Recently, Huffington Post columnist Richard North Patterson wrote a damming article of President Trump’s non-interventionist approach to his foreign policy. Patterson makes the case that by not meddling in other countries affairs, the US runs the risk of further escalating potential conflicts.
North asserts that the rise in nationalism resulted in both World-Wars, and the start of the Cold War. North is critical of Trump pulling America out of the Paris Climate Accord. He believes that global alliances like NATO, the United Nations, and World Trade Organization are the best way to prevent global conflict.
It should be noted however, that in the past 70 years countries like Russia, North Korea, Iran, and China have remained our adversaries despite being part of these organizations. It is unlikely that relations would be any different. What he asserts is that global alliances will always result in peace, but that is not always the case.
North’s harsh crisis of Trump is that his America first economic plan is racist. Trump’s decision to cut foreign aid to certain countries has been predicated on whether or not it is in the best interest of the United States. Trump has often talked about cutting aid to the Palestinian Authority, as it has been proven that they’re funneling their foreign aid resources into terrorism against Israel. Our foreign aid should be spent in America.
A big part of President Trump’s economic plan is imposed tariffs on imported goods, especially from China. Economic wisdom shows that the negative externalities falls to the citizens of the country imposing the tariffs as an implicit tax. However, the aim of these tariffs are to be less reliant on China and other countries for certain strategic industries and to return production to the US. Interestingly, President Xi Jinping and Trump have maintain a good relationship despite their trade differences. What North asserts is that a trade war will eventually lead to actual war despite the lack of any real evidence.
North also makes the biased assumption that President Trump is not seeking results, rather he is seeking attention. However, what we have seen is a pragmatic approach to North Korea that might result in de-nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. His tactics with Kim Jung-Un have been abrupt and at times provoking, however they’re clearly yielding progress that the likes of his predecessor did not see. There are already set plans for President Trump and Kim Jung-Un to meet for peace talks. Furthermore, most are quick to criticize Putin, but President Trump has been selective with is criticism and has not provoked the otherwise ruthless leader.
North’s critique of nationalism goes even further. Hungary and Poland have criticized the European Union’s affairs in domestic politics. The European Union is able to impose new rules and sanctions on its member countries, however in North’s terms Hungary and Poland are authoritarian to question this. He also compares the far left Socialist Venezuelan Dictator Nicholas Maduro to President Trump. They’re on the complete opposite ends of the left-right continuum. It would seem that North assigns his own subjective political attributes regardless of established political physics. This mostly falls in line with the Huffington Post’s biased and subjective interpretations. Inconsistent with his interventionist views, he disapproves of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Advisor John Bolton hawkish pasts. He fails to have a coherent argument of foreign policy rather one that is set against Trump.
While President Trump’s approach to foreign policy has been unconventional it has produced results. America does not need to get involved with every conflict that arises in the world. We can save American lives and money, and better use our time and resources domestically. With tariffs America may take on the negative burden of taxes but it will also put a system in place of making our own products in America.
In the world, we are seeing countries a shift towards nationalism. Globalism has produced unnecessary wars, and freedom restricting regulations. It is time for America and other countries to celebrate their national pride and look out for their own sovereignty first and foremost. Only after countries have solved their own problems, should they even begin to entertain taking on the burdens of others.
It should be noted that the existence of alliances was the cause of most wars. Whether it was the Axis versus the Allies, communists versus non-communist, it was those alliances that led to a country declaring war on other countries that had never directly attacked or involved the other.