Well, there’s no doubting it now. We are in a different world. But even before Trump and his attack dog JD Vance staged their pile on in the White House, we knew that the old order was finished.
What was unclear was what the architects of this realigned universe thought they were doing. Somehow, we had returned to a pre-democratic era in which a mercurial emperor must be flattered and fawned over by supplicant foreign princelings competing for favour. Donald Trump’s whimsical affections were now the sole arbiter in a world in which personality and mood determine the fate of nations.
This is where we are and everybody will have to adjust their expectations. The statesmen of once great powers and the leaders of victimised peoples like Volodymyr Zelensky must line up to praise and plead for favours from a man who appears to have little knowledge of, or interest in, the most tumultuous events in modern history.
So what exactly is of interest to him? What drives his vision for the future, apart from his own glorification as the greatest American president of modern times?
It is true that he wishes to bring an end to the outstanding wars in Ukraine and the Middle East that are now dominating Western concerns – which he insists would never have started if he had not been robbed of the presidency in 2020. This desirable aim is obviously more complicated than it appeared. Trump speaks, no doubt sincerely, of his determination to put an end to the killing and suffering which these conflicts involve. But what is it precisely that he sees as the ideal result of such peaceful resolutions and the antidote to any such conflagrations in the future? He has now made this clear and it is that vision which is the real key to understanding the Trump presidency.
First he proposed to an astonished world that war torn Gaza be taken over by the United States (which is to say, by him) and turned into a glorious Mediterranean style resort. The evacuated population would be provided with a new “beautiful” place to live – somewhere (unspecified) in neighbouring countries which had already made it clear that they would not accept such an influx.
The preposterousness of this suggestion had appeared to push it into oblivion until the President revived it in the form of an AI generated video which depicted a fantasy land of splendid beaches, skyscraper hotels and monumental golden statues of himself. Assuming that this was not just a tasteless joke, what could Trump have intended by it?
Answer: to demonstrate that this is his way to resolve all global problems. The key to settling disputes and bringing permanent peace to the world is to encourage limitless wealth: let me get in there and turn that place around. Everybody, from the global investors who put their cash into the venture, to the local population who will benefit from the opportunities and jobs it creates, will be able to get rich. And when they get rich, they will be happy. That’s the secret to life. The only thing that matters is the chance to make as much money as you possibly can and therefore anything (or anyone) that enables you to do that is morally unimpeachable.
So if in the past, American foreign interventions have been designed to liberate populations from murderous aggressors like Vladimir Putin, they will now be confined to places where there is a chance of profitable enterprise. (There is little scope for argument over this interpretation since the President himself states it with shameless frankness.) All of his relations with world leaders are premised on their willingness to “do business”.
I am quite sure that this is what Trump sincerely believes – partly because I know that it is what a great many Americans believe. He, and they, found the claim that a great many Gazans would simply refuse to leave what they considered to be their homeland, however damaged it was, simply incredible.
Who could possibly value anything more than the chance to make a fortune? Shocking as this may be to old world Europeans, the Calvinist ethic of the United States sees no shame in the ruthless pursuit of wealth as a social virtue. On the contrary, it is being poor – or being complacent about your poverty – that is unforgivable: a sin against the great American dream of opportunity and self-improvement.
In Ukraine, the opportunity for wealth creation lies in the rare earth minerals which Trump (on behalf of his country’s tech industry) wishes to mine – even though the US has access to a considerable supply of many of these on its own territory. Has he been persuaded by his tech entrepreneur friends that there can never be enough of these elements to satisfy their needs? Maybe. But whatever the particular logic of the case, this deal was the price of what would not have been US military protection but a kind of proxy surveillance of Ukrainian territory plus payback for previous armament supplies to which Washington thinks it is entitled.
Virtually all of the premises of the Trump argument on this are wrong. Europe collectively contributed more, not less, assistance to Ukraine than the US and did not receive any repayment for it. But Trump, like all potentates, does not admit past mistakes. (He now cannot remember ever calling Zelensky a dictator.)
The model that is being offered for America is to become an imperial plutocracy in which the desirability of wealth accumulation is the absolute measure of moral worth. Any obstacles in the form of traditional “values” that might stand in the way of this – historic loyalties or the principled resistance to foreign invasion that Zelensky has shown – are either wicked or stupid.
What does this amount to for the countries which must come to terms with it? On the evidence of the past week, it may seem easy to distract the President from his infatuations with dangerous allies. But what happens when the interests of competing courtiers collide? How will the outrage of Western Europe, or an invitation from a British king, measure up against a long phone call with Putin?
Well, there’s no doubting it now. We are in a different world. But even before Trump and his attack dog JD Vance staged their pile on in the White House, we knew that the old order was finished.
What was unclear was what the architects of this realigned universe thought they were doing. Somehow, we had returned to a pre-democratic era in which a mercurial emperor must be flattered and fawned over by supplicant foreign princelings competing for favour. Donald Trump’s whimsical affections were now the sole arbiter in a world in which personality and mood determine the fate of nations.
This is where we are and everybody will have to adjust their expectations. The statesmen of once great powers and the leaders of victimised peoples like Volodymyr Zelensky must line up to praise and plead for favours from a man who appears to have little knowledge of, or interest in, the most tumultuous events in modern history.
So what exactly is of interest to him? What drives his vision for the future, apart from his own glorification as the greatest American president of modern times?
It is true that he wishes to bring an end to the outstanding wars in Ukraine and the Middle East that are now dominating Western concerns – which he insists would never have started if he had not been robbed of the presidency in 2020. This desirable aim is obviously more complicated than it appeared. Trump speaks, no doubt sincerely, of his determination to put an end to the killing and suffering which these conflicts involve. But what is it precisely that he sees as the ideal result of such peaceful resolutions and the antidote to any such conflagrations in the future? He has now made this clear and it is that vision which is the real key to understanding the Trump presidency.
First he proposed to an astonished world that war torn Gaza be taken over by the United States (which is to say, by him) and turned into a glorious Mediterranean style resort. The evacuated population would be provided with a new “beautiful” place to live – somewhere (unspecified) in neighbouring countries which had already made it clear that they would not accept such an influx.
The preposterousness of this suggestion had appeared to push it into oblivion until the President revived it in the form of an AI generated video which depicted a fantasy land of splendid beaches, skyscraper hotels and monumental golden statues of himself. Assuming that this was not just a tasteless joke, what could Trump have intended by it?
Answer: to demonstrate that this is his way to resolve all global problems. The key to settling disputes and bringing permanent peace to the world is to encourage limitless wealth: let me get in there and turn that place around. Everybody, from the global investors who put their cash into the venture, to the local population who will benefit from the opportunities and jobs it creates, will be able to get rich. And when they get rich, they will be happy. That’s the secret to life. The only thing that matters is the chance to make as much money as you possibly can and therefore anything (or anyone) that enables you to do that is morally unimpeachable.
So if in the past, American foreign interventions have been designed to liberate populations from murderous aggressors like Vladimir Putin, they will now be confined to places where there is a chance of profitable enterprise. (There is little scope for argument over this interpretation since the President himself states it with shameless frankness.) All of his relations with world leaders are premised on their willingness to “do business”.
I am quite sure that this is what Trump sincerely believes – partly because I know that it is what a great many Americans believe. He, and they, found the claim that a great many Gazans would simply refuse to leave what they considered to be their homeland, however damaged it was, simply incredible.
Who could possibly value anything more than the chance to make a fortune? Shocking as this may be to old world Europeans, the Calvinist ethic of the United States sees no shame in the ruthless pursuit of wealth as a social virtue. On the contrary, it is being poor – or being complacent about your poverty – that is unforgivable: a sin against the great American dream of opportunity and self-improvement.
In Ukraine, the opportunity for wealth creation lies in the rare earth minerals which Trump (on behalf of his country’s tech industry) wishes to mine – even though the US has access to a considerable supply of many of these on its own territory. Has he been persuaded by his tech entrepreneur friends that there can never be enough of these elements to satisfy their needs? Maybe. But whatever the particular logic of the case, this deal was the price of what would not have been US military protection but a kind of proxy surveillance of Ukrainian territory plus payback for previous armament supplies to which Washington thinks it is entitled.
Virtually all of the premises of the Trump argument on this are wrong. Europe collectively contributed more, not less, assistance to Ukraine than the US and did not receive any repayment for it. But Trump, like all potentates, does not admit past mistakes. (He now cannot remember ever calling Zelensky a dictator.)
The model that is being offered for America is to become an imperial plutocracy in which the desirability of wealth accumulation is the absolute measure of moral worth. Any obstacles in the form of traditional “values” that might stand in the way of this – historic loyalties or the principled resistance to foreign invasion that Zelensky has shown – are either wicked or stupid.
What does this amount to for the countries which must come to terms with it? On the evidence of the past week, it may seem easy to distract the President from his infatuations with dangerous allies. But what happens when the interests of competing courtiers collide? How will the outrage of Western Europe, or an invitation from a British king, measure up against a long phone call with Putin?