Donald Trump thinks of himself as a dealmaker above all else. But what Trump has in mind when he talks about winning is something very different and it offers a glimpse into his Asia policy, writes Thomas Wright. This piece originally appeared in Nikkei Asian Review.
Donald Trump thinks of himself as a dealmaker above all else. For over 30 years, the new U.S. president has criticized his predecessors from both parties for their failure to negotiate good deals for the American people. “We don’t win anymore,” he lamented on the campaign trail, as he promised to “make America great again.”
But what Trump has in mind when he talks about winning is something very different and it offers a glimpse into his Asia policy.
In reality, U.S. foreign policy has very little to do with dealmaking. It is more akin to what former Secretaries of State Dean Acheson and George Schultz described as “gardening.” What they meant was that the U.S. should plant seeds of progress and carefully tend the garden over many years, not uproot the plants every morning to see how much they grew overnight.
Diplomatic gardening in Asia has entailed patiently building and deepening alliances and partnerships. It has meant playing a constructive role in regional institutions and investing time, at the highest levels, in regional summits. It has required a positive economic agenda and an understanding that strong Asian economies will ultimately be good for the U.S. And it has meant a mixture of cooperation and competition with China, recognizing that the fates of the two countries are intertwined.
Trump’s approach could not be more different. On the campaign trail, he promised an “America First” foreign policy that would focus exclusively on immediate benefits for the U.S. He criticized America’s trade deals and argued that its military allies were taking advantage of U.S. taxpayers. So what does he really want?
It is increasingly clear that Trump and his senior advisers are preoccupied by what they see as an economic threat from China. This is the prism through which they view all of Asia, except possibly for the North Korean nuclear threat. Steve Bannon, Trump’s chief strategist, said that the president believes that U.S. support for globalization has created a middle class in China at the expense of American workers. As Trump and his trade advisers, Robert Lighthizer and Peter Navarro, see it, China is waging an economic war against the U.S. by means of unfair trade practices, currency manipulation, intellectual property theft and the use of state-owned enterprises.
They are determined to retaliate and believe they can win a trade war. They are even willing to take actions that hurt the U.S. economy as long as they hurt China more.
This raises the risk of a new cold war between Washington and Beijing that could spiral out of control—with catastrophic consequences for the Asian and global economies. That is bad enough. But what if this is Trump’s opening gambit and he is really looking to strike a grand bargain with China that would jeopardize U.S. security interests in Asia?
HARD AND RISKY LINES
Paradoxically, Trump’s hawkishness on China’s economic behavior carries with it a risk of geopolitical appeasement. Previous presidents separated the geopolitical from the economic when making decisions on security agreements. But Trump sees matters very differently, inextricably linking security arrangements to economics. If China shows a willingness to make concessions on trade, it is possible—even likely—that Trump will reciprocate when it comes to geopolitics.
Trump’s hard line on the South China Sea can be seen as part of this strategy—he is staking out a position on which he can later trade to achieve what he really cares about. The last thing U.S. allies want to hear is that Washington will treat key security commitments as negotiable assets to be bargained away in talks with Beijing.
Asia is heading into a period of profound uncertainty. Economic war and geopolitical change are on the table. There is a dealmaker loose in the garden.
[Kim Jong Un] did not engage diplomatically at all in those first seven years [as the leader of North Korea], probably because he didn’t want to hear the Chinese nagging him about advancing these weapons. And also he wasn’t going to start bargaining or negotiating them away. ... Kim has done a pivot where he’s doing a maximum engagement.
Having someone [like Andrew Kim, head of the CIA’s Korea Mission Center] with strong links to South Korean officials suggests there’s probably a high level of coordination going on [in preparation for the Trump-Kim summit], which is a good thing.
[On Trump-Moon relationship] It’s not a bad relationship, but I wouldn’t call it a love fest either.