Joseph Na: Is Trump a turning point of world politics?

Joseph Middot; Nai

As the 2020 presidential election campaign in the United States entered the sprint stage, and the nomination conference of the two parties did not discuss much about foreign policies. The competition between the Republican President Trump and the Democratic Party nominated Biden will obviously focus on it will mainly surroundDomestic issues unfold.However, in the long run, historians will ask whether Trump's presidential term represents a major turning point in the world's global role, or it is just a small historical accident.

There is no answer at this stage because we don't know if Trump can be elected again.Is my book morality important?The 14 U.S. presidents have been rated since 1945, of which the formal rating to Trump is incomplete, and he is currently ranked 25%at the end.

Roosevelt and other top 25%of presidents recognized the defects of American isolation in the 1930s and established a free international order after 1945.A turning point was Truman's decision after the war, which directly spawned the long -term alliance that continues to this day.In 1948, the United States planned a large amount of capital to Marshall, established NATO in 1949, and led the United Nations army to attack North Korea in 1950.In 1960 under President Eisenhower, the United States signed a new security treaty with Japan.

Although for many years, in terms of military intervention in developing countries such as Vietnam and Iraq, Americans have sharp differences within their own and between other countries, but the institutional order of liberalism still has widely supported until Trump until TrumpIn the 2016 presidential election, it became the first nominee to attack the order.Trump also skeptical of foreign intervention, although he increased national defense budgets, he was relatively rarely used forces.

Trump's anti -intervention ideas are more popular with the public, but he cannot reflect mainstream opinions on the narrowness of the national interests, the definition of transactionality, and the alliance and multilateral institutions.Since 1974, the Chicago Global Affairs Council has asked the public whether the United States should actively intervene in world affairs. About one -third of the US public has been an isolatedist and reached the highest point of 41%in 2014.But opposite to the traditional view, 64%of the people in favor of the 2016 election were in favor of actively intervening, and this number then rose to a high level of 70%in 2018.

Trump's election and its populist demands are based on the economic chaos that has intensified in 2008, but in fact, more cultural changes from racial, women's characters and gender identity are actually more.Although Trump did not win the overall majority votes in 2016, he successfully attributed economic unsteady and wages to adverse trade agreements and immigrants, and successfully made white people's dissatisfaction with the increasing population ratio and influence of ethnic minorities.Course with foreign policy.However, according to former national security adviser Bolton, Trump, as president, has little strategic awareness, and its foreign policy is mainly driven by domestic politics and personal interests.

Before Trump took office, Martin Wolf, chief economic commentator of the British Financial Times, described it at this moment as the end of the economic period (Western -led globalization) and a geopolitical period (American leader leaderThe end of the Cold War after the Single Permanent time).In this way, Trump may be proven to be a turning point in the history of the United States and world, especially if he is elected again.His election demands may be concentrated in domestic politics, but his impact on world politics may be transformed.

The current debate on Trump is reminiscent of an unreasonable issue: whether the major historical consequences are the product of political leaders' decision -making, or the result of the social and economic power that individuals cannot control?Sometimes, history is like a rushing river. The route depends on precipitation and terrain, and the leader is just ants with tight branches in the water.In my opinion, they are more like drifts who try to manipulate kayak and avoid rocks. Sometimes they turn the boat and fall into the water, and sometimes they can successfully reach the planned destination.

For example, Roosevelt has been unable to allow the United States to participate in World War II before attacking Pearl Harbor, but it turns out that his moral framework cognition of Hitler's threats and his preparations for this threat.is crucial.If Henry Wallace (Henry Wallace, who was once Vice President after World War II, was replaced by Roosevelt in the 1944 election) instead of Truman as the president, the United States' response to Soviet ambitions may be different.If the isolatedist Robert TAFT or the arrogant Douglas Macarthur won the 1952 election, instead of being maintained by Eisenhower, the process of Truman's relatively stable consolidation of the Soviet curb strategy may be disturbed.

Kennedy played a key role in avoiding the Nuclear War during the Cuban missile crisis and the subsequent signing of the nuclear arms control agreement for the first time.However, he and Lyndon Johnson dragged the United States into the unnecessary defeat of Vietnam.In the last decades of the last century, economic factors caused the Soviet Union to decline, and Gorbachev's actions accelerated the collapse of the Soviet Group.Reagan's national defense construction and negotiation skills, as well as Bush's crisis processing capabilities, played an important role in the end of peace and the unification of the two virtues.

In other words, leaders and their skills are also important, which means that they cannot ignore Trump easily.What is more important than his tweet is that he weakens the soft power of the system, alliance, and the United States in attractiveness; polls show that this attractiveness has been declining since 2016.

Power conspiracy and organizational ability are essential for successful US presidents, and the same is true of emotional intelligence leading self -awareness, self -control and environmental insights, but this is lacking in Trump.Whether in 2021 or 2025, his successor will face a changeable world.This is the product of Trump's unique personality and policies to some extent, and the degree of change depends on Trump's term.After November 3, we will know whether we are at a historic turning point or only experienced a historic accident.

Author Joseph S. Nye, Jr. is a professor at Harvard University. Is the new book important?The presidential and foreign policy from Roosevelt to Trump? Presidents and Foreign Policy from FDR to Trump.

English Title: Is Trump a Turning Point in World Politics?