Current media attention on the US presidential election is missing out examining the unprecedented turbulence affecting key players in geopolitics and the current world order dominated by the United States.
The Group of Seven (G7) advanced economies forum, which has been functioning as a handmaiden of the US economic and foreign policy agenda, is now in disarray. Italy has a newly elected president from the radical rightwing and its nationalist conservatism wave, anti incumbency, anti immigrant sentiments, and electoral volatility have had aftershocks reverberating across the continent.
Today, France and Germany, the leading European nations, are having the grip of long running parties not just challenged but also loosened. Emmanuel Macron is virtually a lame duck President during the next 3 years with diluted powers in domestic and foreign policy. A similar fate awaits Olaf Scholz. He is in charge of a coalition government which has turned further right and splintered more during the recent European Parliament election.
Meanwhile in Japan, Prime Minister Kishida Fumio has booted himself out of his position in government and his party, the Liberal Democrat party. Faced with a lacklustre economy, endemic political and money scandals and unpopular ruling government and opposition parties, Japan is stalled for the foreseeable future with weak factionless leadership lacking strong majority support.
Rudderless in domestic politics, Japan is now even more dependent on the US for foreign policy leadership. This is clear as seen in its unprecedented break from a more pacifist foreign policy to one with a record military expenditure beginning 2024 and extending to 2027. Besides greater convergence with US policy in the Asia-Pacific region aimed at containing and contesting China, Japan has loosened export restrictions on the sale and supply of lethal weapons and munitions to other countries. It seems like Japan has forgotten learning from the Second World War and Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
What Happens Next After November
Whether it is Trump or Harris winning the Presidential election in the US, he or she will have to prioritise the domestic issues dividing the country and which their respective parties and political leadership have been unable to resolve.
Better jobs, inflation, immigration, race, abortion, health care, Supreme Court and justice, crime and gun control – the blend and interplay of socio-cultural, economic and political homegrown problems and concerns have become more toxic and unresolvable. Whoever wins, however large the margin and whatever the feel good cheerleaders in the media or think tanks have to say, US society – post election – will remain polarised and disunited with Republicans and Democratic leaders and voters on opposite sides of the fence on major domestic issues.
Meantime, the polls tracking American trust in government which go back to 1958 are at or near record lows. As of April 2024, an overwhelming minority 22% of Americans say they trust the government in Washington to do what is right “just about always” (2%) or “most of the time” (21%). Last year, 16% said they trusted the government just about always or most of the time, which was among the lowest measure in nearly seven decades of polling.
What’s also significant is that there is little trust in most of the 16 identified major US institutions. Whether it be the presidency, Congress, judiciary, medical system, the Church and organised religion, banks, police, public schools, newspapers and tv news, etc. public trust in the institutions that are the hallmark of the American way of life has plummeted to levels that resemble those of the ‘failed’ states that admirers of the US are prone to referring to when castigating countries they target for criticism.
If US leaders cannot inspire trust in their institutions or sell their confidence and worth to their own public, what is it that we can expect of them to inspire and sell to their allies, Malaysia or the rest of the world?
For now, there should be no illusion that the US – through the enormous resources, reach and primacy of its military – industrial – commercial – media and academic complex (MICMA) and the support of its deputy sheriffs in the small number of faithful allied countries – will continue being the chief instigator and perpetrator of wars, military conquest, gunboat diplomacy, unequal treaties, economic exploitation, sanctions and other dirty tricks.
We can expect It to be business as usual for America’s MICMA and its junior mainly European associates – but now including Japan – especially at the lucrative global weapons market.
Pay Up Or Else!
There will be one important difference though for G7 and NATO members arising from the US Presidential outcome. Whoever wins will insist that member countries will have to cough up and pay a lot more given the distressed state of the US national debt which recently hit a record US$34 trillion, and the huge annual deficit of over US1.5 trillion so far for 2024.
According to the French newspaper Le Monde report, “Why did Donald Trump accuse NATO members of not paying?”, Trump noted:
“I said, ‘You didn’t pay, you’re delinquent […] No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage [the Russians] to do whatever the hell they want.’”
The UK Guardian newspaper quoted the following
He (Trump) recounted a conversation with an unidentified NATO member in which he said, “You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent? No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills.”
It is more than likely that the administration of Kamala Harris if she wins will take the same position as Trump in demanding that NATO and other US allies have to pay a great deal more to secure the ‘privilege’ of American protection.
G7 and NATO citizenry perhaps can console themselves that the insistence by the US that it will no longer be the major paymaster of NATO can have a positive counter effect on their foreign policy allegiance and dependence on the US. Should this happen, it may provide a first step to the end of the war in Ukraine and help bring genuine peace and security to the continent.
Asia- Pacific leaders should take notice too. What G7 and NATO members will have to deal with from financial year 2025 onwards will have to be reckoned for in the defence budgets in Australia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines where some of the over 750 military bases of the US around the world are located.
They will discover – as Australians are finding with AUKUS – that the price to pay for being deputy sheriff to the US will cost them and the coming generation a more than exorbitant monetary sum This does not include the consequences of being party to a war over which they will have no control and from which there will be no victors.
