Since taking office in January 2017, President Donald Trump has earned record low ratings for his global leadership in public opinion surveys conducted around the world. On a recent Gallup Poll, only 30% had confidence in US global leadership. President Barack Obama, by contrast, was rated positively by 48%. Even President George W. Bush, often maligned for the Afghan and Iraq Wars, earned higher marks than Trump at 34%.
World leaders, global populations, and experts—let’s call them globalists—rightly opine that Trump is failing in his role as a global leader: He wrongly seeks to unravel the existing liberal rule-based world order so as to "Make America Great Again" by putting "America First." He is abrogating America’s traditional role by withdrawing from membership in international organizations and treaties, abandoning multilateral trade deals, threatening "bad actors," demanding allies to take care of themselves, giving up on defending freedom and human rights, and consorting with dictators.
Many also abhor Trump’s personal style, accusing him of being undiplomatic, uninformed, insensitive, insulting, inconsistent, cantankerous, petty, vindictive, childish, chauvinistic, and callous; along with being a nationalist, racist, misogynist, white supremacist and Nazi. One recent poll found that half of Americans believe Trump to be mentally ill.
His use of Twitter as a major public policy communication tool, and a vehicle to launch personal attacks is unprecedented. Trump recently fired his Secretary of State Rex Tillerson via Twitter.
The world thinks Trump is a poor global leader, and wishes him gone. This unprecedented opinion of a US president, often bordering on hatred, warrants a closer look. I’ve employed a "Trumpian" perspective as a way of contrasting him with globalist positions. In self-defense, I don’t agree with Trump’s style and have problems with many of his policies.
One way to summarize the gist of global polling results on Trump is that globalists simply do not like him. Trump himself would not disagree with this assessment. He seems not to care. Perhaps he even encourages this dislike. It would take a brave commentator to rationalize Trump’s boorish behavior. Let’s consider his dysfunctional personality as a given, and not try to explain it away.
A second way to characterize the polls is that globalists, with exceptions, do not like his foreign policies. Trump’s policies fly in the face of what the world wants from the US, hence the negative reviews.
According to recent Pew Research Center and Gallup Poll surveys, the world disapproves of the Trump’s foreign policy actions, particularly, attempts to unravel the Iran nuclear weapons deal, the ban on visitors to the US from several Muslim countries, withdrawal from the Paris climate accord, the reversal of trade deals particularly the Trans Pacific Partnership, building a wall to keep Mexicans and Latinos from illegally immigrating to the US, refusing Syrian refugees from settled in America, calling North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un nasty names, and publically disparaging every US ally’s leader, country and people. Add to this the recent imposition of tariffs on foreign imports from most countries.
Images: Reuters
Aside from the fact that these policies fly in the face of the liberal world order, why do they elicit such extreme responses? Nearly all of Trump’s policy decisions are in line with prevailing conservative Republican policy perspectives, and on any given issue, more than half of Americans are in agreement with Trump. And, with Trump’s recent policy successes, Republican opposition is supporting him because he is winning, not because they agree with him. The US governance system is not based on principle. Nowadays, political parties oppose one another no matter what the policy positions are.
Further, governance in America has been in disarray for decades: institutions have been corrupted, the system is in gridlock, widespread dissent reigns, everything has become politicized, many people feel left behind. From Trump’s perspective, this is why many people voted for him.
Globalist opinions on Trump’s global leadership are undoubtedly influenced by these factors.
First, while Trump’s policies often have support from some Republicans and Trump voters, they are intensely opposed by some liberal Republicans, Democrats and their voting constituencies. This opposition, often referred to as "The Resistance," is unprecedented in US history. It stems from opposition in Congress, the courts, bureaucracy, the FBI, CIA, advocacy groups, extremist agitators, socio/political movements, political elites and perhaps from Trump’s own White House staff.
The Resistance began by trying to nullify Trump’s election, then failing that, attempting to prevent him from governing by tying him up in criminal investigations, personal and political scandals and obstruction, and now working toward impeachment to throw him out of office. Trump seems to feed on these attacks making his behavior even more extreme.
Second, the assault on Trump is aided and abetted by the mainstream media. Harvard University’s Shorenstein Center in May 2017 reported on the negative coverage of Trump’s first 100 days in office. Some 80% of the mainstream media coverage of Trump was negative, as compared to 41% for Barack Obama during his first 100 days. Major news outlets—CNN, NBC, CBS, New York Times and Washington Post—ranged from 83% to 93% negative coverage. Even FoxNews, a pro-Trump outlet had 52% negative.
Images: Reuters
Trump believes the mainstream media has unfairly "thrashed" his policies. The media simply does not like the policies because, as mentioned, they defy the world order. But from Trump’s perspective, when the policies are difficult to criticize, the media reverts back to ad homonym attacks on Trump. In so doing, they often fail to properly convey the issues.
Not only is the US press largely against him, but so too is the international media. Visit news websites of the BBC, Deutsche Welle, or Australia Broadcasting Corporation and one sees mirror images of US news coverage and commentary about Trump. If globalists get their political information about Trump from these sources, Trump supporters might wonder how they could be objective toward him.
Third, Trump has managed to assemble a team of senior leaders who are extremists, radicals, and ideologues; do not enjoy much respect or gravitas in the foreign policy arena; are poor team players; and seem to be pursing hidden agendas that do not support Trump. Trump appointed his son-in-law to be the chief negotiator to mediate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Not only does he not have any experience in international relations, he also lacks a security clearance at a level that would allow him to access necessary classified documents and information.
Fourth, President Barack Obama was a globalist in good standing in the world community. His approach to global leadership and his foreign policies, while good intentioned, made Trump’s election possible.
Trump’s perspective on Obama….
Obama dramatically changed America’s global leadership role. Obama’s foreign policies aligned exactly with the prevailing views of globalists on most issues. And Obama’s leadership approach won support around the world. Basically, Obama ceded American leadership to the world community. Obama was the ultimate globalist.
Obama proclaimed that the US would now "lead from behind." The US would sacrifice its sovereignty in favor of decision making through multilateral and international organizations. Obama completed the Iran nuclear weapons treaty and the Paris climate agreement by by-passing the US Congress and committing the US to agreements.
Images: Reuters
Obama employed "soft power," seeking diplomatic solutions, while employing military action as a last resort. Obama reduced the size and capabilities of the military to all-time lows. Obama refused to involve the US in the Syrian civil war, causing it to drag on for 8 years, at the cost of 400,000 lives, and the displacement of millions of refugees into Europe.
Obama espoused "strategic patience," that is, waiting to see whether crises would resolve themselves. Obama watched for eight years as North Korea developed nuclear weapons to threaten the US, but did nothing to stop their deployment.
Obama reengineered the existing balance of power in the Middle East, deepening the quagmire. Obama abandoned traditional alliances with Saudi Arabia and its coalition, along with Israel, encouraging the formation of a power block comprised of Iran, Russia and Syria. The civil war in Yemen now in its fourth year was the result. Worst yet, Obama turned over Iraq to Iran and Russia after the US lost 4,500 soldiers and spent $2.4 trillion from 2003 to 2011, only to have Obama give it away.
Obama avoided most confrontation at all costs. When Obama met with Russian President Vladimir Putin about Russia meddling in the US presidential election between Trump and Hillary Clinton, Obama reportedly told Putin to "stop doing that," but did nothing to sanction Russia.
Obama curried favor with global leaders by making extraordinary concessions while receiving little in return. He withdrew economic sanctions from Myanmar’s military junta without receiving guarantees that democracy would be returned.
Trump, in running for president in 2015-7, seemed to understand that Obama’s approach to global leadership and his foreign policies were unpopular in the US, in spite of mainstream media coverage to the contrary.
Trump’s global leadership style and foreign policies are easy to understand: do the opposite of whatever Obama did. This is not unusual: recall that Obama inevitably blamed President Bush whenever his policies failed.