For decades, the US was the champion of democracy, the rule of law and human rights. Of course, there were glaring discrepancies between rhetoric and reality: During the Cold War, the US overturned democratically elected governments in Greece, Iran, Chile and elsewhere in the name of defeating communism. At home, the US was in a battle to uphold black Americans’ civil rights a century after slavery’s end. More recently, the US Supreme Court has acted aggressively to restrict efforts to rectify the legacies of the long history of racial discrimination.
While the US has often failed to practice what it preached, now it does neither.
US President Donald Trump and the Republican Party have seen to that.
In his first term, Trump’s contempt for the rule of law culminated in his attempt to overturn democracy’s most important principle: the peaceful transition of power. He claimed — and still insists — that he won the 2020 election, even though former US president Joe Biden received about 7 million more votes, and even though dozens of courts ruled that there had been no significant electoral irregularities.
Anyone familiar with Trump might not have been surprised; the big surprise was that about 70 percent of Republicans believe that the election was rigged. Many Americans — including a majority of one of the two major parties — have gone down the rabbit hole of outlandish conspiracy theories and disinformation. For many Trump supporters, democracy and the rule of law are less important than preserving the American way of life, which in practice means ensuring domination by white males at the expense of everyone else.
For better and for worse, the US has long provided a model for others to follow. Unfortunately, there are demagogues around the world more than willing to adapt Trump’s formula of trampling on democratic institutions and repudiating the values that underpin them.
A prominent example is former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro, who went so far as to try to emulate the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol to prevent Biden’s election. That attempted coup on Jan. 8, 2023, in Brasilia was larger than the attack on the US Capitol, but Brazil’s institutions held firm — and now they are demanding that Bolsonaro be held accountable.
Meanwhile, the US has been moving in the opposite direction since Trump’s return to the White House in January. Once again, Trump has made it clear that he loves tariffs and abhors the rule of law — even violating the trade agreement he made with Mexico and Canada in his first term.
Now, ignoring the US constitution, which gives the US Congress the sole authority to impose taxes — and tariffs are just a particular tax on imports of goods and services — he has threatened to impose a 50 percent levy on Brazil unless it stops the prosecution of Bolsonaro.
Here was Trump violating the rule of law to insist that Brazil, which has adhered to all the strictures of due process in prosecuting Bolsonaro, do the same. The US Congress has never enacted tariffs as an instrument for inducing countries to obey a president’s political dictates, and Trump could cite no law that gave him even a fig leaf for his unconstitutional actions.
What Brazil is doing stands in marked contrast to what happened in the US. While the legal process had moved slowly, but judiciously, to hold to account those who had participated in the January 6 insurrection, immediately after his second inauguration, Trump used the president’s pardon power to forgive all who had been duly convicted — even the most violent. Complicity in an attack that left five people dead and more than 100 police officers injured was no crime.
Like China, Brazil has refused to submit to the US’ bullying. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva called Trump’s threat “unacceptable blackmail,” adding: “No foreigner is going to give orders to this president.”
Lula has defended his country’s sovereignty not only in the domain of trade, but also in regulating US-controlled tech platforms. The US’ tech oligarchs use their money and influence worldwide to try to force countries to give them free reign to pursue their profit-maximizing strategies, which inevitably cause enormous harms, including by serving as a channel of misinformation and disinformation.
As in recent elections in Canada and Australia, Lula got a “Trump bump” in national support as Brazilians recoiled from the US administration and rallied around him. However, that was not what motivated Lula to take his stance. It was a genuine belief in Brazil’s right to pursue its own policies without foreign meddling.
Under Lula’s leadership, Brazil has chosen to reaffirm its commitment to the rule of law and democracy, even as the US seems to be renouncing its own constitution. It must be hoped that other leaders of countries large and small would demonstrate similar bravery in the face of bullying by the world’s most powerful country. Trump has undermined democracy and the rule of law in the US — perhaps irreparably. He must not be allowed to do so elsewhere.
Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics, is a former chief economist of the World Bank, a former chair of the US President’s Council of Economic Advisers, professor at Columbia University and the author, most recently, of The Road to Freedom: Economics and the Good Society.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
A report by the US-based Jamestown Foundation on Tuesday last week warned that China is operating illegal oil drilling inside Taiwan’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off the Taiwan-controlled Pratas Island (Dongsha, 東沙群島), marking a sharp escalation in Beijing’s “gray zone” tactics. The report said that, starting in July, state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp installed 12 permanent or semi-permanent oil rig structures and dozens of associated ships deep inside Taiwan’s EEZ about 48km from the restricted waters of Pratas Island in the northeast of the South China Sea, islands that are home to a Taiwanese garrison. The rigs not only typify