Return
Of The Great Communicator
Nicholas Lemann, professor of journalism at Columbia
University, reviewing a recent pair of books on Ronald Reagan in the New York
Review of Books writes: “By focusing so powerfully on the language and framing
of American politics, Reagan was able to have large effects, in a rightwards
direction, on the country’s governance too”.
But first, Reagan the actor, story-teller and
spokesperson for various entities including General Electric, a former governor
of California, had to secure the Republican Party nomination in a contested
Republican convention.
Today, as Donald Trump moves closer to securing the
Republican nomination, the contest is being held amidst the consternation of
friend and foe alike, as people are searching for an explanation for ‘phenomenon’
Trump.
Trump’s tumultuous progress brings back contrasting
memories of Ronald Reagan, an altogether smooth operator, from the self-same ‘party
of Lincoln’. Reagan comes to mind, not so much for how different he was from
Trump, but because he too had the gift of directly communicating with the
people.
In hindsight, amongst several achievements of the Reagan
presidency, what stands out is the historicity of what no one thought was
happening at the time. It was Ronald Reagan, perhaps already feeling the
effects of Alzheimer’s disease, the most hands-off of presidents, who scored
high in strategic terms, perhaps even higher than Nixon and his opening up to
China.
Today, it is Reagan who is credited with having made the
moves that brought the Cold War to an end, and caused the collapse of the USSR.
And this, by the deliberate and conscious, we know this
now from the copious Reagan diaries, and seemingly simple expedient, of breaking
their bank.
Reagan sharply stepped up the US military budget and launched
the colossally expensive ‘Star Wars’ missile-shield programme. He knew the
Soviets were having a tough time maintaining military parity anyway, and would
simply not be able to keep up.
The long and short of this strategy was that the world,
in a binary power equation ever since the end of the WWII, though the Bamboo
Curtain too was up, was changed to a unipolar force, with America assisted by its
NATO allies, in sole charge.
This is under challenge today from the multipolar
narrative, with China/ North Korea/Pakistan emerging from behind the new Bamboo
Curtain as a fresh military-economic Axis.
And also other scattered and weaker poles such as a newly
assertive Russia under Putin, the much battered BRICS with India standing out
from within it, groupings like the G-8/G-20, APAC, ASEAN, the once powerful
OPEC now in reduced circumstances.
The EU, home of NATO, is economically battered, and as
Trump points out, it is the US that has to finance European security too.
But, even today, the overwhelming military and
technological superiority of the American military machine, plus the might of
its pre-eminent economy, still gives the US the head-and-shoulders-ahead edge.
But yes, its reluctance to commit to any boots-on-the-ground warring, weakens the
strategic advantage.
But if Reagan brought about the biggest change in the
post WWII scenario, Trump as president, may well be the one to break the back
of Islamic terrorism, and also the tacit bid to leverage, power, and influence
of Islamic nations worldwide.
He could do this with a frontal assault on its ability to
wage terrorism on US territory, leaving other nations to work up similar
resolve and commitment for themselves. Trump has no intentions to go on a Dubya
style rampage abroad, particularly since oil is no longer in the strategic
balance!
And from all
indications, Trump intends to realign other economic and strategic equations
also, to suit his unipolar vision for America first. If Reagan busted the
Soviet bank, Trump intends to teach the rest of the world about which country
is the undisputed boss - but without taking on their responsibilities too. It
is a new and unabashed isolationism, because Trump does not see the rest of the
world as America’s frontier anymore. But there is the old are-you-for-us-or-against-us
assertion.
He has already thrown down the gauntlet to Islamic terrorism/extremism
in terms that include bald threats to the families of suspected terrorists, and
what Trump considers the legitimate and ‘minimal’ use of torture- waterboarding
. This has got most Islamic nations, including ally Saudi Arabia, squealing in
outraged protest, but to little effect.
Conventional wisdom across the globe, including amongst
his Republican/ Democrat rivals, distinguishes between Muslims as followers of
a great religion, and Islamic terrorism, that purportedly ‘has no religion’.
But Trump deliberately flies in the face of this
reckoning. He holds all Muslims responsible for this Frankenstein, sprung up in
their midst. That moderate Islamic nations have neither protested ISIS, LeT
etc. nor agreed to take in Syrian refugees, illustrates Trump’s point.
So Trump has already put all Muslims in the US on notice.
He also proposes to prevent Muslims from elsewhere visiting the US, till better
security measures have been put in place.
No country with sizeable Muslim populations, have dared
to take this kind of tough position, and indeed many liberal regimes, including
those in the beleaguered EU, go so far as to refuse to ‘demonise’ their Muslim
immigrant populations, even as they are bloodied.
Meanwhile the bombings and killings are intensifying,
taking advantage of this moderation, not only in Europe but in Islamic Turkey
too. Of course, the ISIS, that has laid claim to the latest atrocity in Brussels,
explaining that it, and the Paris attacks before it, are retaliations.
Trump has expressed anger and pointed out that this is
exactly what he means. That there are Islamic neighbourhoods in Brussels which are
even unsafe for police patrols to enter! And there are similar ghettoes in many
other capitals and cities around the world.
ISIS says everyone who is not with it, Russia, France,
the US, UK, are on notice. Of course, they, and other Islamic militant groups,
also cite the recent arrest of their operative in Brussels, and the activities
of Charlie Hebdo in Paris, as additional reasons.
In addition, Trump has pronounced similarly radical
rightwing views with regard to immigration, particularly from Mexico, and has
vowed to return jobs to America, with special reference to manufacturing.
Trump’s wild and sudden success comes from having struck
a chord with the American people. He is always blunt, very clear and
unambiguous, but also, sometimes,
incoherent and evasive. And yet, many people, across the country, as more and
more primaries are showing, seem to understand and support what he means.
And he has not alienated as many from non-white ethnic
groupings as was hoped for by his opponents and antagonists. Hispanics, ethnic
immigrants, and Blacks too, vote for Trump, and in significant enough numbers
to see him win.
His detractors, both in the Republican Party and outside
amongst the Democrats, attribute Trump’s popularity to a range of outlier issues,
holding up his lack of clear policy prescriptions, ignoring what he does say
for its unorthodoxy.
Trump is seen to uphold very few traditionally republican
positions. He mixes in idea raids into the democrat lines. Then there are other
inspirations, presumably from the business world. His detractors mock it all,
unable to understand what the public sees in it, and are panicked into jeering denial.
They cite broad sociological markers and trends for Trump’s
popularity - public anger with professional politicians, and lightly educated redneck
supporters. But they also think he appears to have the antidote to urban
poverty and declining middle class living standards. While it is rhetorical,
Trump’s critics agree he strikes a chord with his promise to make America great
again. Like Reagan’s, the numerous Trump generalisations, work too.
But who would have thought that Trump is proving to be a
great communicator by breaching political taboos, shunning excessive political
packaging, breaking rules of engagement, going above the heads of the
professionals who analyse everything a serious presidential contender says?
Trump has received millions of dollars worth of
free-to-air political coverage and analysis. He projects himself as a deal-making
businessman, who can be a better president precisely because he has never been
a professional politician.
Trump tags his rivals with a taunting descriptor, the now
dropped-out Little Rubio, Lying Ted, and the latest- Irresponsible Hillary. He
also expects Hillary Clinton to be indicted by the FBI and debarred from contesting
for her allegedly illegal and mysterious emails off an unsecured private server
as secretary of state. At least, by constantly hammering away at the
possibility, he is diminishing her credibility quite effectively.
Whatever happens at the imminent Republican convention,
and assuming Trump fords that particular river, in November 2016; it is clear
that he has shifted American politics rightwards, and in
his success might extract some of the poison of extremism from the body politic
of the world too.
But this bold and brutal change, flying in the face of a
great and paralysing liberalism, reminiscent of Chamberlain’s ‘peace in our
time’ trip to Berlin, won’t even be attempted - if Trump is cast aside.
For: Swarajya
(1,495 words)
March 23rd 2016
Gautam Mukherjee
No comments:
Post a Comment