May 4, 2017 | By Ivo H. Daalder

This Week's Reads – Don't Discount the President's Rhetoric

“Sometimes it’s important to watch what the president does rather than what he says.” That was Senator John McCain’s advice to America’s allies in a recent interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, in which he attempted to explain the White House’s mixed foreign policy messages. McCain’s advice seems to reflect the popular idea that President Trump’s words should be taken with a heavy dose of salt—that he should be taken “seriously, but not literally,” as Peter Thiel famously said during the election.

I can appreciate the sentiment, but I think it's mistaken. A president’s words matter. Whether he is truthful, accurate, and consistent in his statements determines his credibility in the eyes of America’s allies and adversaries. His office, moreover, lends him the ability to alter the public’s perception of America and its role in the world.

Consider President Trump’s statements toward Europe. He recently put his thumb on the scale in the French elections, for example, by praising far-right candidate Marine Le Pen as “the strongest on what’s been going on in France.” This has the potential to carry serious consequences for US-French relations, regardless of the election results. On NATO, he recently—and rightly—walked back his former criticism of the alliance, saying “it’s no longer obsolete.” Still, the abrupt about-face, combined with his unsatisfactory explanation for the shift, was hardly reassuring.

Trump’s praise of some of the world’s dictators and strongmen is equally worrisome. North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un, he says, is a “pretty smart cookie,” while authoritarian presidents Vladimir Putin and Recep Tayyip Erdogan are both “strong leaders.” Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sissi is doing “a fantastic job,” and Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte was just officially invited to the White House.

What should be made of comments like these? For one thing, they signal to the world that authoritarians can ignore the rule of law and human rights and still be praised by the leader of the free world. They offer a degree of status and legitimacy to authoritarianism and demonstrate a willingness to compromise on American principles. Whatever their intent, these words carry profound symbolism and meaning. Actions may often speak louder than words. But words matter, especially when spoken by the president of the United States of America.

This Week’s Reads help to explain President Trump’s foreign policy messages, and highlight some of the global issues that will continue to shape them.

Republicans Are Now the "America First" Party 

R.R. Reno/The New York Times

As a self-proclaimed member of the ousted conservative elite, R.R. Reno describes the realignment of the Republican Party’s focus from government spending to anti-globalism. Citing increasingly elitist practices among both conservatives and liberals as the cause of a rift between voters and the upper political echelons, Mr. Reno concedes that it will be from “Mr. Trump’s playbook” that future Republican leaders will draw their rhetoric. In the face of this paradigm shift, he challenges the assumption that globalism is to be taken for granted, calling for skepticism towards an ideology that “…disenfranchises the vast majority and empowers a technocratic elite.”

The Man Who Saved Europe the Last Time

Henry A. Kissinger/Wall Street Journal

Adapted from a speech about the first chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, Konrad Adenauer, by former secretary of state Henry A. Kissinger, this article focuses on both the period that lead to the foundation of a united European Union and the character of the man that Kissinger credits with delivering Germany to it. As the title implies, Kissinger sees the same “fractured world” threatening to return, questioning whether or not existing structures will be able to recapture the “conviction and creativity” that people like Mr. Adenauer built it with.

The Real Lessons of the French Election

Yascha Mounk/Slate

While many are celebrating as Marine Le Pen’s polling numbers look grimmer, author Yascha Mounk cautions against viewing this outcome as a huge victory for globalism. Merely fifteen years ago, Le Pen’s father was rejected by a margin of 60 percent of the vote after unexpectedly making it to the runoffs. Now, Ms. Le Pen has gotten closer with much less resistance. Warning against complacency, Mounk advises fellow liberals to “harness the power of globalization” for the majority of the population, rather than for its own sake as a moral imperative.

Is it Time to Break Up Google?

Jonathan Taplin/The New York Times

With the advent of the digital age, it is not terribly surprising that tech companies have become the most successful on the market. Apple, Alphabet, Amazon, and Facebook are ascendant, dominating their industries and leaving little room for competition. The characteristic signs of burgeoning monopolies have begun to surface and the question now stands: “What do we do about it?” Several options for curbing the control that these corporations have garnered are presented in this article: Prevent them from buying their competitors, regulate them as public utilities, or remove the “safe harbor” clause that allows these sites organizations to host content at low cost and with little accountability.

The Changing of the Global Economic Guard

Edward Luce/The Atlantic

With unprecedented speed, China and the United States have seemingly traded places on the world’s economic stage. China’s ascendency to the role of international trade steward also signals a growing partnership with the big players at the World Economic Forum in Davos, as well as the increasing popularity of authoritarianism. However, there are concerns that the globalist economy China and these elites strive for is precisely what has caused the widespread populism that they are now struggling to halt. The difficult balance between democracy, national identity, and economic globalism is strained, calling into question whether all three ideologies can truly coexist.

6 Things We Know About Trump's Foreign Policy After 100 Days

Hal Brands/Foreign Policy

Uncertainty abounds as to what direction the Trump administration is taking the United States. This article, however, claims a few simple certainties we can draw from the past 100 days of his presidency. We can be sure that when he said “America first” he meant it, but also that it will be a difficult ideology to enact. We can also be sure that Mr. Trump likes to be tough, gives his generals a long leash, and lacks rhetorical discipline. What we can be most sure of, however, seems to be that there is very little to be sure of at all.

The Education of Donald Trump

Josh Dawsey, Shane Goldmacher and Alex Isenstadt/POLITICO

Recently, President Trump invited a pair of reporters from POLITICO to personally interview both him and his staff. Despite protests, the president insisted that the comments remain on the record. What resulted was a surprisingly candid view into the work environment within the White House. The interviews with aides provide intimate details on the nature of their task and their concerns going forward. Their accounts are somewhat grim, recounting many internal hiccups, from jockeying for position and power to the particular stressors that most aggravate Mr. Trump. The picture they paint is of an administration “gripped by paranoia and insecurity.”

Stars Align for Emmanuel Macron—and France

Simon Nixon/The Wall Street Journal

This article presents an optimistic look at Emmanuel Macron’s chances of seriously improving France. Contrary to doubts on Macron’s relative inexperience; his political track record, from staffer to Economic Minister, is fairly promising. His relatively light policy plans may reflect a more reserved stance against making promises that may prove difficult to keep. While potential opposition from parliament will certainly prove challenging, there is hope that the state of France’s economy, as well as a consensus among experts on clear solutions to these issues, will spur bipartisan agreement. With a predicted upturn in the French economy imminent, odds may be favoring a successful Macron presidency.

The Brilliant Incoherence of Trump's Foreign Policy

Stephen Sestanovich/The Atlantic

Since the 1950s a debate on the role America is meant to play on an international stage has occurred in 20 year intervals: Following a costly war and with concerns mounting at home, voters and politicians reignite the debate on America’s place in the world. This cycle has been interrupted by Donald Trump’s presidency, purports Stephen Sestanovich. Trump was able to outplay all of his opponents and now they are uniting to curb the advance of his agenda. These people, argues Sestanovich, were supposed to be pitted against one another to determine America’s future course. Now, distracted, the questions we should theoretically be answering remain unanswered.

Colombia is a "Smart Power' Success Story

Bill Lane/Wall Street Journal

Bill Lane presents Colombia as an exemplar of what American soft and hard power together, or “smart power,” can accomplish. A combination of military and civil action costing the United States $10 billion dollars, a drop in the national bucket, has resulted in a stronger Colombia, able to better combat the country’s historic drug trade. With an administration touting a radical rebalancing in favor of hard power, Colombia serves as a perfect case study for how using every tool America has at its disposal, in unison, can yield fantastic results.

About

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs is an independent, nonpartisan organization that provides insight – and influences the public discourse – on critical global issues. We convene leading global voices and conduct independent research to bring clarity and offer solutions to challenges and opportunities across the globe. The Council is committed to engaging the public and raising global awareness of issues that transcend borders and transform how people, business, and governments engage the world.

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs is an independent, nonpartisan organization. All statements of fact and expressions of opinion in blog posts are the sole responsibility of the individual author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Council.

Archive



| By Ian Klaus

Did the UNSG Say “Revolution”?

While there is nothing convenient about 2020, the upcoming Pritzker Forum on Global Cities has been helpfully anticipated by a series of publications that speak to the high stakes currently in play in cities around the world and the urgent need - from the perspective of both efficacy and equity - to adapt governance practices.








| By Laurence Ralph, Thomas Abt, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Police Reform Lessons from Around the World

Princeton University’s Laurence Ralph and the Council on Criminal Justice’s Thomas Abt join Deep Dish to explain why police brutality is not a uniquely American phenomenon and argue the strongest examples of successful police reform come from outside the United States.



| By Pavin Chachavalpongpun, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Thailand’s Youth Demand Democratic Reforms

Political scientist Pavin Chachavalpongpun joins Deep Dish to explain how social media makes these Thailand's pro-democracy protests different than past movements and why the United States should see Thailand as a foreign policy priority when negotiating a rising China.


| By Maha Yahya, Emile Hokayem, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Can Lebanon Overcome Corruption and Crisis?

Carnegie Middle East Center Director Maha Yahya and the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Emile Hokayem join Deep Dish to examine the ongoing protest movement in Lebanon, Hezbollah’s role in the crisis, and how a system built on sectarian politics could be rebuilt.



| By Laura Rosenberger, Jacob Helberg, Brian Hanson

Deep Dish: Making Cyberspace Safe for Democracy

The Alliance for Security Democracy’s Laura Rosenberger and Stanford University’s Jacob Helberg join Deep Dish to discuss digital interference, misinformation, and data privacy within the lens of geopolitics.