What Trump meant at Davos: “America first does not mean America alone.”
President Donald Trump veered away from his typical protectionist rhetoric at the World Economic Forum in his remarks on the benefits of global cooperation.
26 January, 2018
Trump at the World Economic Forum — Photo: FABRICE COFFRINI/GETTY
<p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>President Donald Trump walked a fine line between globalization and his trademark protectionism on Friday while addressing global political and business leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.</span></p> <p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>His main selling point: American is back in business.</span></p> <p></p><p dir="ltr">“There has never been a better time to hire, to build, to invest, and to grow in the United States,” he said during his <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-world-economic-forum/" target="_blank">15-minute speech</a>. “America is open for business, and we are competitive once again.”</p> <p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Elsewhere in the speech, Trump touted himself as the first true businessman president, extolled recent Republican tax cuts, said he favored free trade but warned the U.S. would no longer “turn a blind eye” toward unfair trade practices, and argued for a merit-based immigration system.</span></p> <p></p><p dir="ltr"><span><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODI0MTEwMS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1ODQxNzMzMX0.kzX1xhFbspHcgTevxNEXLmBmp9uPa4YS5ZeeaDToFoU/img.jpg?width=980" id="cea7d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a9566996638b1d489436540a4207ae28" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image"><br></span></p> <p></p><p dir="ltr"><em>Photo: Fabrice Coffrini/<span>Getty</span></em></p> <p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>But the most notable part of Trump’s address came when he veered away from his typical hardline protectionist rhetoric, saying </span><span>“America first does not mean America alone.” </span></p> <p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“When the United States grows, so does the world,” he said.</span></p> <p></p><p dir="ltr">The message more or less fit the general tone of the forum, which has traditionally hosted speakers who promote globalization, praise diversity, and decry climate change — issues with which Trump has sometimes been at odds, as the <em>New York Times</em> <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/business/davos-world-economic-forum-trump.html" target="_blank">notes</a>.</p> <p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>German Chancellor Angela Merkel said at the forum that “</span><a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/24/germany-has-difficulties-and-polarization-that-we-havent-seen-for-decades-merkel-tells-davos.html"><span>protectionism is not the proper answer.</span></a><span>” Other world leaders echoed the sentiment.</span></p> <p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Trump has repeatedly criticized multilateral trade agreements and argued for more isolationism in the past. In early 2017, he withdrew the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, originally a 12-nation </span><span>agreement among the U.S. and Pacific rim countries that was designed partially to temper </span><a href="https://www.cnbc.com/china/"><span>China’s</span></a><span> rising dominance in the region, because he thought it would encourage domestic companies to ship jobs overseas.</span></p> <p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>But in January 2018, the president said he would consider rejoining the agreement if the U.S. got a “substantially better” deal. It’s likely too late, considering the 11 remaining TPP countries have already moved forward in the agreement without the U.S.</span></p> <p></p><p><span>Trump’s change of tone in Switzerland comes in the wake of slowed economic growth back home. The annualized GDP growth rate dropped to 2.6 percent in the last quarter of 2017 — up from the year before, but still below the </span><a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-gdp-growth-20180126-story.html"><span>3 percent mark the Trump administration had repeatedly predicted</span></a><span>. </span></p> <p></p><p><span id="docs-internal-guid-9b5511fb-33d3-58a7-0416-fd4df5e08654"> </span></p> <p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>But that could change if global business leaders believe what <span id="docs-internal-guid-9b5511fb-33d8-1c28-43eb-b6055945ce0b"><span>Trump said in Davos:</span></span></span></p> <p></p><p dir="ltr">“Now is the perfect time to bring your business, your jobs and your investments to the United States.”</p> <p></p><p dir="ltr">--</p>
Keep reading
Show less
What Would the Founding Fathers Think of Modern America’s Foreign Policy?
The world today is far more complex than it was 200 years ago, but the speeches and writings of the Founding Fathers point to a common general principle.
16 November, 2017
How did the Founding Fathers conceptualize America’s role in the global community?
<p dir="ltr">More than 200 years ago, the United States were founded by disgruntled colonial men wearing ruffled shirts and tri-corner hats. Their writings on government structure and democracy have endured, but what about their views on global affairs? <br><br>The Founding Fathers’ general <a href="https://www.cato.org/multimedia/cato-audio/william-ruger-founders-vision-restrained-foreign-policy" target="_blank">approach to foreign policy</a> began with Thomas Paine’s '<a href="http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense4.htm" target="_blank">Common Sense</a>'. In his famous 1776 pamphlet, Paine made the case that political connections with the outside world—especially with Britain, the dominant power at the time—should essentially be limited to commerce:</p><blockquote>
<p dir="ltr">“As Europe is our market for trade, we ought to form no partial connection with any part of it. It is the true interest of America to steer clear of European contentions, which she never can do, while, by her dependence on Britain, she is made the makeweight in the scale of British politics.”</p>
</blockquote><p dir="ltr"><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODM5NjM2MC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzNjg1MTYyOH0.-J7ECv_ANLkEej-2mBWYozBMmRtQYjiQW6qk4Ja0hv0/img.jpg?width=980" id="e5be4" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="6e9560e1573a37b03ecc020e6ca5a798" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image"><br><em style="color: #737d83; font-size: 13px;">Oil painting of 18th century Enlightenment philosopher and author <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Paine" target="_blank">Thomas Paine</a> by Auguste Millière (1880); <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Sense" target="_blank">Common Sense</a>, a pamphlet by Thomas Paine (1776).</em></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The Founding Fathers had subscribed to Paine’s view during the Revolutionary War, but eventually found that an alliance with France was necessary in the short term. Then, in 1793, George Washington effectively broke the alliance with his Proclamation of Neutrality.</span></p><p dir="ltr">Washington doubled down on his support of American independence in his <a href="http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp" target="_blank">Farewell Address</a> of 1796, believing there to be an inherent danger in becoming overly entangled with other countries, namely the risk of becoming too lenient on allies, and too harsh on their enemies:</p><blockquote>
<p dir="ltr">“The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.”<br>...<br>“Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.” </p>
</blockquote><p dir="ltr">The early nation’s views on foreign policy were solidified in 1821 when John Quincy Adams, then the secretary of state, delivered an <a href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/repository/she-goes-not-abroad-in-search-of-monsters-to-destroy/" target="_blank">address on U.S. foreign policy</a> that outlined why the country wouldn’t get involved in the <span>Greek War of Independence:</span></p><blockquote>
<p dir="ltr">“Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will recommend the general cause, by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.”</p>
</blockquote><p dir="ltr">Speaking at the <a href="https://www.cato.org/multimedia/cato-audio/william-ruger-founders-vision-restrained-foreign-policy" target="_blank">Cato Institute</a> in 2016, <a href="http://bigthink.com/experts/william-ruger" target="_blank">William Ruger</a>, Vice President for Research and Policy at the Charles Koch Foundation, delved into the views of Washington, Adams, and others, remarking: "States don't have permanent friends, they have permanent interests, and the Founders were hyper-realist when it came to that."</p><h2>Three Decades of American Primacy</h2><p dir="ltr"><span id="docs-internal-guid-238742c0-c5f4-b3aa-d268-a2509bbdf49c">The U.S. has been the world’s most powerful nation since the end of the Cold War. Some refer to this position as “American primacy,” which political scientist Joseph Nye <a href="http://nationalinterest.org/feature/american-primacy-multiplex-world-17841" target="_blank">defined</a> as its “disproportionate (and measurable) share of all three kinds of power resources: military, economic, and soft.” While this power has allowed the U.S. to create an advantageous world order, America's interventions abroad have come at massive human and economic cost.</span></p><p dir="ltr"><a href="http://bigthink.com/experts/william-ruger" target="_blank">Ruger</a> spoke to Big Think about the consequences of U.S. foreign intervention:</p><p dir="ltr"><em> </em></p><div class="video-callout-placeholder" data-slug="william-ruger-how-america-destabilized-the-middle-east" style="border: 1px solid #ccc;">
<div class="rm-shortcode" data-media_id="5nE0ltCv" data-player_id="FvQKszTI" data-rm-shortcode-id="582fcad6fab187902783f46a09df3cc9">
<div id="botr_5nE0ltCv_FvQKszTI_div" class="jwplayer-media" data-jwplayer-video-src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/5nE0ltCv-FvQKszTI.js">
<img src="https://cdn.jwplayer.com/thumbs/5nE0ltCv-1920.jpg" class="jwplayer-media-preview">
</div>
<script src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/5nE0ltCv-FvQKszTI.js"></script>
</div>
<em>william-ruger-how-america-destabilized-the-middle-east</em></div><blockquote>
<p>“Primacy has often led the United States to create situations where there’s greater instability, more problems, lots of unintended consequences that have spilled over to other places. And Iraq is a perfect example of that. ISIS would not exist in Iraq had it not been for the United States opening Pandora’s box by our regime-change efforts.”</p>
</blockquote><p>As the U.S. enters its third decade of primacy since the end of the Cold War, it’s worth returning to the thoughts of the Founding Fathers, and how they conceptualized America’s role in the global community. What would they have thought about invading, say, Iraq? In Adams' words, is it a monster the U.S. should have gotten mixed up with?</p><p><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODQxMDcwMC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMDM1MTIwNX0.insL36-HmcGHb7Tz0awzA5snnSrit_BI0Xz4EugN9wM/img.png?width=980" id="0ec74" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3b6b7c74a10a00ac5bd0cb7b2c93c18b" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image"></p><div class="image-caption"><em>The cost of the war in Iraq. Source: <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/03/charts-cost-iraq-war/" target="_blank">Mother Jones</a>.</em></div><h2><strong>The Founding Fathers’ Views Today</strong></h2><p dir="ltr"><span>It goes without saying that the world today is far more complex than it was 200 years ago. Technology and industrialization have connected the world in entirely unpredictable ways, and the power of the U.S. has multiplied to an unimaginable extent. There’s also a case to be made that with America’s great power comes the responsibility to right the many wrongs in the world.</span></p><p dir="ltr">However, the massive costs of U.S. foreign policy over the past couple of decades have caused some to call for <a href="https://www.cato.org/events/case-restraint-us-foreign-policy" target="_blank"><span>realistic restraint</span></a>, which argues for the U.S. to fully consider the consequences of intervention before entangling itself in the problems of other countries, as Ruger <a href="http://bigthink.com/videos/william-ruger-why-america-doesnt-win-wars-like-it-used-to" target="_blank">explains</a>:</p><blockquote>
<p dir="ltr">“Over the last 15 to 25 years, our foreign policy simply isn’t working. It is not making us safer. And that’s why we need to reconsider what we’re doing. We need to rethink our grand strategy. We need to rethink how we’re using diplomacy and economic levers of statecraft. We need to rethink our budgets and the types of platforms we’re building and the types of missions we want to send our troops on.</p>
<p>This is vitally important so that we can rightsize the military for the challenges ahead. And I don’t think we’re doing that, which is why we need to bring new voices into the conversation. The other thing I think that we should ask for is: we would like our executives to practice humility. That means that they need to understand what they don’t know, and to have that be part of the decision-making process.<em>”</em></p>
</blockquote><p dir="ltr"><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODM5NjMwOC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1MDkyODAxNX0.xo0vouuZyVaI3j1b05iL70RzKl7rsyR4zYneb_thG7U/img.jpg?width=980" id="cf840" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="dbc82ffb59c5cfdb978b39c6058a8b28" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image"></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Still, a more realistic and restrained foreign policy doesn’t mean the U.S. should engage in full-blown isolationism and abandon the rest of the world, Ruger says:</span></p><blockquote>
<p dir="ltr">The United States needs to be engaged abroad in terms of trading with other countries, providing positive-sum outcomes between peoples, diplomacy, cultural engagement, people to people engagement. We can be engaged in the world and open to the world without thinking that the United States needs to be everywhere and without the United States having to lead and be militarily deployed to every part of the globe.</p>
</blockquote><p>We can never know exactly what the Founding Fathers would think about modern U.S. foreign policy. However, we can tell from their speeches and writings that they all seemed to agree on a general principle: be extremely wary of becoming overly entangled with the never-ending problems of the outside world.</p><div class="video-full-card-placeholder" data-slug="william-ruger-why-america-doesnt-win-wars-like-it-used-to" style="border: 1px solid #ccc;">
<div class="rm-shortcode" data-media_id="iAcZTQ2D" data-player_id="FvQKszTI" data-rm-shortcode-id="d273de17eef1cf4aa740851f0b37079d">
<div id="botr_iAcZTQ2D_FvQKszTI_div" class="jwplayer-media" data-jwplayer-video-src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/iAcZTQ2D-FvQKszTI.js">
<img src="https://cdn.jwplayer.com/thumbs/iAcZTQ2D-1920.jpg" class="jwplayer-media-preview">
</div>
<script src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/iAcZTQ2D-FvQKszTI.js"></script>
</div>
</div><p> </p>
Keep reading
Show less
Popular
