US president-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration on Wednesday next week has raised hopes that his administration would “make America lead again.” If the US is to transform its rivalry with China into constructive competition, this is the right approach. However, whether Biden can restore and sustain the US’ global leadership depends on how effectively he mends domestic fractures and addresses deep-seated misgivings about globalization held by segments of the US electorate.
Biden has repeatedly pledged to restore the US’ international reputation and global standing, which were severely damaged under US President Donald Trump. To that end, he would quickly rejoin multilateral institutions (such as the WHO) and international agreements (beginning with the Paris climate agreement) from which Trump withdrew the US.
These pledges point to a vision of the US back at the head of the liberal international order, a position from which it can more effectively compete — and cooperate — with China. However, there is good reason to believe that many Americans do not want their country to lead again.
Illustration: Mountain People
Biden’s electoral victory in November last year fell short of the decisive repudiation of Trump and his toxic brand of populism that liberals expected. Yes, Biden won over 81 million votes — more than any US presidential candidate in history. However, Trump received more than 74 million — the second-highest number on record — and increased his share across minority groups, compared with 2016. This is despite an unprecedented parade of scandals and a disastrously mismanaged pandemic.
What explains Trump’s enduring popularity? One explanation, advanced by Peter Singer in November, is that nearly half of the US has “lost its soul.”
This diagnosis is certainly true of the most disturbing elements of Trump’s voter base, which includes the white nationalists and neo-Nazis who stormed Capitol Hill on Wednesday last week. Even those who do not fit into this category did vote for an openly racist president, who refused to denounce white supremacy.
Still, it would be simplistic to dismiss support for Trump as nothing more than an endorsement of bigotry. It is worth remembering that 6 percent of those who voted for Trump in 2016 voted for then-US president Barack Obama in 2012. Moreover, Trump received 10 million more votes last year than in 2016.
Trump draws support from a motley array of sources. Racism and xenophobia are among them, but so is anger among rural and working-class voters over stagnating incomes and rising inequality.
Some Asian voters also fell for his hawkish stance on China. As a political outsider, Trump was able to exploit resentment of the political establishment, hack the Republican apparatus and package himself as a champion of the disaffected.
These voters have been misguided to put their faith in Trump, who never intended to address their grievances in any genuine way, and has no qualms about inciting them to mount an insurrection and then abandoning them. One structural factor has made it easy for Trump and his conspirators to dupe these voters: globalization has created many losers alongside winners.
The winners include big companies that shifted their manufacturing to cheaper locations, thereby considerably expanding their profit margins, and the developing economies — especially China — to which they moved.
The losers include millions of US manufacturing workers who have lost their jobs. Mix in the US’ legacy of racism and the spread of fake news via social media, and the result is flammable.
However, it is not only the working class that is disillusioned with globalization. As the global economy’s center of gravity has shifted toward emerging powers such as China, these countries have gained a greater say in international institutions, which are supposed to represent all countries rather than only these institutions’ architects.
For many US policymakers, this was unacceptable: If the US bears the costs of sustaining a world order, they believe, it should get to ensure that its interests come first.
True to his promises of “America First,” Trump withdrew the US from its previous global leadership commitments, pared down its engagement overseas and built a wall. He delivered exactly what his voters wanted. However, his policy inevitably produced a consequence that US leaders could not accept: China’s rising profile, as it stepped in to fill the leadership vacuum the US left behind.
In response, the Trump administration portrayed China as the US’ mortal enemy, launched a ruinous trade war and imposed a slew of sanctions.
For Beijing, such hostility confirmed long-held suspicions that the US would never accept its rise without a fight, so it has reacted defensively. The resulting vicious cycle of mistrust and antagonism has yet to be broken.
For the Biden administration, two lessons stand out.
First, the US cannot have it both ways. It cannot withdraw from global leadership and refuse to allow anyone to take its place; if it insists, confrontation and brinkmanship would ensue.
Second, Washington’s clash with Beijing over the past four years has been as much a divorce from that country as a divorce from globalization.
This means that, if the US is to reclaim the leadership position that would enable it to compete constructively with China — and retain it for more than an election cycle — the Biden administration must tackle inequality and the costs that globalization has brought.
Otherwise, Trump — or, worse, a more competent version of Trump — could well recapture the presidency in 2024 or 2028, and reverse whatever progress the Biden administration makes.
Yuen Yuen Ang is a professor of political science at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
If social media interaction is any yardstick, India remained one of the top countries for Taiwan last year. President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has on several occasions expressed enthusiasm to strengthen cooperation with India, one of the 18 target nations in her administration’s New Southbound Policy. The past year was instrumental in fostering Taiwan-India ties and will be remembered for accelerated momentum in bilateral relations. However, most of it has been confined to civil society circles. Even though Taiwan launched its southbound policy in 2016, the potential of Taiwan-India engagement remains underutilized. It is crucial to identify what is obstructing greater momentum
In terms of the economic outlook for the semiconductor industry, Taiwan has outperformed the rest of the world for three consecutive years. This is quite rare. In addition, Taiwan has been playing an important role in the US-China technology dispute, and both want Taiwan on their side, reflecting the remaking of the nation’s semiconductor industry. Under the leadership of — above all — Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), the industry as a whole has shifted from a focus on capacity to a focus on quality, as companies now have to be able to provide integration of hardware and software, as well as
In memory of Diane Baker: one of the last working dance journalists, a true dance aficionado and dear friend. On Friday, through a mutual friend, I received the shocking news that dance critic Diane Baker had passed away suddenly at her apartment in Tianmu, Taipei. The news quickly spread, and messages of concern quickly swarmed in from the dance community in Taiwan and abroad. Her sister Sharon in the US later confirmed that Diane died of a heart attack on Wednesday last week. She was 65. Diane was a dear friend to Taiwan’s dance community. Her frequent appearance at dance performances in
US President Joe Biden’s foreign policy on China and the Indo-Pacific region will have huge repercussions for Taiwan. The US Department of State in the final weeks of former US president Donald Trump’s term took several actions clearly aimed to push Biden’s foreign policy to build on Trump’s achievements. Former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo’s announcement on the final day of the Trump administration that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was committing “genocide and crimes against humanity” in Xinjiang was welcome, but comes far too late. The recent dropping of “self-imposed” restrictions on meetings between Taiwanese and US officials was