration: He will begin with immigration, for that was the bogeyman of the 2024 episode of ‘American carnage’.
  • While the memes on migrants to the U.S. “eating cats and dogs” flooded the comedy channels, there is a more serious undercurrent of “other-ising” peoples at play here, the dehumanising by a thousand cuts, all for the ultimate purpose, perhaps, of laying the ground for the promised mass deportations and —
  • yet again — family separations that see migrant children held in unacceptable conditions away from their parents.
• Corporate tax cuts: Next, a corporate tax cut is said to be in the works, and indeed, was also promised as a policy agenda.
  • On the one hand, it is not clear how such a cut could impact inflation, and on the other, why would this promise hold appeal to say, a coal mine worker in West Virginia, quite clearly not a member of the elite group of Wall Street and Silicon Valley executives and shareholders, folks who stand to gain considerably from such concessions?

What are the potential foreign policy and trade implications?

• Trade Tariffs and Isolationism: It is almost terrifying to open the can of worms that is a proposed Trump agenda for the world at large. The promised 10%-20% cross-cutting tariff on all $3 trillion worth of U.S. goods imports and a special, punitive 60% tariff on Chinese goods is sure to be the trigger for a retaliation-based trade war of uncertain proportions.
• Impact on international relations: If he resumes the Trump 1.0 plan of drawing America back inward and away from global, multilateral and regional engagements:
  • Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu will assume that he has a free hand to do more of what his country has done abundantly in Gaza and in other parts of West Asia; and
  • Russia’s Vladimir Putin will gleefully press forward with terms to force Ukraine into a painful détente that is backed by Washington.
• Long-Term global consequences: The list goes on — and it is perhaps only four years down the road that the world will be able to lick its wounds — human toll, institutional damage, economic catastrophes — and chart a new way forward.

Way Forward: Post-truth world

• Rhetoric vs. Voter Interests: Stepping back from the obvious contradictions between the rhetoric and promises of the Trump campaign and the interests of those who ended up voting for him in 2024, the broader philosophical question that the rise and rise of Trump begs is this: are the post-World War II liberal consensus, and its global cousin, the rule-based international order, dead in the water?
• Democratic Voter Perspective: Slightly less than 50% of the voters in this election — who threw their weight behind Ms. Harris with a fervent passion in the heat of mass mobilisation efforts for the Democratic Party — would answer, “No”.

Conclusion

They are the student protesters across U.S. universities who braved punitive actions by the university administration and the police to stand for Gaza. They are the Black Lives Matter activists who took to the streets to poignantly call out the moral repugnance of the excesses of law enforcement against minorities. They are the patient yet relentless advocates of common sense gun reform and comprehensive immigration reform, who do not shy away from telling the whole country about the plight of those at the receiving end of hawkish policies in these areas. No matter what the next four years hold for America, their message will be clear in 2028 — “We are still here.”

Editorial 2: A West Asia under Donald Trump

Context

With Joe Biden leaving behind a broken region, it remains to be seen whether Donald Trump can look at the larger strategic picture.

Introduction

One of the key foreign policy issues to have plagued Joe Biden’s single-term presidency was Israel’s war on the Palestinians in Gaza. Before the October 7, 2023 attack by Hamas in Israel, his administration seemed confident about its West Asia policy. Mr. Biden wanted to expand the Arab-Israel normalisation process, which was initiated by his predecessor, Donald Trump, through the 2020 Abraham Accords. Saudi Arabia and Israel were in an advanced stage of normalising ties. The Palestine question had been pushed to the margins of regional politics. But October 7 overhauled the status quo.

U.S. Support for Israel and Retaliatory Actions in Gaza

• Mr. Biden immediately offered his full support for Israel, which launched a retaliatory war in Gaza.
• The Biden administration’s approach was largely two-pronged:
  • support Israel’s war in Gaza, while
  • beginning diplomatic measures to prevent the conflict from escalating into an all-out regional war.
• Outcome After a Year: But what Mr. Biden got after a year was a disastrous, unending war in Gaza, sullying America’s reputation, and a widening conflict in West Asia, dragging the United States deeper into it.
• Human cost in Gaza: Over the past year, more than 43,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza.
• Expansion of the war to Lebanon: The war also expanded to Lebanon when, on October 1, Israel launched its fourth invasion of the neighbouring country.
• Escalation with Iran: The conflict has also triggered a shooting match between Israel and Iran.
• Accusations Against Mr. Biden: Mr. Biden was accused of being complicit in “Israel’s genocide” against the Palestinians, and his diplomatic efforts to prevent the conflict from widening in West Asia proved ineffectual.
• Ineffectual diplomatic efforts: This means Donald Trump, the next President of the U.S., is going to inherit a West Asia, traditionally a backyard of American influence, on fire.

 

Trump’s record

• Clear Pro-Israel Policy history: Mr. Trump is not an Israel-sceptic. Pro-Israel policies defined his West Asia policy during his first term in office.
• Embassy move to Jerusalem: It was Mr. Trump who moved America’s embassy to Jerusalem.
• Recognition of Golan Heights annexation: It was Mr. Trump’s administration that recognised Israel’s illegal annexation of Syria’s Golan Heights.
• Withdrawal from Iran nuclear deal: And it was Mr. Trump who withdrew the U.S. unilaterally from the Iran nuclear deal, despite United Nations certification that Iran was fully compliant with the terms of the 2015 agreement.
• Alliance against Iran: And even the Abraham Accords, which brought Israel and Arab nations, the two pillars of America’s West Asia policy together, were aimed at building a combined stronger alliance against Iran, the common foe of the U.S. and Israel.
• Israel-Palestine ‘Peace Plan’ in 2020: Mr. Trump had unveiled a ‘peace plan’ for Israel-Palestine in 2020, but it had been rejected outright by the Palestinian leadership, saying it was heavily in favour of Israel.
• Trump’s likely approach to Gaza conflict: So, Mr. Trump is unlikely to take a strong moral position against Israel’s war in Gaza.
  • During the campaign, he had also made it clear that he strongly stood for Israel’s victory in the ongoing wars in West Asia.
• Challenges for Mr. Trump: Yet, Israel’s disastrous multi-front wars would pose critical foreign policy challenges to Mr. Trump.

 

Threads to the issues

• Initial problem: The first problem he would face is what Mr. Biden faced in October 2023.
  • Mr. Biden was ready to overlook criticisms of genocide against Israel, but he did not want an all-out war in West Asia, which the Americans believe are not in their interests.
  • He called for a ceasefire in Gaza but refused to exert any meaningful pressure on the Benjamin Netanyahu government.
  • According to an analysis by Brown University, the Biden administration spent $17.9 billion on military assistance to Israel in a year from October 2023.
  • Mr. Biden wanted to insulate the war in Gaza from the larger conflict in West Asia, but he failed to do so.
• Mr. Trump’s likely approach: Mr. Trump, likewise, might support Israel in the war on Gaza or against Hezbollah, but he would not like the U.S. being drawn into a regional war, mainly for two reasons.

What are the reasons for Mr. Trump’s resistance to a regional war?

• Political pressure from Trump’s base: First, Mr. Trump’s base is against the U.S. getting stuck in West Asia’s forever wars.
  • His Vice-President-elect J.D. Vance has repeatedly slammed America’s wars in the region, particularly the 2003 Iraq invasion.
• Focus on U.S. conventional strength and rivalry with China: Mr. Trump would like to focus on further strengthening America’s conventional capabilities and bring China, its most powerful conventional rival, into the pulpit of his foreign policy.
  • A war with Iran would not serve this purpose.
• Economic Priority: One of Mr. Trump’s key campaign promises was to fix the cost of living crisis.
  • If there is a larger war with Iran, which could affect energy supplies through the Strait of Hormuz that connects the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea, the inflationary pressure will only get enhanced.
  • For political, economic and strategic reasons, a wider war in West Asia would not be in the interest of a Trump administration either.

Way Forward: Looking ahead

• Restoring America’s position in West Asia: But what is to be seen is whether Mr. Trump can look at the larger strategic picture and take corrective measures to restore America’s position in West Asia.
• The Legacy Left by Mr. Biden: Mr. Biden is leaving behind a broken region where Israel is going rogue with American support.

Conclusion

Granted, America still remains the most powerful country in the region and its Arab allies are still sticking to America’s leadership, despite many grievances. But Israel’s unending, disproportionate wars have damaged America’s reputation. Worse, it has brought the region to the brink of an all-out war. Mr. Trump has to be more assertive in bringing the wars in Gaza and Lebanon to an end at the earliest if he wants to restore stability in the region. If he continues the Biden policies, topped up by his own pro-Israeli impulses which were on display during his first presidency, West Asia will fall further into chaos.