With every new US president arriving in Washington come a handful of counselors and aides whose personal ties, built over years and forged in election campaigns, give them pride of place in the administration. From the “Irish Brotherhood” that brought John F. Kennedy to office to the “Berlin Wall” that guarded Richard Nixon’s door, close friends and confidantes have often outdone the administration’s biggest names. However, no US president has ever brought to the White House an inner circle dominated by his family — until president-elect Donald Trump.
Judging by Trump’s business history and presidential campaign — which featured few, if any, intimates outside his family — his adult children will have a major hand in his administration’s decisions, despite their lack of experience in international and domestic affairs. After hiring and firing personnel and shaping strategy during the election campaign, Trump’s children have remained front and center in his transition team. His daughter, Ivanka, joined the president-elect’s tete-a-tete with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. His son, Donald Jr, played a role in picking US Representative Ryan Zinke to be secretary of the interior in the new administration.
Now, Trump is taking his dynasty to the White House. Ivanka is set to take over the first lady’s office there. Her husband, the real-estate investor Jared Kushner, just might be suited, if only in the eyes of his father-in-law, to serve as a special envoy to broker peace in the Middle East. Yes, Donald Jr and his brother, Eric, are to remain in New York to run the Trump Organization, which oversees their father’s diverse businesses; but Trump’s claim that his sons will remain at arm’s length strains credulity.
All of this has spurred questions about the Trump children’s capacity to leverage their father’s presidency to benefit the family business, with many fixating on whether Trump is violating conflict-of-interest or anti-nepotism rules. However, Trump regards such questions as essentially moot.
INNER CIRCLE
That is not surprising. Trump’s management model has long been underpinned by a hereditary inner circle. His adult children have spent their lives being groomed and promoted, and have operated at the pinnacle of the Trump Organization for years. They now occupy three of the company’s board seats, with Trump occupying a fourth. Given their standing in the company, and their relationship with their father, their influence in his administration should not be in doubt.
The remaining top-level positions are filled by long-time family retainers who, on average, have 17 years on the job. Several have spent three decades at Trump’s elbow. Compared with public companies of comparable size, the Trump Organization’s dynastic C-Suite and the longevity of its consiglieri are striking. The lesson for any administration appointee should be clear: Only loyalty comes close to heredity in winning and holding an executive role.
The record of the modern US presidency sheds little light on whether Trump’s family-driven leadership style will work. Yet Trump is unlikely to weigh the pros and cons of stacking his inner circle with family members, not least because of his own experience: Ever since his father brought him into the family business, he has never worked anywhere else.
Moreover, Trump is far from the only corporate boss who prefers to keep leadership “all in the family.” A study last year by the Boston Consulting Group found that one-third of US companies with annual revenue of US$1 billion or more are family-owned. Of those, 40 percent are family-run.
There is also plenty of precedent for family-based leadership in government, though not in developed democracies. From Kazakhstan to Congo, blood binds together ruling elites who share the spoils, guard against usurpers, and ensure that their children succeed them in power.
While it may seem far-fetched to compare the Trumps to, say, the Kims of North Korea — the world’s longest-running family dictatorship — plenty of similarities are likely to emerge. Some already have.
LOYALTY FIRST
The first rule of family dictatorships is that loyalty matters above all else. Like the histrionic pledges of support required from North Korean commissars and generals for their leader Kim Jong-un, the Trump White House is likely to demand unswerving fealty to the clan.
That message has already been received loud and clear by incoming White House chief of staff Reince Priebus and chief strategist Steve Bannon. Both have repeatedly affirmed their admiration for Kushner and vowed that he will be deeply involved in decisions, despite his utter lack of experience.
Second, tasks beat titles. Like Kim, who has ignored the pecking order of the ruling Workers’ Party of Korea to give his sister and brother high-ranking positions, Trump is likely to entrust his offspring with key assignments.
While nepotism laws will probably rule out official presidential appointments for Trump’s children and their spouses, that will not matter much in practice; their de facto clout, as well as Trump’s own priorities, will quickly become apparent. Indeed, their influence in advancing Trump’s major goals could easily overwhelm that of Cabinet-level appointees, who would be wise to accommodate them.
Third, there will be unexpected promotions and abrupt purges. In North Korea, all of this dictated from the top. In his reality television persona, Trump’s enthusiastic firings and occasional Cinderella-like promotions of low-level employees provide an obvious parallel. Under Trump, as under Kim, sputtering or failed policies are likely to have personnel consequences, though only those outside the family will face them.
Two weeks before the election, one of the Trump campaign’s top employees, Brad Parscale, suggested how a Trump White House would function.
“My loyalty is to the family,” Parscale said.
No one in Kim’s family could put it more succinctly.
Kent Harrington, a former senior CIA analyst, was National Intelligence Officer for East Asia and chief of station in Asia, and served as the CIA’s director of public affairs.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.