tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/america-first-40473/articles"America First" – The Conversation2023-06-28T12:59:46Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2081702023-06-28T12:59:46Z2023-06-28T12:59:46ZWhat is the difference between nationalism and patriotism?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/533816/original/file-20230623-4805-h1p42y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=41%2C6%2C4530%2C2755&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Donald Trump, left, and Harry Truman: Two former presidents who had different ideas about nationalism and patriotism.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Donald_Trump_by_Gage_Skidmore.jpg">The Conversation, with images from Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>During his presidency, Donald Trump said, “We’re putting America first … we’re taking care of ourselves for a change,” and then declared, “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lLQ8IEm8PE">I’m a nationalist</a>.” In another <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/25/trump-un-speech-2018-full-text-transcript-840043">speech</a>, he stated that under his watch, the U.S. had “<a href="https://youtu.be/KfVdIKaQzW8?t=1182">embrace[d] the doctrine of patriotism</a>.”</p>
<p>Trump is now running for president again. When he announced his candidacy, he <a href="https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/former-president-trump-announces-2024-presidential-bid-transcript">stated</a> that he “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hugb9fDXTd8">need[s] every patriot on board</a> because this is not just a campaign, this is a quest to save our country.” </p>
<p>One week later he dined in Mar-a-Lago with <a href="https://www.axios.com/2022/11/25/trump-nick-fuentes-ye-kanye">Nick Fuentes</a>, a self-described <a href="https://www.tribstar.com/news/local_news/fuentes-i-am-an-american-nationalist/article_57dfaf0e-2751-5039-97e2-2ce832bbf870.html">nationalist</a> who’s been banned from Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube and other platforms <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/nick-fuentes-live-streamer-white-nationalist-suspended-twitter-1608438">for using racist and antisemitic language</a>. </p>
<p>Afterward, Trump <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/109405826070401204">confirmed that meeting</a> but did not denounce Fuentes, despite <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kejjJyABP0o">calls for him to do so</a>. </p>
<p>The words <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1193192673429131264">nationalism</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/newtgingrich/status/1044633849572077568">patriotism</a> are sometimes used as synonyms, such as when Trump and his supporters describe his <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1347555316863553542">America First</a> agenda. But many <a href="https://academic.oup.com/book/12461">political scientists</a>, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=vXXZBEkAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">including me</a>, don’t typically see those two terms as equivalent – or even compatible. </p>
<p>There is a difference, and it’s important, not just to scholars but to regular citizens as well.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/533517/original/file-20230622-23-ovgndv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A comic depicting Superman talking to people about treating others with respect and dignity." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/533517/original/file-20230622-23-ovgndv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/533517/original/file-20230622-23-ovgndv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=828&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533517/original/file-20230622-23-ovgndv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=828&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533517/original/file-20230622-23-ovgndv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=828&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533517/original/file-20230622-23-ovgndv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1041&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533517/original/file-20230622-23-ovgndv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1041&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533517/original/file-20230622-23-ovgndv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1041&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">An image from 1950, colorized in 2017, shows Superman – a refugee from another planet and a character created by two Jewish immigrants to the U.S. – teaching that patriotism should drive out nationalism.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.dc.com/blog/2017/08/25/superman-a-classic-message-restored">DC Comics</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Devotion to a people</h2>
<p>To understand what nationalism is, it’s useful to understand what a nation is – and isn’t. </p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780199599868.001.0001/acref-9780199599868-e-1237">nation</a> is a group of people who share a history, culture, language, religion or some combination thereof.</p>
<p>A <a href="https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/country">country</a>, which is sometimes called a <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/state-sovereign-political-entity">state</a> in political science terminology, is an <a href="https://www.economist.com/international/2010/04/08/in-quite-a-state">area</a> of <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-many-states-and-provinces-are-in-the-world-157847">land</a> that has its own government. </p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/nation-state">nation-state is a homogeneous political entity</a> mostly comprising a single nation. Nation-states <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/theneweurope/wk18.htm">are rare</a>, because nearly every country is home to more than one national group. One example of a nation-state would be <a href="https://www.mhpbooks.com/books/the-cleanest-race/">North Korea</a>, where almost all residents are ethnic Koreans.</p>
<p>The United States is neither a nation nor a nation-state. Rather, it is a country of <a href="https://www.npr.org/2013/11/11/244527860/forget-the-50-states-u-s-is-really-11-nations-says-author">many different groups of people</a> who have a variety of shared histories, cultures, languages and religions.</p>
<p>Some of those groups are <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/01/28/2022-01789/indian-entities-recognized-by-and-eligible-to-receive-services-from-the-united-states-bureau-of">formally recognized</a> by the federal government, such as the <a href="https://www.navajo-nsn.gov">Navajo Nation</a> and the <a href="https://www.cherokee.org">Cherokee Nation</a>. Similarly, in Canada, the French-speaking <a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Quebecois">Québécois</a> <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/house-passes-motion-recognizing-quebecois-as-nation-1.574359">are recognized</a> as being a distinct “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGuLE7zmcqM">nation within a united Canada</a>.” </p>
<p>Nationalism is, per one dictionary definition, “<a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nationalism">loyalty and devotion to a nation</a>.” It is a person’s strong affinity for those who share the same history, culture, language or religion. <a href="https://academic.oup.com/book/527">Scholars</a> understand <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.1990.9968234">nationalism as exclusive</a>, boosting one identity group over – and at times in direct opposition to – others.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/oath-keepers-founder-sentenced-to-18-years-for-seditious-conspiracy-in-lead-up-to-jan-6-insurrection-4-essential-reads-206482">Oath Keepers</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/proud-boys-members-convicted-of-seditious-conspiracy-3-essential-reads-on-the-group-and-right-wing-extremist-white-nationalism-205094">Proud Boys</a> – <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/23/oath-keepers-guilty-seditious-conspiracy-jan-6-00079083">10 of whom</a> were convicted of seditious conspiracy for their role in <a href="https://theconversation.com/jan-6-committee-tackled-unprecedented-attack-with-time-tested-inquiry-195999">the Jan. 6 attack</a> on the U.S. Capitol – are both examples of <a href="https://theconversation.com/white-nationalism-is-a-political-ideology-that-mainstreams-racist-conspiracy-theories-184375">white nationalist</a> groups, which <a href="https://theconversation.com/white-nationalism-born-in-the-usa-is-now-a-global-terror-threat-113825">believe</a> that immigrants and people of color are a threat to their ideals of civilization. </p>
<p>Trump has described the events that took place on Jan. 6, 2021, as having occurred “<a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/109401452224192463">Peacefully & Patrioticly</a>”. He has described those who have been imprisoned as “<a href="https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-praises-jan-6-rioters-great-patriots-1773808">great patriots</a>” and has said that he would <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-pardoning-extremists-undermines-the-rule-of-law-207272">pardon</a> “<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/11/politics/transcript-cnn-town-hall-trump/index.html">a large portion of them</a>” if elected in 2024.</p>
<p>There are many other nationalisms beyond white nationalism. <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-nation-of-islam-a-brief-history-198227">The Nation of Islam</a>, for instance, is an example of a <a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/black%20nationalist">Black nationalist</a> group. The <a href="https://www.adl.org/resources/profile/nation-islam">Anti-Defamation League</a> and the <a href="https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/nation-islam">Southern Poverty Law Center</a> have both characterized it as a Black supremacist hate group for its anti-white prejudices.</p>
<p>In addition to white and Black <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02589340500101741">racial nationalisms</a>, there are also <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/20032578">ethnic</a> and <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/26222195">lingustic</a> nationalisms, which typically seek greater autonomy for – and the eventual independence of – certain national groups. Examples include the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/01/world/canada/Bloc-Quebecois-Nationalism.html">Bloc Québécois</a>, the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jun/24/snp-leader-general-election-win-mandate-independence-push-humza-yousaf">Scottish Nationalist Party</a> and <a href="https://www.partyof.wales/annibyniaeth_i_gymru_welsh_independence">Plaid Cymru – the Party of Wales</a>, which are nationalist political parties that respectively advocate for the Québécois of Québéc, the Scots of Scotland and the Welsh of Wales.</p>
<h2>Devotion to a place</h2>
<p>In contrast to nationalism’s loyalty for or devotion to one’s nation, patriotism is, per the same dictionary, “<a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patriotism">love for or devotion to one’s country</a>.” It comes from the word <a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patriot">patriot</a>, which itself can be traced back to the Greek word <a href="https://logeion.uchicago.edu/%CF%80%CE%AC%CF%84%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%BF%CF%82">patrios</a>, which means “of one’s father.” </p>
<p>In other words, patriotism has historically meant a love for and devotion to one’s <a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fatherland">fatherland</a>, or country of origin.</p>
<p>Patriotism encompasses devotion to the country as a whole – including all the people who live within it. Nationalism refers to devotion to only one group of people over all others.</p>
<p>An example of <a href="https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/articles/martin-luther-king-jr-model-american-patriot/">patriotism</a> would be Martin Luther King Jr.’s “<a href="https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety#">I Have a Dream</a>” speech, in which <a href="https://theconversation.com/mlks-vision-of-love-as-a-moral-imperative-still-matters-89946">he</a> recites <a href="https://www.classical-music.com/features/works/my-country-tis-of-thee-lyrics/">the first verse</a> of the patriotic song “<a href="https://bensguide.gpo.gov/j-america-my-country">America (My Country ‘Tis of Thee)</a>.” In his “<a href="https://www.npr.org/2013/04/16/177355381/50-years-later-kings-birmingham-letter-still-resonates">Letter from Birmingham Jail</a>,” King describes “nationalist groups” as being “<a href="https://www.csuchico.edu/iege/_assets/documents/susi-letter-from-birmingham-jail.pdf">made up of people who have lost faith in America</a>.”</p>
<p>George Orwell, the author of “<a href="https://theconversation.com/orwells-ideas-remain-relevant-75-years-after-animal-farm-was-published-165431">Animal Farm</a>” and “<a href="https://theconversation.com/guide-to-the-classics-orwells-1984-and-how-it-helps-us-understand-tyrannical-power-today-112066">Nineteen Eighty-Four</a>,” describes patriotism as “<a href="https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/notes-on-nationalism/">devotion to a particular place</a> and a particular way of life.” </p>
<p>He contrasted that with nationalism, which he describes as “the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests.”</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/smEqnnklfYs?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">In his ‘I Have a Dream’ speech and other works, Martin Luther King Jr. decried nationalism and encouraged patriotism.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Nationalism vs. patriotism</h2>
<p>Adolf Hitler’s rise in Germany was accomplished by perverting patriotism and embracing nationalism. According to <a href="https://theconversation.com/i-understood-you-may-1958-the-return-of-de-gaulle-and-the-fall-of-frances-fourth-republic-93510">Charles de Gaulle</a>, who led <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Free-French">Free France</a> against Nazi Germany during World War II and later became president of France, “<a href="https://www.britannica.com/quotes/Charles-de-Gaulle-president-of-France">Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first</a>.” </p>
<p>The tragedy of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/5-websites-to-help-educate-about-the-horrors-of-the-holocaust-152702">Holocaust</a> was rooted in the nationalistic belief that certain groups of people were inferior. While Hitler is a <a href="https://theconversation.com/quantifying-the-holocaust-measuring-murder-rates-during-the-nazi-genocide-108984">particularly extreme example</a>, in my own research as a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=vXXZBEkAAAAJ&hl=en">human rights scholar</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219409">I have found</a> that even in contemporary times, countries with nationalist leaders are more likely to have bad human rights records.</p>
<p>After World War II, President Harry Truman signed the <a href="https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/marshall-plan">Marshall Plan</a>, which would provide postwar aid to Europe. The intent of the program was to help European countries “<a href="https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/special-message-the-congress-the-marshall-plan">break away from the self-defeating actions of narrow nationalism</a>.”</p>
<p>For Truman, putting <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/110537721192978858">America first</a> did not mean <a href="https://theconversation.com/trumps-foreign-policy-is-still-america-first-what-does-that-mean-exactly-144841">exiting the global stage</a> and sowing division at home with nationalist actions and <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-field-guide-to-trumps-dangerous-rhetoric-139531">rhetoric</a>. Rather, he viewed the “principal concern of the people of the United States” to be “the creation of conditions of enduring peace throughout the world.” For him, patriotically <a href="https://theconversation.com/america-cant-be-first-without-europe-75109">putting the interests of his country first</a> meant fighting against nationalism.</p>
<p>This view is in line with that of French President <a href="https://theconversation.com/president-macron-marches-to-parliamentary-majority-in-france-79245">Emmanuel Macron</a>, who has stated that “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-t-QIqsCTr8">patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism</a>.” </p>
<p>“<a href="https://www.axios.com/2018/11/11/emmanuel-macron-nationalism-patriotism-donald-trump">Nationalism,” he says, “is a betrayal of patriotism</a>.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/208170/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joshua Holzer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Nationalism and patriotism are sometimes treated as synonyms, but they have very different meanings.Joshua Holzer, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Westminster CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1497352020-11-16T01:06:50Z2020-11-16T01:06:50ZWhat a Biden presidency means for world trade and allies like Australia<p>Back in March, <a href="https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-01-23/why-america-must-lead-again">Joe Biden lamented</a> “the international system that the United States so carefully constructed is coming apart at the seams”.</p>
<p>“As president,” he declared, “I will take immediate steps to renew US democracy and alliances, protect the United States’ economic future, and once more have America lead the world.”</p>
<p>Among the closest allies of the US, none arguably has more at stake in Biden making good on his promises than Australia. </p>
<p>The international system Australia wants repaired is one defined by rules and consensus. As a middle-ranking power, it has long recognised its national interests are best protected by international agreements and the rule of law, rather than one in which might makes right. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-australia-china-relationship-is-unravelling-faster-than-we-could-have-imagined-145836">Why the Australia-China relationship is unravelling faster than we could have imagined</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>At the heart of Australia’s desired international trade system are multilateral trade deals, rather than bilateral deals which tend to favour the stronger nation, and a strong international authority – namely the World Trade Organisation – to negotiate rules and adjudicate disputes. </p>
<p>Donald Trump’s presidency undermined both. His “America First”
polices were grounded in grievances about other nations playing the US for “suckers”. He obstructed the WTO, turned his back on multilateral deals and started trade wars. </p>
<p>A Biden presidency promises a return to multilateralism. But it remains to be seen how it approaches the WTO.</p>
<h2>Trump’s war on multilateralism</h2>
<p>As president, Trump rapidly undid decades of mutilateral trade negotiations.</p>
<p>In his first week in office he withdrew the US <a href="https://theconversation.com/can-the-trans-pacific-partnership-survive-after-trump-71821">from the Trans-Pacific Partnership</a>, the multilateral trade deal intended to strengthen economic ties between Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore, Peru, Vietnam and the US. (The agreement was modified and signed without the US as the <a href="https://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/in-force/cptpp/Pages/comprehensive-and-progressive-agreement-for-trans-pacific-partnership">Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership</a>.)</p>
<p>Trump’s trade war with China was also an exercise in power over principle. Both the escalating tariffs and the truce struck in January, known as the “<a href="https://www.fas.usda.gov/topics/china-phase-one-agreement">Phase One Agreement</a>”, repudiated established free-trade principles.</p>
<p>Along with commitments to reduce “structural barriers”, China is required to buy an extra US$200 billion in specified American goods and services over two years in return for the US cutting tariffs on $US110 billion in Chinese imports. </p>
<p>This worries Australian exporters.</p>
<p>The US shopping list for China includes more American seafood, grain, wine, fruit, meat and energy – all markets in which Australia is a significant exporter to China. As former Australian prime minister Kevin Rudd <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/us-china-trade-deal-threatens-australian-exporters-20200116-p53s2a.html">asked at the time</a> the deal was signed:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>How can the US pursue another $US32 billion of American beef, wheat, cotton and seafood – all listed in the agreement – without Australian exporters becoming collateral damage?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The deal, as the Minerals Council of Australia rightly noted, undermined “the principles of free trade which have underpinned Australia’s bipartisan approach to trade policy for many decades”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/are-trumps-tariffs-legal-under-the-wto-it-seems-not-and-they-are-overturning-70-years-of-global-leadership-121425">Are Trump's tariffs legal under the WTO? It seems not, and they are overturning 70 years of global leadership</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Blocking the World Trade Organisation</h2>
<p>The Trump administration has also continued the slow <a href="https://theconversation.com/key-trade-rules-will-become-unenforceable-from-midnight-australia-should-be-worried-126768">strangulation of the World Trade Organisation</a>, on the grounds it doesn’t serve American interests.</p>
<p>The US has blocked every recent appointment and reappointment to the WTO’s Appellate Body, which hears appeals to WTO adjudications. Appointments require the agreement of all of the WTO’s 164 member nations, and the Appellate Body requires three judges to hear appeals. US obstruction reduced the number of judges to <a href="https://theconversation.com/key-trade-rules-will-become-unenforceable-from-midnight-australia-should-be-worried-126768">just one by December 2019</a>, meaning it simply cannot function.</p>
<p>It’s important to note that US antagonism to the WTO predated Trump. The Obama administration also blocked <a href="https://worldtradelaw.typepad.com/ielpblog/2016/09/the-obama-administrations-attack-on-appellate-body-independence-shows-the-need-for-reforms-.html">appointments</a> it considered would not sufficiently represent US preferences. But the Trump administration certainly upped the obstructionism.</p>
<p>Indeed, just days before the 2020 election it blocked the appointment of former Nigerian finance minister Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala to head the World Trade Organisation. A highly regarded development economist with a 25-year career at the World Bank, Okonjo-Iweala is widely considered to be an outstanding candidate to lead the WTO. The United States stood alone in objecting to her appointment.</p>
<h2>What will change under Biden?</h2>
<p>Dropping opposition to Okonjo-Iweala and other appointments so the WTO’s processes can function would be an important symbolic and practical first step for Biden. It would reassure Australia and others that global rules still matter.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/arrogance-destroyed-the-world-trade-organisation-what-replaces-it-will-be-even-worse-125321">Arrogance destroyed the World Trade Organisation. What replaces it will be even worse</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>How quickly, and on what terms, Biden returns the US to multilateralism remains to be seen. </p>
<p>He has acknowledged the importance of deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership to ensure an increasingly powerful China “<a href="https://www.cfr.org/article/presidential-candidates-trans-pacific-partnership">doesn’t write the rules of the road for the world</a>”. But he has also pledged to not enter any more international agreements “until we have made major investments in our workers and infrastructure”.</p>
<p>For Australia – and other US allies – it is important that the US return to the multilateral negotiating table sooner rather than later. For global stability, long-term interests need to override the temptation of short-term expediency. </p>
<p>For “<a href="https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-01-23/why-america-must-lead-again">America to lead again</a>” there’s a long and difficult diplomatic road ahead. The international trade system and the WTO are not perfect, but a world without rules would be far worse.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/149735/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Professor Lisa Toohey is a holder of the 2020 Fulbright Professional Scholarship in Australian-American Alliance Studies, funded by the Fulbright Foundation and the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. </span></em></p>A Biden presidency promises a return to multilateral trade agreements. But it remains to be seen how it approaches the World Trade Organisation.Lisa Toohey, Professor of Law, University of NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/992672018-07-05T10:38:44Z2018-07-05T10:38:44ZWhy it doesn’t matter if a Harley is ‘made in America’<p>Harley-Davidson was one of the president’s favorite companies less than six months ago. Now it’s the latest business to feel his wrath. </p>
<p>That’s because on June 25, Harley-Davidson <a href="http://investor.harley-davidson.com/node/17401/html">announced</a> it will move some of its production overseas. The iconic American motorcycle brand said it was doing this to avoid retaliatory tariffs imposed by the European Union in response to U.S. import taxes. </p>
<p>“A Harley-Davidson should never be built in another country – never!” President Donald Trump <a href="https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1011584315040419840">tweeted</a> “Their employees and customers are already very angry at them. If they move, watch, it will be the beginning of the end.”</p>
<p>Back in February, things were very different. At a meeting with executives at the White House, Trump <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-meeting-harley-davidson-executives-union-representatives">praised</a> Harley-Davidson for being “a true American icon, one of the greats,” and thanked them “for building things in America.” </p>
<p>As an international relations expert who focuses on <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=vf1UpqAAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">trade disputes</a>, Trump’s anger at Harley’s announcement is understandable. He wants to promote Harley-Davidson for his <a href="https://www.upi.com/Trump-puts-America-first-in-manufacturing-trade-speech/2081500317847/">“America First” agenda</a>. The goal of this approach is to protect and create American manufacturing jobs. With Harley taking the production of its EU-bound bikes abroad, this does not look like a success for Trump. </p>
<p>But this got me to thinking, in a world that depends on global supply chains, what makes a product truly “made in America”? Is a Harley really an all-American bike? Who even cares?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/226054/original/file-20180703-116129-1keb60x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/226054/original/file-20180703-116129-1keb60x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/226054/original/file-20180703-116129-1keb60x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/226054/original/file-20180703-116129-1keb60x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/226054/original/file-20180703-116129-1keb60x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/226054/original/file-20180703-116129-1keb60x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/226054/original/file-20180703-116129-1keb60x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Trump and Vice President Mike Pence met with Harley-Davidson CEO Matthew Levatich in February.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Trump-100-100-Photos/6e55f7cf96a8455a9567e56961fd8497/10/0">AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, file</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What ‘made in America’ means</h2>
<p>For consumers hoping to figure out if a product is made in the U.S., it’s trickier than you’d think.</p>
<p>Products like American soybeans or corn are pretty clear-cut: They are grown and harvested in the U.S. by American farmers, in states like North Dakota and Iowa. The only inputs are seeds, land, fertilizer and water – all of which are easily found in the U.S. </p>
<p>“American-made” clothing, on the other hand, becomes more ambiguous. Even when a garment is sewn in a factory in New York or Los Angeles, earning it its “Made in USA” tag, the fabric or thread may have been spun in Bangladesh or India with American-grown cotton. </p>
<p>The Federal Trade Commission has a <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/plain-language/bus03-complying-made-usa-standard.pdf">40-page document</a> that thoroughly explains what makes an item “Made in USA.” Basically, to earn that designation, a product has to be “all or virtually all” made in a U.S. state or territory. Only automobiles, textiles, fur and wool must disclose their U.S. content at the point of sale. Other products may use the tag as long as they follow the guidelines. </p>
<h2>Foreign or domestic</h2>
<p>Let’s take a closer look at vehicles.</p>
<p>The parts that comprise “American-made” motorcycles and cars have been shuttled back and forth over North American borders ever since the <a href="https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/nafta-signed-into-law">North American Free Trade Agreement</a> was signed in 1993. American auto manufacturers like Ford and Chevrolet <a href="https://www.autoblog.com/2010/10/06/is-your-car-really-american">depend</a> on parts from Mexico and the EU and often assemble their cars in Canada. </p>
<p>In 1994, Congress passed the <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/part-583-american-automobile-labeling-act-reports">American Automotive Labeling Act</a>, requiring automakers to reveal the share of the parts that came from the U.S. or Canada, the country of assembly, and the engine and transmission’s country of origin. The aim was to encourage more patriotic consumerism on the premise that Americans would buy more of a product if they knew it was produced domestically. </p>
<p>American University business professor Frank DuBois describes some of this data as misleading because it doesn’t break down what share of the parts came from the U.S. versus Canada. He created the <a href="http://kogodbusiness.com/auto-index/">2016 Kogod Made in America Auto Index</a> to track this and other information to come up with a more accurate indicator of how much of a car benefits the U.S. economy. His results reveal the fine line between foreign and domestic. </p>
<p>For instance, Japanese carmaker Toyota assembled its 2017 Camry in the U.S. with an American-made engine and transmission. Three-quarters of the parts came from either the U.S. or Canada, giving it a “total domestic content” score of 78.5 percent. Similarly, Tokyo-based Honda built its Accord in the U.S. with an American engine, Japanese transmission and 80 percent U.S. or Canadian parts, giving it a score of 81 percent. </p>
<p>General Motors’ Chevy Volt, on other hand, contains only 63 percent domestic content and half its parts are from outside the U.S. or Canada, even though its engine is American. The Ford Fusion is even lower: It has a U.K.-built engine, and only a quarter of its parts were made in the U.S. or Canada. </p>
<h2>A global bike</h2>
<p>As for Harley-Davidson motorcycles, they may be considered classic Americana, but the components of the bikes themselves come from many places outside the U.S., just like in the auto industry. </p>
<p>Harleys sold in the U.S. <a href="https://www.jsonline.com/story/money/2018/06/28/harley-davidsons-classic-americana-foreign-sourced-parts/741163002">are indeed assembled</a> in one of four plants located in Wisconsin, Missouri and Pennsylvania. But the brakes and clutch are imported from Italy, the engine pistons are made in Austria, the bike suspension comes from Japan, and other electronic components originate in Mexico and China.</p>
<p>While Harley-Davidson claims it attempts to use as many American parts as it can, the company is <a href="https://www.cycleworld.com/2013/11/12/where-is-it-made-2014-harley-davidson-street-750-and-street-500/">sometimes forced</a> to go abroad to find the right parts in terms of cost and comparable quality. </p>
<p>As for its <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/business/harley-davidson-us-eu-tariffs.html">plan</a> to avoid the EU counter-sanctions, Harley plans to shift some production of bikes intended for European markets to facilities in other countries <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/6/26/17506424/trump-tariffs-harley-davidson-thailand">such as Thailand</a>, where it’s building a new factory. </p>
<p>But that won’t actually change anything for American consumers, no matter what Trump says. In other words, Harleys that Americans buy after its plans go into effect will still be as American as they were a year ago. And all the profits Harley makes will continue to flow to the U.S. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/226056/original/file-20180703-116120-1vbwya3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/226056/original/file-20180703-116120-1vbwya3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/226056/original/file-20180703-116120-1vbwya3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/226056/original/file-20180703-116120-1vbwya3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/226056/original/file-20180703-116120-1vbwya3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/226056/original/file-20180703-116120-1vbwya3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/226056/original/file-20180703-116120-1vbwya3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Furniture-Revival/9e2874e6e1d34c2180c01282a8285c03/2/0">AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Don’t go bananas</h2>
<p>So back to our original question, what does it really mean to be “made in America”? </p>
<p>Since the 1980s, U.S. companies have been using this label in their advertising to push back against foreign competition as global production expanded into Asia and elsewhere. In this era of “America First,” the Trump administration <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/342235-white-house-announces-new-campaign-promoting-trumps-agenda">has doubled down</a> on this branding. </p>
<p>But the truth is it makes little sense. Nor does attacking a U.S. company for moving some of its production – production intended for overseas markets and customers – to another country. </p>
<p>In 2013 political scientist Mike Allison and I <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1557-203X.2013.01195.x">wrote an article</a> that showed how the meaning of “domestic” can be very expansive. In the 1990s, for example, the U.S. filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization against the EU for quotas it set on bananas from Latin America.</p>
<p>None of the products in the dispute were made in the U.S. or Europe, but two of the biggest growers of bananas – Chiquita and Fyffes – were headquartered in the U.S. and the U.K. respectively. Essentially, both the Clinton and first Bush administrations – as well as officials in the EU – fought over bananas made elsewhere because they figured corporate profits supported by a product mattered more than where it was made. </p>
<p>Furthermore, consumers also look at other things besides where the product is made. In a <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-buyamerican-poll-idUSKBN1A3210">2017 poll</a>, 69 percent of Americans surveyed said price is “very important” in considering the purchase of a product. Only 32 percent said not bearing a made in the U.S. label was a dealbreaker. </p>
<p>So the problem with Trump’s tariff push is that other things matter more than where something is made. And companies will do what they have to do to stay competitive, even if it means moving overseas. </p>
<p>Following Harley’s announcement, fellow bike maker Polaris <a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/money/business/2018/06/29/polaris-tariffs-prompt-study-moving-production-out-iowa-europe/747386002/">said</a> it was also considering moving some production from Iowa to Poland. </p>
<p>Other companies in different industries will likely follow. While Trump may be following a hard line with tariffs against U.S. competitors, Americans will likely see negative effects from that move, either in the form of jobs being shipped overseas or prices rising due to reciprocal tariffs.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99267/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christina Fattore does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The motorcycle maker angered Trump after it said it plans to move some production overseas to avoid EU tariffs – just a few months after the president praised the company for being a ‘true American icon.’Christina Fattore, Associate Professor of Political Science, West Virginia UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/955942018-04-29T08:51:26Z2018-04-29T08:51:26ZWhat Buhari and Trump stand to gain from state visit<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/216456/original/file-20180426-175038-oihv64.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari heads to the White House.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Frank Augstein</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari’s visit to the Obama White House <a href="https://www.npr.org/2015/07/20/424722402/nigerian-president-muhammadu-buhari-makes-first-u-s-visit">three years ago</a> was ecstatic. By contrast, his visit this week to the Trump White House will be awkward. This time around, his host is a president who has referred to African states as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/12/unkind-divisive-elitist-international-outcry-over-trumps-shithole-countries-remark">“shithole countries”</a> and remarked that Nigerians would never want to leave the US to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/23/us/politics/trump-immigration.html">“go back to their huts”</a>. </p>
<p>Given Trump’s unpalatable statements about Africans in general, and Nigerians in particular, it’s fair to wonder why Trump invited the leader of a country he despises so much for a state visit. And also why Buhari accepted the invitation. </p>
<p>One answer is that the meeting offers both leaders a platform to promote their various political goals. Trump could use the occasion to showcase his credentials as an indefatigable fighter against terrorism. And he could pledge to help Buhari defeat Boko Haram in northern Nigeria, much as he has done with ISIS in Syria and Iraq. </p>
<p>For his part, Buhari is headed for a <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nigeria-politics/nigerian-president-buhari-to-seek-re-election-in-2019-idUSKBN1HG1MN">tough re-election bid a year from now</a> and may believe that a visit to the White House could boost his international profile. His prolonged absence from office last year due to illness led some observers to believe that Nigeria had abandoned its role as a leading voice for Africa.</p>
<p>It’s not inconceivable that Buhari’s visit to the White House has little to do with economic relations, but more about the political gains both leaders can make. Buhari’s US visit comes on the heels of a recent <a href="https://www.vanguardngr.com/2018/04/videos-buhari-visits-theresa-may-london/">visit to Downing Street</a>, and will soon be followed by another visit to the Elysee Palace.</p>
<p>What must not be forgotten is that US dependence on Nigerian oil has increased dramatically with imports jumping threefold in 2016 driven by uncertainties in Iran and Venezuela. This suggests that both countries have a common interest in maintaining a close relationship. </p>
<h2>What will be on offer</h2>
<p>One deal that’s likely to be consummated during the meeting is the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nigeria-usa/nigeria-says-u-s-agrees-delayed-593-million-fighter-plane-sale-idUSKBN1EL1EN">planned sale</a> of up to 12 Embraer A-29 Super Tucano attack planes to the Nigerian Air force for about USD$600 million to help fight Boko Haram. Trump is also likely to announce the deployment of more military advisers to assist Nigeria in fighting Boko Haram. </p>
<p>But fighting Boko Haram requires much more. As the commander of the US Africa Command, General Thomas D. Waldhauser, <a href="http://www.africom.mil/about-the-command/2018-posture-statement-to-congress">recently observed,</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Unrest within West Africa is driven by local grievances, corruption and weak governance, human rights violations, and imported religious ideology.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Buhari could also do with substantial non-military assistance. In particular, he needs help to address two huge social problems in Nigeria: the fact that<a href="https://www.vanguardngr.com/2018/01/67-nigerians-live-poverty-line-presidential-aide/"> 70% </a>of Nigerians live in abject poverty, and that <a href="http://www.pulse.ng/bi/politics/youth-unemployment-61-6-of-nigerian-youth-are-unemployed-nbs-says-id6790731.html">more than 50%</a> of the country’s young people are jobless.</p>
<p>But Buhari should not count on Trump to increase aid for the kind of economic transformation the country needs. In the 2017 financial year, the US budgeted a mere USD$608 million in <a href="https://agoa.info/news/article/14943-trump-effect-on-africa.html">foreign assistance to Nigeria</a>, a number which eerily echoes the price tag for the 12 fighter jets Nigeria wants to buy. </p>
<p>US assistance is unlikely to increase for two main reasons. First, Trump is pursuing his <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42835934">“America First” philosophy</a> and has vowed to slash its foreign aid budget. In 2017, the budget was USD$34 billion, or 0.2 percent of US budget, out of which Africa received 21%. </p>
<p>The other reason the aid taps are unlikely to be opened is that Trump has <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/20/donald-trump-threat-cut-aid-un-jerusalem-vote">threatened to withhold aid</a> to countries that supported the UN resolution condemning his administration’s decision to recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Nigeria is one of the several African countries that voted for the resolution.</p>
<h2>Trade</h2>
<p>Nigeria is America’s <a href="https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/africa/west-africa/nigeria">56th largest goods trading partner</a>. The US exported goods worth USD$1.9 billion in 2016, and imported goods worth USD$4.2 billion that year, leaving the US with a trade deficit of USD$2.3 billion with Nigeria. But these numbers are deceptive because US imports are made up mainly of crude oil. Stripping out the oil, the US would have had a trade surplus of USD$1.7 billion in 2016. </p>
<p>To alleviate poverty and create jobs Nigeria needs to export more non-oil products to the US. At the very least, Buhari should press Trump to strengthen the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) enacted in 2000 to facilitate the access of African exporters to the US market. Nigeria was the leading AGOA exporter in 2016, with over USD$2 billion worth of exports under the Act. </p>
<p>There are <a href="http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/business/Agoa-treaty-repeal-Trump/2560-3784086-i5xqqqz/index.html">fears</a> that Trump might jettison the Act, or weaken some of its provisions that he deems inimical to his “America First” philosophy. Buhari should defend it unequivocally.</p>
<p>And he should tell Trump that Nigeria needs more US foreign direct investment. In 2016 <a href="https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/africa/west-africa/nigeria">the number was </a> USD$3.8 billion in 2016, far less than the USD$13 billion the <a href="https://www.thecable.ng/chinas-investments-nigeria-exceed-13-billion">Chinese invested in Nigeria in the same year</a>. </p>
<h2>Business as usual</h2>
<p>The US-Nigeria relationship has historically been driven less by economics, but more by convenience and indifference. While Nigerian presidents covet a visit to the White House, US presidents tend to be indifferent, and sometimes passive, about Nigerian affairs.</p>
<p>An example is the blind eye various US administrations turned as successive military dictators presided over Nigeria for three decades. Some of those dictators managed to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-nigeria-assets/u-s-takes-control-of-480-mln-stolen-by-nigerian-dictator-abacha-idUSL2N0QD23D20140807">stash their ill-gotten wealth in US financial institutions</a>. I suspect that Buhari will be asking Trump to help repatriate some of those illicit funds. Whether Buhari also gets to ask Trump to commit to trade and investment, and not fighter jets, remains to be seen.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/95594/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephen Onyeiwu does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It’s inconceivable that military prowess can offer long-term solutions to Nigeria’s deep-rooted institutional problems.Stephen Onyeiwu, Professor and Chair of the Economics Department, Allegheny CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/927152018-03-01T21:35:51Z2018-03-01T21:35:51ZEconomic history shows why Trump’s ‘America First’ tariff policy is so dangerous<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208564/original/file-20180301-152584-xtorsi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Economic history suggests Trump's 'America First' trade policies will put the U.S. last.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Reuters/Kevin Lamarque</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>President Donald Trump is finally making good on his promised threats to erect protectionist walls around the U.S. economy. </p>
<p>Citing the need to protect national security, last month he released <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-wont-quickly-announce-new-tariffs-on-aluminum-steel-1519921704">plans to impose</a> tariffs of 25 percent on foreign steel and 10 percent on aluminum for a “long period of time.” More recently, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/trump-administration-targets-chinese-electronics-aerospace-and-machinery-goods-with-50-billion-in-tariffs/2018/04/03/9be42e5e-3786-11e8-9c0a-85d477d9a226_story.html?utm_term=.abd645cd5a92">he placed</a> $50 billion worth of tariffs on China, which <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/04/china-new-us-tariffs-including-soy-cars-and-chemicals.html">released</a> its own retaliatory tariffs. </p>
<p>The president’s new trade barriers stem directly from the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-does-america-first-mean-for-american-economic-interests-71931">“America First” policy</a> he has been promoting since the presidential campaign. Trump is orienting the country distinctly toward protectionism and claiming that unilateralism in trade is good for the U.S.</p>
<p>But economic history should make Americans skeptical of this claim.</p>
<p>President Trump’s <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-trade-policy-agenda-2017-3">approach to trade</a> seems to be based on a false understanding of how the global economy works, one that also plagued American policymakers nearly a century ago. Essentially, the administration has forgotten an important lesson from the Great Depression. </p>
<p><a href="http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/06/economists-take-aim-at-trump-trade-theory-again-peter-navarro-bilateral-multilateral-trade-deals-china-germany-national-security/">Virtually all economists</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Y58-EhUAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">trade researchers like me</a> <a href="https://www.voanews.com/a/trump-trade-policy-loser-economists-contend/3323997.html">agree</a> that the costs could be steep. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194884/original/file-20171115-19768-8hk2wk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194884/original/file-20171115-19768-8hk2wk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194884/original/file-20171115-19768-8hk2wk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194884/original/file-20171115-19768-8hk2wk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194884/original/file-20171115-19768-8hk2wk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194884/original/file-20171115-19768-8hk2wk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194884/original/file-20171115-19768-8hk2wk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">If Trump puts ‘America first’ in trade, other countries will follow. And that’s bad news for everyone.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Hadrian/Shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The U.S. and the global economy</h2>
<p>Trump’s “America First” orientation <a href="http://time.com/4386335/donald-trump-trade-speech-transcript/">assumes</a> that the United States, as the world’s dominant actor, can behave freely and independently in trade. </p>
<p>Unfortunately for the administration, America’s top economic position does not shield it from the dire consequences that unilateral trade policy can provoke. The constraints on U.S. action result from the basic nature of the international economy and from America’s <a href="https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/current_issues/ci18-1.pdf">declining dominance</a> of the world trade system. </p>
<p>It is a standard principle of economics that all individual actors exist within a system. Any action taken by one actor will likely result in a response from others. This means that wise governments, in considering which policies to adopt, must make <a href="https://www.economist.com/news/economics-brief/21705308-fifth-our-series-seminal-economic-ideas-looks-nash-equilibrium-prison">difficult calculations</a> about how their actions will interact with those of others.</p>
<p>“America First” fails to make these calculations. It disregards how America’s trading partners will respond to the new U.S. protectionism – which is also what American lawmakers ignored during the Great Depression.</p>
<h2>‘Beggar-thy-neighbor’</h2>
<p>Before the 1930s, America’s trade policy was generally set unilaterally by Congress – that is, without the international negotiations used today. </p>
<p>Lawmakers, already in a <a href="http://www.nber.org/papers/w2001">protectionist mood</a>, responded to the pain of the Great Depression by passing the infamous <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/smoot-hawley-tariff-act.asp">Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930</a>, which <a href="http://www.economist.com/node/12798595">raised duties on hundreds of imports</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194881/original/file-20171115-19823-b2itsw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194881/original/file-20171115-19823-b2itsw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194881/original/file-20171115-19823-b2itsw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=809&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194881/original/file-20171115-19823-b2itsw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=809&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194881/original/file-20171115-19823-b2itsw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=809&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194881/original/file-20171115-19823-b2itsw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1016&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194881/original/file-20171115-19823-b2itsw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1016&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194881/original/file-20171115-19823-b2itsw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1016&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Sen. Reed Smoot co-sponsored the famous act that bears his name.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Everett Historical/Shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Meant in part to ease the effects of the Depression by protecting American industry and agriculture from foreign competition, the act instead helped prolong the downturn. <a href="https://press.princeton.edu/titles/9430.html">Many U.S. trading partners reacted</a> by <a href="http://www.nber.org/chapters/c6899.pdf">raising their own tariffs</a>, which contributed <a href="http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/003465398557410">significantly</a> to shutting down world trade.</p>
<p>Fortunately, the U.S. and the world learned a lesson from this experience. With the <a href="http://www.nber.org/chapters/c6899.pdf">Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934</a> and its successors, which granted the president authority to reach tariff reduction agreements with foreign governments, U.S. trade policy came to be global and strategic. This new approach was institutionalized at the international level with the creation of the <a href="https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/agrmntseries2_gatt_e.pdf">General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade</a> in 1948 and its successor, the World Trade Organization, in 1995.</p>
<p>The basic principle of these agreements is <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-wto-still-matters-34624">reciprocity</a> – that each country will agree to liberalize its trade to the extent that other countries liberalize theirs. The approach uses international negotiations to <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2706411?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">overcome protectionist political pressures</a> and recognizes that trade is a global phenomenon that generates national interdependence.</p>
<h2>Dangers of ignoring history</h2>
<p>The dangers of ignoring history are only beginning to manifest themselves, but they can be seen in several recent developments that bode ill for us all.</p>
<p>One of the Trump administration’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-tpps-demise-threatens-us-national-security-and-pax-americana-67514">first actions</a> was to withdraw the United States from the <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/transpacific-partnership-1882">Trans-Pacific Partnership</a>. This agreement, which was a major initiative of the Obama administration, would have created the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/business/tpp-explained-what-is-trans-pacific-partnership.html">largest economic bloc</a> in the world by linking America’s economy with those of 11 other Pacific nations. It would also have created an American-led liberal bulwark in Asia against any Chinese challenge to the regional economic order.</p>
<p>Withdrawing from the agreement denied American exporters enhanced access to foreign markets and was a <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnbrinkley/2017/01/24/trump-dumps-trans-pacific-partnership-sad/#4543448e75dc">gift</a> to Chinese influence in Asia. But we are only now beginning to see the longer-term repercussions of President Trump’s decision. </p>
<p>During Trump’s trip, the other 11 signatories of the original trade deal, including Japan, Australia, Canada and Mexico, <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/13/news/economy/tpp-11-without-us-what-next/index.html">agreed to move forward</a> without the U.S. This is a problem for the U.S. because it means that these countries will grant preferential market access to one another, making it harder for American companies to compete in their markets.</p>
<p>American companies are already feeling the impact of what happens when they’re left out of a trade deal. A recent <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/12/business/trump-trade-lobster-canada.html">New York Times article</a>, for example, highlights the plight of American lobster producers whose prices are being undercut by Canadian producers in the wake of a new <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ceta/">Canada-European Union trade agreement</a>. </p>
<p>If the United States is reluctant to participate in multilateral trade agreements, other countries have every incentive to do deals that exclude and even may hurt the U.S.</p>
<p>Trump’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/trumps-threat-to-withdraw-from-nafta-may-hit-a-hurdle-the-us-constitution-81444">ongoing efforts</a> to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement also pose potential dangers. The administration has a tendency to speak of renegotiation as if it can <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/11/news/economy/trump-nafta/index.html">dictate the terms</a>. But while Canada and Mexico may be more dependent on the U.S. than the U.S. is on them, an <a href="https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/naftas-economic-impact">implosion of NAFTA would be devastating</a> for many U.S. industries that rely on North American trade. <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/13/the-next-big-worry-for-markets-nafta-fails-and-trade-wars-erupt.html">Market analysts increasingly worry</a> that NAFTA may not survive the negotiations. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194882/original/file-20171115-19789-ujcuha.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194882/original/file-20171115-19789-ujcuha.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194882/original/file-20171115-19789-ujcuha.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194882/original/file-20171115-19789-ujcuha.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194882/original/file-20171115-19789-ujcuha.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=512&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194882/original/file-20171115-19789-ujcuha.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=512&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194882/original/file-20171115-19789-ujcuha.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=512&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Trade representatives from Canada, the U.S. and Mexico have been meeting to renegotiate NAFTA.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In addition to withdrawing from and renegotiating trade agreements, the administration has <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trumps-trade-policies-keep-backfiring/">ramped up</a> unilateral efforts to sanction U.S. trading partners for receiving subsidies or for dumping their products on the American market. </p>
<p>Decisions to impose trade penalties – such as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/trump-administration-targets-chinese-electronics-aerospace-and-machinery-goods-with-50-billion-in-tariffs/2018/04/03/9be42e5e-3786-11e8-9c0a-85d477d9a226_story.html?utm_term=.abd645cd5a92">those against China</a> – risk severe blowback, as when sanctions on Bombardier drove the Canadian plane manufacturer into the <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trumps-trade-policies-keep-backfiring/">arms of Airbus</a>, Boeing’s top foreign rival. The <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/sunpower-layoffs-job-losses-donald-trump-solar-panel-tariff-30-per-cent-a8233866.html">imposition of sanctions</a> on imports of solar panels is having <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/22/solar-tariff-trump-china-trade-243021">a similar effect</a>, damaging American panel installers and encouraging foreign retaliation. China’s <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/04/china-new-us-tariffs-including-soy-cars-and-chemicals.html">already-announced</a> retaliatory tariffs could be just the beginning. </p>
<h2>Trade needs a champion</h2>
<p>President Trump assumes the U.S. can act unilaterally without consequences. </p>
<p>Economic history shows this doesn’t work. The world’s economies are far more interdependent than they were during the Great Depression, so the impact of governments all following a “my country first” trade policy – as the president said <a href="http://www.eaglenews.ph/trump-says-us-wont-tolerate-other-countries-unfair-trade-practices-anymore-to-protect-america-first/">he expected world leaders to do</a> – could have disastrous consequences. </p>
<p>Today, the international trade system the U.S. helped create, one based on open markets and classically liberal principles, is <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-twilight-of-the-liberal-world-order/">under threat</a> as never before. Yet President Trump’s “America First” approach is a total abdication of the traditional U.S. role as its defender. And in fact, the president is doing his best to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/31/business/economy/trump-trade.html?_r=0">undermine that system</a>. </p>
<p>In my final analysis, the Trump administration is reverting to a policy that is, I would argue, dangerous for the U.S. economy and for the international system. </p>
<p>If the U.S. abdicates as champion of the international trading system, China may be the only country that can take the reins. The question is, what would that mean for the current system of open and free markets?</p>
<p><em>This article was updated on April 4 with new details about trade tariffs.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92715/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charles Hankla does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The president’s tariffs on steel and China mirror the misguided trade policies that helped precipitate the Great Depression.Charles Hankla, Associate Professor of Political Science, Georgia State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/907922018-01-26T21:53:47Z2018-01-26T21:53:47ZWhat Trump’s every-country-for-itself rhetoric gets wrong about Davos<p>There is a disarming and almost touchingly naive belief among the presenters and the government delegations in the cloistered mountain village of Davos that “<a href="http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_AM18_Overview.pdf">creating a shared future in a fractured world</a>” – the title of this year’s World Economic Forum – is actually possible. </p>
<p>To the outside world, the panels and speeches fleetingly catch the news cycle, doing little to alter the perception that it’s just a <a href="https://qz.com/1184584/the-list-of-davos-attendees-for-2018/">gathering of elites and billionaires</a>. But inside the forum, political leaders mingle with entrepreneurs, scientists and humanists. It’s a menagerie of power, money, brains and innovative thinking mainly, though not exclusively, being <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/24/opinion/davos-corporate-social-impact.html">channeled toward social good</a>. </p>
<p>So what happens when the “<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/01/trump-free-world-leader/514232/">leader of the free world</a>” walks into the room and promotes a form of isolationism as his recommended method for creating that shared future?</p>
<h2>Universal values meets ‘America First’</h2>
<p>Like Trump, this year was my first at Davos. But my reason for being there was markedly different. </p>
<p>As the director of the University of Southern California’s Shoah Foundation, I was invited to present “<a href="https://sfi.usc.edu/collections/holocaust/ndt">new dimensions in testimony</a>,” a collaborative project that aims to bring the stories of Holocaust and other genocide survivors to three-dimensional life by using articial intelligence to simulate a conversation.</p>
<p>On a typical day teaching on <a href="https://sfi.usc.edu/about/unesco">Holocaust and genocide</a>, I would never have the chance to speak with Iraqi clerics or Saudi journalists. The distance is just too great physically, intellectually and emotionally. </p>
<p>Not so at Davos. In the last few days, for example, I have had detailed conversations with members of the United Arab Emirates government who agreed that Holocaust testimony could be used to teach universal human values at home. Davos allows such boundaries to be crossed.</p>
<p>Enter Donald Trump, the “<a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/america-first-34020">America First</a>” president whose rhetorical track record at first glance seems at odds with the Davos globalists. In a <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/26/full-text-trump-davos-speech-transcript-370861">keynote address</a> on Jan. 26, Trump chose his words carefully and stuck to the script, ostensibly encouraging collaboration.</p>
<p>“Together let us resolve to use our power, our resources and our voices, not just for ourselves but for our people, to lift their burdens, to raise their hopes and to empower their dreams,” he said.</p>
<p>Trump described himself as America’s “cheerleader,” but the effect was more salesman, as he anchored his speech in the <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/26/gdp-q4-2017-first-reading.html">revival of the American economy</a>, reassuring investors that their money is safe with him.</p>
<p>While <a href="https://twitter.com/kenroth/status/956880603785416704">Trump’s critics</a> saw his speech as out of touch, the globalist gathering at Davos is known for embracing a broad spectrum of political, social and fiscal perspectives. It could be argued that Trump’s rumbustious isolationist rhetoric adds a healthy disruption to the remarkably polite company at Davos, but it is also a fact that the United States is by no means the only power here, a point <a href="https://qz.com/1188895/davos-2018-xi-jinping-has-shaped-the-theme-of-the-world-economic-forum-chinese-media-say">not lost on the Davos die-hards</a>. </p>
<h2>An invitation to isolation</h2>
<p>More to the point, it was not what he did say but what he did not that was so at odds with the tenor of the forum. </p>
<p>Trump focused on the fiscal performance of his country but said nothing about the shared global values at the heart of this year’s forum. Trump’s thesis is that if every country looks after its own interests, then ultimately common outcomes will prevail. This flies in the face of the hard work leaders in government, business, academia and others have put in at Davos this year to create multilateral agreements on key issues of global security, such as international efforts to <a href="https://thinkprogress.org/davos-climate-world-leaders-without-trump-8ab608162c95/">tackle climate change</a>. </p>
<p>While most leaders who attend also speak to their own country’s interests, only Trump promoted a “my country first” brand of isolationism. </p>
<p>Even his invitation for delegates to visit America, as generous as it sounds, is disingenuous, as some – such as the delegates from Chad and Iran I have been working with this week – cannot get visas <a href="https://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2018/01/travelling-ban">because of his travel ban</a>. Trump’s insistence that “putting America first” is his duty as president – just as other heads of state must do so in their own countries – ignores the many political leaders at Davos, such as <a href="http://www.politico.eu/article/5-takeaways-from-macrons-big-speech-on-europes-future/amp/toward">France’s Emmanuel Macron</a> or <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/01/24/580266951/in-davos-merkel-warns-against-poison-of-right-wing-populism">Germany’s Angela Merkel</a>, who were genuinely trying to find shared interests at the forum. </p>
<p>Trump and even a few of the Davos delegates may believe that his administration’s policies, such as corporate tax cuts, deregulation and increased military spending, do in fact create the “shared future” promoted by the forum. The reality is doing so requires a less self-interested strategy, one that doesn’t put “America first.”</p>
<p>In other words, his claim that “America First does not mean America alone” rings hollow.</p>
<p>Rather, the goal of a shared future was being met elsewhere at Davos, such as in a conversation I had with Salih Al-Hakeem, a cleric and director of the <a href="http://al-kalima.iq/?p=1289&lang=en">Hikmeh Center for Dialogue and Cooperation in Iraq</a>, who lost his entire family during the Saddam Hussein regime. I watched Al-Hakeem as he listened to the interactive testimony of <a href="https://sfi.usc.edu/news/2018/01/20876-new-dimensions-testimony-showcased-world-economic-forum-davos-switzerland">Holocaust survivor Pinchas Gutter</a> describing the destruction of his family by the Nazis. </p>
<p>After interacting with the holographic Gutter, he invited the real one to visit Iraq to tell his story to Muslims there. Al-Hakeem then turned to me and said, “When he speaks about the Holocaust he speaks for all of us.” </p>
<p>That for me is the Davos not seen in the glare of the cameras. Call me naive, but it just might help create a more shared future in an otherwise fractured world.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/90792/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephen D. Smith does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Trump’s keynote address in Davos struck a discordant note with many of those in attendance, including this one.Stephen D. Smith, Director of Shoah Foundation, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and SciencesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/897012018-01-08T14:42:24Z2018-01-08T14:42:24ZChina steps into soft power vacuum as the US retreats under Trump<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201118/original/file-20180108-83547-hu9el1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">US President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Reuters/Thomas Peter</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Soft power is the ability of a country to shape other countries’ views, attitudes, perceptions and actions without force or coercion. Its importance has been acknowledged for centuries, though the term was only <a href="https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/2004-05-01/soft-power-means-success-world-politics">coined</a> by American political scientist and author Joseph Nye in the late 1980s.</p>
<p>A country’s soft power depends on many factors, including its performance, global image and international reputation. A state can use soft power to attract supporters and partners towards its policies, views and actions. </p>
<p>Take, for instance, the case of China’s giant pandas.</p>
<p>In 685 AD <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/sep/14/china.conservation">Empress Wu Zetian</a> of the Tang Dynasty presented two giant pandas to the Japanese emperor. More than a millennium later, in 1941, Chinese leader Chiang Kai-Shek gifted another pair to the Bronx Zoo in appreciation of the US’s wartime help. Pandas remain a hallmark of Chinese soft power <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/8a04a532-be92-11e7-9836-b25f8adaa111">even today</a>. </p>
<p>These animals have become symbols of China’s efforts in wildlife preservation and environmental protection. They are a way for China to communicate a caring and genial approach and culture. </p>
<p>And soft power will remain a key strategy for China into the coming decades. In October 2017, at the governing party’s national congress, President Xi Jinping <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-southchinasea/chinas-xi-strikes-conciliatory-note-broadens-diplomatic-focus-idUSKCN0JE04J20141130">outlined steps</a> to enhance China’s soft power and make its culture more globally appealing:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We will improve our capacity for engaging in international communication so as to tell China’s stories well, present a true, multi-dimensional and panoramic view of China, and enhance our country’s soft power.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>China is stepping into a soft power vacuum created by the US’s new administration. Since Donald Trump was elected president, the US has eschewed soft power. It’s withdrawn from a global climate change agreement; renegotiating a number of bilateral treaties and taken an openly “America first”, and somewhat isolationist stance. Its cordial relations with many traditional allies have become strained.</p>
<p>China has spotted the gap and is attempting to woo many countries whose US relations are wavering. One of China’s key weapons is the “<a href="https://www.ft.com/content/4e96e20c-e742-11e7-97e2-916d4fbac0da">One Belt, One Road</a>” programme, a USD$900 billion initiative that aims to strengthen land and sea transportation links through major investments in transport infrastructure in Asia, Europe and Africa.</p>
<p>This is the equivalent of the US’s <a href="http://marshallfoundation.org/marshall/the-marshall-plan/history-marshall-plan/">Marshall plan</a>, which significantly improved West European countries’ economies after World War II. This help was not altruistic; nor is China’s “One Belt, One Road” programme. Assisting other nations through economic growth is a way of wielding soft power and advancing a country’s global standing. This will be important for China, which needs to counter its reputation as a one party state with hegemonic intentions.</p>
<h2>How soft power has featured</h2>
<p>China’s <a href="https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/45124/1/601791185.pdf">economic success</a>, massive <a href="http://www.dw.com/en/sierens-china-speeding-ahead-of-the-rest-of-the-world/a-40303445">infrastructural development</a>, academic and research progress, cultural heritage and success in sports will continue to increase its soft power in the future. </p>
<p>Culture and tourism are always important aspects of soft power. Some 138 million tourists visited China in 2016, a <a href="https://www.travelchinaguide.com/tourism/2016statistics/inbound.htm">growth of 3.5%</a> over 2015
Similarly, 122 million Chinese visitors <a href="https://www.travelchinaguide.com/tourism/2016statistics/outbound.htm">went abroad</a> in 2016, a growth of 4.3% over 2015. This increasing interchange of the visitors will give foreigners an insight into Chinese culture, history and its economic might – all of which will further enhance China’s soft power.</p>
<p>China is also emerging as a global leader in terms of academic and research progress. High income countries’ share of global research and development (R&D) expenditure <a href="http://www.unesco.org/new/en/media-services/single-view/news/how_much_do_countries_invest_in_rd_new_unesco_data_tool_re/">fell</a> from 88% to 69.3% between 1996 and 2013.</p>
<p>China alone filled this gap. It increased <a href="http://www.unesco.org/new/en/media-services/single-view/news/how_much_do_countries_invest_in_rd_new_unesco_data_tool_re/">its share</a> from a paltry 2.5% to 19.6% in 17 years. Recently, China’s average annual R&D expenditure growth has been 18.3%, compared to an anaemic growth rate in upper and middle income countries of 1.4%.</p>
<p>Increased educational and research activities have ensured that the number of foreign students in China is <a href="https://chinapower.csis.org/china-international-students/">increasing rapidly</a>. China now ranks third in attracting foreign students, after the US and UK. Its universities are <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/student/best-universities/best-universities-china">climbing the global rankings</a>. This, along with rapid internationalisation, policies that support foreign students, and affordability of study and living costs compared to the West, means China could soon become the top destination for international students.</p>
<p>And the reverse is also true. Of some <a href="http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20170530122432533">5 million</a> international students pursuing higher education outside their countries, nearly 25% are Chinese. It’s another form of cultural interchange that will contribute to China’s soft power, as are the many <a href="https://theconversation.com/chinas-confucius-institutes-arent-perfect-but-have-much-to-offer-africa-51596">Confucius Institutes</a> set up around the world to showcase China’s culture, history, language, economic and social development. The idea is somewhat similar to the UK’s British Councils, Germany’s Goethe Institutes and France’s Alliance Francaise. </p>
<h2>China fills gap left by US</h2>
<p>American soft power, on the other hand, is now <a href="https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2004-05-01/decline-americas-soft-power">in retreat</a>. </p>
<p>The asymmetry of views between leaders of the world’s two soft powers has made Xi the poster child for globalisation, free trade and international cooperation.</p>
<p>During the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit in November 2017, in Vietnam, Trump <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-apec-ceo-summit-da-nang-vietnam/">reconfirmed</a> his “America first” policy. This approach will further decrease America’s soft power. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, Xi is singing from a different hymn sheet. Also in Vietnam, he noted in <a href="http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-11/11/c_136743492.htm">his speech</a> that globalisation is an “irreversible historical trend” and championed multilateral trading regimes. </p>
<p>He presented a vision of the future that is interconnected and invited “more countries to ride the fast train of Chinese development.”</p>
<p>China’s rise as the world’s leading soft power will not be without hurdles. It must tackle border issues with its neighbours; navigate the current South China Sea <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/outofasia/2017/08/22/making-sense-of-the-south-china-sea-dispute/#2636ae831c3b">disputes</a> and find solutions to its extensive <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/toward-green-robust-economy-asit-k-biswas">environmental pollution</a> problems, among other things.</p>
<p>Despite these challenges, the US’s many missteps and China’s demonstrated social and economic success – as well as its increasing use of soft power – mean that the Asian giant is on the rise.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89701/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Asit K. Biswas is Distinguishedwith Visiting Professor at Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore. He has been studying China since 1983. 21 of his 84 books are now available in Chinese.. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Cecilia Tortajada does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>China is stepping into a soft power vacuum created by the new US administration. Since Donald Trump was elected president, the country has eschewed soft power.Asit K. Biswas, Distinguished visiting professor, University of GlasgowCecilia Tortajada, Senior Research Fellow, Institute of Water Policy, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of SingaporeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/806302017-07-09T10:59:06Z2017-07-09T10:59:06ZWhat the World Bank’s shift from public to private funding means for development<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177113/original/file-20170706-26465-fr5rnv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">World Bank President Jim Yong Kim speaks during the Milken Institute Global Conference in the US.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mike Blake/Reuters</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Making economies work for more people is a political task, not a technical exercise. The <a href="http://www.worldbank.org/">World Bank</a> has just conceded this – without meaning to do so.</p>
<p>The bank has taken a <a href="https://www.devex.com/news/world-bank-president-kim-calls-for-a-different-and-difficult-conversation-about-development-finance-90043">new direction</a> which, <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-world-bank-reinvents-itself-and-puts-poverty-reduction-at-risk-79403">its critics say</a>, means that it has given up on making economies work for the poor. </p>
<p>In theory, they are right. In practice, the bank may be recognising that the politics which shape it made it impossible for it to achieve the development which it promised for the poor.</p>
<p>The change was outlined in an April <a href="http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/speech/2017/04/11/speech-by-world-bank-group-president-jim-yong-kim-rethinking-development-finance">speech</a> by bank President <a href="http://president.worldbankgroup.org/home">Jim Yong Kim</a>, and is discussed in a recent <a href="http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DEVCOMMINT/Documentation/23745169/DC2017-0002.pdf">document</a> spelling out the bank’s vision for 2030. It’s meant to change it from a lender for development into a broker which will unlock “trillions” of dollars in private investment. It will seek to help countries by advising them on the policy and governance changes they need to make to attract the money. So the Bank will become a conduit for private investment, not public development funding.</p>
<p>The Bank does not say it is giving up on public funding. But its document declares that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Only where market solutions are not possible … would official and public resources be applied. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>So public development funding will be used only where it cannot attract private investors to poorer countries. Since Kim insists it can unlock “trillions” of dollars which can transform developing countries, it seems unlikely to reach for public funding in a hurry. So it seeks now to act as a broker for private investment, not public development.</p>
<h2>Increased poverty and conflict</h2>
<p>The bank’s critics point out that private funding wants returns, not less poverty. They warn that relying on it for development will increase poverty and conflict. Ironically, they are repeating <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/aug/11/world-bank-jim-yong-kim">criticism</a> that Kim made when he was a development practitioner – that <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-world-bank-reinvents-itself-and-puts-poverty-reduction-at-risk-79403">development was being shaped</a> by the agendas of private funders.</p>
<p>In principle, the shift does abdicate the World Bank’s mandate. It was a product of the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7725157.stm">1944 Bretton Woods conference</a> where its <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/24563251">architects</a>, John Maynard Keynes, Henry Morgenthau and Harry Dexter White, all saw an important public sector role in correcting some of the market’s impact. The bank was an instrument of that public role - <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/research/a-new-global-agenda-implications-for-the-role-of-the-world-bank/">one of its functions</a> was “counter cyclical” public funding to stimulate economic activity when dips in the business cycle depressed markets.</p>
<p>The bank’s shift abandons this role and places the fate of the global poor largely in the hands of private wealth. It seeks not to find ways in which private money can serve public needs but how public needs can shift to meet the demands of private money. </p>
<p>It could be seen as the final abandonment of wealthy countries’ obligation to the rest of the planet, US President Donald Trump’s <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-38698654/donald-trump-america-first-america-first">“America First”</a> translated into a development strategy. </p>
<p>But in practice, it’s debatable whether the shift will change much in the life of the world’s poor.</p>
<h2>A role to markets</h2>
<p>The role the World Bank’s architects had in mind may describe what it did at the beginning when it funded the revival of war-torn Europe. But, when it <a href="http://www.worldbank.org/en/about/history">began to fund </a> development in poor countries, it gave a role to markets well beyond anything its inventors would have endorsed.</p>
<p>In Africa, it demanded <a href="http://www.globalissues.org/article/3/structural-adjustment-a-major-cause-of-poverty">Structural Adjustment Programmes</a> which cut back sharply on public welfare and, in the view of critics (such as Kim in his previous incarnation), caused great suffering. Its determination to ensure that funds went only to the most desperate (cutting the funding burden) once prompted it to recommend, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/may/25/imf-arab-spring-loans-egypt-tunisia">in Tunisia</a>, a biscuit so unpleasant that only the very hungry would eat it. The World Bank’s private finance arm, the <a href="http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/corp_ext_content/ifc_external_corporate_site/home">International Finance Corporation</a> (IFC), whose role will be strengthened by the shift, was fingered as the chief cause of that suffering. </p>
<p>So the bank behaved in much the same way and for much the same reasons as its critics fear it will behave now.</p>
<p>It and its supporters insist it made a <a href="https://books.google.co.za/books?id=A6HKcmoJixIC&pg=PR23&lpg=PR23&dq=the+world+bank+says+International+Finance+Corporation+had+a+positive+impact&source=bl&ots=WbH1DrvtXq&sig=5vixu7qUpi1pGi7DhMyO3GQnkPU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiMtdet5vbUAhVrJ8AKHUZyCrsQ6AEIQDAF#v=onepage&q=the%20world%20bank%20says%20International%20Finance%20Corporation%20had%20a%20positive%20impact&f=false">positive impact</a>: they cite data showing a marked drop in global poverty and say it contributed to this. But the figures are hotly debated. Even if they are accurate, there is no clear evidence that the bank helped make them happen. Nor has it created a world in which many more people find a settled role in the economy.</p>
<p>So the bank’s new role may, therefore, be simply its old one, but now with an accurate product description. </p>
<p>This may overstate the case: the bank has, at times, made a serious attempt to listen to critics and to become a conduit of development, not pain. But it was never able to adjust as an organisation – it would often endorse criticisms in theory but not translate them into practice. And so it did not become an effective development engine. The bank’s current shift has probably been prompted by its declining role as a development funder, as poorer countries discover other sources of finance.</p>
<h2>More finance, but more expensive</h2>
<p>The bank failed to do what it promised because it reduced development, a political task, to a technical exercise. It did this because its own political constraints ruled out an effective role.</p>
<p>Effective campaigns against poverty and inequality happen for one of two reasons. Either elites decide it’s in their interests to fight them or, in democracies, poorer citizens use their vote and their rights to achieve change.</p>
<p>Neither condition applied to the World Bank. Its decisions are not made democratically because votes are allocated in proportion to capital invested, not the number of people a government represents. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/apr/16/jim-yong-kim-world-bank-president">America always appoints</a> the bank president because it provides most of the capital and has most of the votes. </p>
<p>The Bretton Woods trio did not see that the <a href="https://livingnewdeal.org/what-was-the-new-deal/">New Deal</a>, the US programme in response to the Great Depression in 1933, had worked partly because it had a solid base of democratic support and that democracy was essential to the development they sought. In the absence of democracy, the elites have decided what the bank should do. Since the focus shifted from Europe to the rest of the world, they have shown little interest in changing a state of affairs from which they benefit.</p>
<p>It’s this political context which has caught up with the bank, first reducing its role and then forcing it to give up on public funding to fight poverty. Ironically, the critics who insisted that it take politics seriously have been vindicated in a way they did not intend or expect. Challenged to recognise politics’ role in development, it has done so by concluding that the politics which govern how it works make an effective role in development impossible.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/80630/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steven Friedman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The World Bank has changed direction. It won’t be giving up on public funding, but it will increasingly be trying to attract private investors to developing countries.Steven Friedman, Professor of Political Studies, University of JohannesburgLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.