The Oxford English Dictionary defines a
bully as "A person who uses strength or influence to harm or intimate
those who are weaker". I suspects that Mr. Trump has always been a bully. It appears as if his approach to almost any
discussion either face to face or when on social media is to bombastically shout
over his opponent, insulting them whenever possible and ignoring them when they
say things he doesn't like. He has used his financial power to dominate. His approach
has been surprising successful in his business life. Experience has shown him
that many people just back down when faced with this overbearing attitude,
perhaps in part because they can't
believe it is happening. Mr. Trump has recently started to apply that apparently
successful strategy to international affairs.
There have
been times when the USA was capable of, and the population was willing to,
support a president who wanted to dominate world politics. For example, the
American political philosophy of manifest destiny has long been applied to
other parts of the world. The Mexican -American War of the late 1840s was a
blatant land grab as was Spanish American War fifty or so years later. In fact for the next hundred years, the USA
consistently, whether overtly or subvertly, stuck its nose into the politics of
various countries scattered across the globe. And for the most part they got
away with it. The USA, in terms of their economy were the world power. They
could afford to either directly or indirectly buy governments , to use their
economic might to pressure governments
to do what they wanted or if that failed - they had a large enough army and
navy to threatened countries. There was as well a time when the battle lines
between the Soviet Union and the USA were clear; a time when 90% of the world
was divided into two political camps. Countries that fell within the USA's
sphere of influence - automatically supported their ally. I am not too sure if
Trump realizes that things are changed.
The USA is
not the economic powerhouse it once was. There are other countries (e.g. China
and India) whose economies have a significant impact on the world economy.
There are other countries who may in fact have healthier economies and who are
not dependent upon the USA. As the US's economic power wanes - citizens in
other countries are less willing to be influenced by USA's political desires.
The reduced economic power also means that the US has less money to continually
build up its armed forces. It is clear from the recent budget submitted by
Trump that if the priorities are to better support the armed forces - then
there are not sufficient funds to support the environment or enhanced social
programs. And finally - while citizens of the US have, because of extraordinary
manipulation (e.g. the myth of weapons of mass destruction), been supportive of
American intervention in the Middle East, their natural desire to be insulated
from the world predominates (part of Trump's winning campaign platform was the
promise to not engage in foreign wars). There may not be a way to convince the
American public that another war is a good thing for them.
In the past
ten or so days - Trump has dropped the largest non-nuclear bomb ever made, has
continued to threaten North Korea with the USA's Navy sailing ever closer to
their water, used 59 cruise missiles to protest Assad's use of chemical weapons
and has been surprisingly combative with Russia. It would appear as if Trump
thinks that these dictators will react to his bluster. It appears as if he
thinks that these men perhaps don't understand the art of bullying. By
definition Putin, Assad and Kim Jong-un
are bullies. They have been bullies on the international stage for far longer
than has been Trump. They have total control of their countries political apparatus
and they have far more to lose if they back down. They are not going to back down quickly or
easily.
If Trump
does not find a way out (although he seems to never be embarrassed about
changing his mind and then doing the exact opposite of what he promised), the
world is going to come far too close to another war. There are times when I
start to understand how some people felt in 1914 or 1939 as they watched their
world slip in chaos.
