International Relations For Donald Trump

President Trump's introduction of tariffs and its potential harms to the economy

Discuss about the International Relations for Donald Trump.

The United States of America has been at the forefront in ensuring that it maintains healthy regional, national and international relationships that seem beneficial to its economic dominance. In fact, if there would come a time when America feels like abrogating international cohesion, much of the blame would be laid on itself for backward movement of its activities. Since time immemorial, United States of America has been enhancing peaceful and joint trade for the benefit of every citizen in a bid to improve his or her living standards. As can be expected, it is the mandate of every American president to uphold all upright moves that do not deprive the nation of its glory and prosperity. However, the election of Donald trump as the current president of United States of America seems to have evoked a variety of opinions regarding his leadership moves. In fact, during his campaign, Donald trump spoke of making America great again. Conversely, his leadership strategies raise a substantial wind of doubts. Evaluating if President Donald trump is a realist will be helpful in giving credits his ideologies as far as American prosperity is concerned.

President trump took hold of the introduction of new tariffs on the foreign sound in an attempt to improve domestic trading. One of the compound ideas regarding offsetting the different advantages in regards with tariffs is the actual time by which America will enjoy the economic boost before trade wars emerge to prove the practice unworthy (Banerjee, 2017, 3). Apparently, the introduction of tariffs to take care the internal business affairs of the particular nation tends to put the stakeholders at a position of retaliation, a moment that can be rectified by well coming to the external trade elements. Another important consideration that president trump failed to take caution on regarded their manufacturers. A close look at the value chain contributing to the success of America's trading affairs illustrates that American manufactured goods are underpinned by foreign countries. The implication is that any attempt by America to declare it independent by abandoning the efforts of international relations would do a lot of harm to American manufacturers. Besides, president trump firmly believes that North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has nothing to do with the current glory of America and that wiping it out of the system, could help stabilize the functions of the country. One thing that trump seems to forget is that abrogating NAFTA will harm American trading grips since Mexico contributes a lot to strengthen the value chain (Bourne et al.,2017,50). Of course, president trump is a dreamer in his thinking hence collectively leaving thinker within America in a shivering mood concerning certain mutual trade benefits.

Abrogating NAFTA and its negative impact on American trading grips

President trump has worked towards bringing to a halt all donations to continents such as Africa and Asia. Most of those donations are medical aids such as the provision of antiretroviral and family planning drugs (Spalding, 2017, 80). Curtailing such subsidies from reaching the needy is a clear implication that birth control system will be affected therefore putting the barrier to demographic control. Besides spread of aids will move to great heights since there will be no provision of protective gears such as condoms. Failure to provide ARVs will attract more deaths, a situation that a real realist would work on to better the lives of every person. Inability to present medical aid by America to the developing countries will pave the way for poor relations among the members hence preventing America from tasting a share of the national resources (Mares, 2017, 160). Similarly, African and some Asian countries will divert their attention to developed nations in the east such as China and Japan for assistance and entrust them with their resources. Embracing greediness would foresee America wreathing as they seek to mend their deteriorating economy whereby no one will be willing to listen to them. As solid as it is, falsely thinking that America can sustain itself is a mere fiction that lacked quality evidence (Harris, 2017, 22). If at all Americans need to realize high economic goals there is a need to pick from where Obama left without changing important elements in the system for quality national and international benefit.

Without any doubt, President Donald trump is far away from being called a realist. His views regarding the well-being of the Americans are blurred and cannot be condoned (Cha, 2016, 85). From the personal perspective, President Trump claims to have the objective of making "America first." One of the strategies to be employees toward foreseeing his objectives attained is by disjoining his nation from other countries. Although the United States of America is endowed with many precious resources, the idea that they can sustain themselves is a mere fiction (Coffee, 2017, 81). President trump declared that for a long he has been observing America being in a position to be misused by other weaker states hence promising to seal the gap. In addition, trumps in his public speech highlighted that America has been sacrificing its interests for the sake of other nations; a habit that should be contained if at all America wishes to retain its glory.

Trump's decision to cease all medical donations to Africa and Asia

Crane and Maguire (2017, 27) posit that President Trump alongside his newly appointed advisors has a strong belief that dealing with trade issues is an aspect of domestic concern. For that matter, without hesitating trump showed lack of interest in the transpacific partnership and posting that America would rely on another basis for trading purposes. In fact, trump failed to understand are the specification of TPP among them being the abolishment of illegal business undertaking such as employment of child labor (Engle, 2016, 94). Having neglected the provision of TPP was an apparent show that the United States of America would continue exploiting child labor, a factor that would foresee the nation reaps less than expected benefits from such a platform. Another backlash of abandoning the TPP was that China could utilize the opportunity to join the transpacific partnership hence standing a chance to outdo the United States of America concerning economic well-being and overall performance of the nation (Frühling & O’Neil, 2017, 51). Precisely, the undertakings of United States of America would be frozen, hence, conferring all its glory to the ever-rising China hence exposing America to unnecessary competition for survival.

President trump emphasized opposing the operation Iraq freedom. It has been noted that ever since 2003, America has been taking an interest in Iraq in the name of security concerns. It does not make sense for the American government to take full control of Iraq for such a long time (Gordon, 2017, 57). In fact, the time has come for the Iraq citizens to fight for their country since they stand a chance to operate their own country concerning active leaders at the disposal to make the nation shine once more. In his declaration, Donald trump argues that if at all America could leave Iraq to depend on its own, it would serve as a clear pathway for Taliban and Iran to take over Iraq (Gordon, 2017, 13). On the contrary that postulation, there has been growing a strong relationship between Iraq and the neighboring countries who stand on the same ground to condemn America for its prolonged stay in Iraq. President trump fails to speak the truth to the public regarding their stay in Iraq a move that seems to have veered off from security concerns. The fact is that America enjoys full control of the Iraq resources among them being mining and stealing of oils, an itching fear that drives Iraq toward claiming their lost independence (Grevi, 2016, 74). Sources illustrate that America has oil reserves that have the potential of sustaining the world for four good years. Precisely, trump is not a realist because he could have opted to leave Iraq resources in peace instead of giving vague excuses that have no factual basis.

The fallacy of America sustaining itself without international support

President trump unrealistic nature stems from the fact that he has been discontented by the dependency of the other nation on American security. To some extent, we cannot oppose the trumps proposition as far as security matters are concerned (Harris, 2017, 19). As can be expected, most of the allies spend less than America in fixing security issues hence using United States of America as their protective cover. However, although America spends a lot on behalf of its allies, trump does not consider the indirect benefits that underlie America emanating from those pinpointed allies. There are contributions that collaborates have made, enabling America to achieve sound monetary value (Kahan, 2017, 113). Another input of the partners stems from the fact that they collectively support and maintain overseas bases. Therefore, it would be unfair for trump to come up with such awful suggestion since all saving originating from pre-stocking is contributed by all security member countries. For instance, most of the important allies in the mix include Japan, South Korea, and Israel among others who lend a hand in ensuring United States military succeeds in its undertakings.

President trump goes on to condemn the matters pertaining international organizations. In his view, it is true that trump does not regard the importance of United Nations. In a broad perspective, it is okay that America can thrive without any assistance from UN although it might be proven weak if it extends the ignorance to curtail access to services provided by World Bank and international monetary fund (Lanoszka, 2017, 45). In that case, Donald did not seem to have incorporated second thought in his proposition whereby he highlighted the greedy nature of some states about the international monetary funds. It is true that the United States of America solely controls most of the undertakings underlying IMF. Therefore, any move by the America to leave World Bank and the IMF would probably work in favor of China that could immediately fill the vacuum. In fact, as per now, China has already come up with Asia infrastructure investment bank to stiffen the competition with the World Bank (Mares, 2017, 159). The result of leaving IMF and World Bank would therefore, bring many setbacks to the interests of the United States of America hence conferring Beijing the freedom to dominate and out-compete the weakening America.

President trump talked of his mission to disband the NATO. Although the fact remains that the origin of NATO is merely traced from Washington, that is not an apparent cover up that member countries do not contribute to the well being of the organization. Factually, America has the potential to distract and soil up to the harmony existing between member countries of NATO (Mayda & Peri, 2017, 70). However, abandoning NATO by the America has many negative consequences that would befall their security aspect. Firstly, none of its members would be willing to respond to the initiatives laid by America hence ignoring it even in pressing matters worth attention. The United States of America fails by greater percentage to recognize the unique advantages NATO as an organization brings in to bring balance to the security system. NATO has been on the leading line in facilitating deployment of the military forces in whichever way possible in a bid to contain aggression raised by the overseas allies (Mettler, 2017, 114). Another issue is that America alone cannot withstand forces and the ever-increasing nuclear conflicts without the help of NATO as a team. Therefore opting to disregard the efforts of NATO would imply that America will continue struggling to achieve their misinterpreted slogan “Putting America first."

Opposing the introduction of TPP and its repercussions

Payne (2017, 12) postulates that it does not make sense at all when president trump condemns and introduces harsh immigration rules. Much of his support of the immigration tends to have assumed new direction towards curtailing terrorism in the United States of America. However, his approach is confusing the realists since the country cannot proceed in the absence of immigrants. Trumps move towards tightening his grips on abolishing and putting strict measures in the migration sector is doing more harm to America rather than mending it for good (Pillar, 2017,56). To shed light on the postulation, trump had gone further to sign the migration abolishment to become law. The latter would be that most of the non-indigenous Americans could be evacuated to their original countries in the mission to make America great again. That is contrary to the likes of former presidents George Bush and Barrack Obama, who during their time enhanced international cohesion for continued realization of countries goals and objectives. President trump accuses the immigrants of continued suffering and lack of employment to the Native Americans (Rasmussen, 2017, 176). From a realist point of view, Trump's way of thinking is shallow enough to raise doubt. The truth of the matter is that immigrants contribute heavily to the success of United States of America in many ways. To begin, immigrants contribute to the overall performance of Americas GDP. One of the reasons by which the gross domestic product of America has been performing well is that immigrants put a lot of quality labor into the system. In the education sector, for example, there are significant numbers of trainers who originate from outside countries (Rudd, 2017, 105). That is, curtailing immigration would mean that services provided by such experts would be no more and that America will experience a moment of lagging behind hence standing a chance to be overtaken by its rival nations.

President trump portrays his unrealistic way of approaching matters of national concern by dictating that the only country he would like to work with is Russia. The public in collaboration with some of the senior government official has come out to oppose this move since the motive for holding on to Russia interest by trump administration have not been established (Sabl, 2017,157). The United States of America is the nation that depends on almost all nations for its survival. In particular, matters regarding trade and other related affairs make it worthy to put other countries in consideration. Concisely there might be an outstanding deal between America and Russia. Besides, America might be targeting to reap benefits and exploit Russia regarding national glory. Whichever way America attempts to take advantage from Russia, trump must consider the strength of reciprocal concession (Spalding, 2017, 78). That is, Russia is an already developed country, and however much America attempts to exploit them, they have to retaliate at the end to bring balance to the equation. The latter is that if the deal backfires, no outside nation will come to rescue the ailing America hence urge trump to preach international cohesion with as many nations as possible without devaluing their little but significant efforts.

Trump's stance on the operation Iraq Freedom

President trump in his leaderships seems to have engaged personal interest and a show of might concerning military upbringing. One of his deals was to declare independence among European and Asian countries that previously had a well thriving agreement regarding nuclear war. The agreement strictly restrained the member nations from engaging in the production of the nuclear weapon that broadly affects generations after generations. President trump declaration regarding America as a free nation puts it in a position of doing weird things out of self-will (Swers, 2017, 61). America under the leadership of president trump has continued displaying the show of might in regards to weaponry superiority hence bringing a lot of tension to the public not only from America alone but also internationally. The dictates preventing the manufacture of nuclear weapons also greatly condemn chemical attacks by the member nation. However, trump showed lack of respect to the said provisions of the law by attacking Syrian military base using deadly chemical weapons. Discontentment among idealists continued to grow to the extent of formulating a strategy meant to help America avert from such harmful practices (Weber, 2017, 138). Another repercussion of trumps war oriented ideology was handing North Korea the freedom to express their military strengths by beginning nuclear testing at designated places to provoke their counterparts, united states of America. One thing incognizant president trump fails to apprehend is that nuclear show does not work to stabilize the forward movement of the nation but rather triggering a third world war.

President trump can be said to have run out of ideas as he forces things to work in his thinking far below reality. Trump's vision regarding the budget critically attracts a wind of confusion to the economists as they attempt to think broadly on the issue taking care of other situations at hand (Banerjee, 2017, 7). President trump highlighted that he expects this year’s budget to increase by 3%v as America works hard to become first in the attainment of the lost glory. An economist from all corners of the country has aired their views regarding meeting annual economic growth of 3 % illustrating that aiming such a high economic achievement is unlikely to take place. The only way by which America can attain fast economic growth is by introducing the new taxing system that stimulates higher domestic spending. Other researchers claim that if at all America wants to see strong economic growth; they must be ready to repeat some of the fastest productivity growth realized for the last seven decades. Others question the mindset, propelling trump to such reach claiming that no way such growth can be possible without taking into account all facets of economic growth. Far from that, trump proposes immigration abolishment, implying that labor force will be at risk with the continued industrial growth witnessed in the country (Cha, 2016, 96). The greater percentage of America’s population is quickly aging. Surprisingly, parents do not believe in raising more children to take care of the labor force later. From that point, condemning immigration and resigning from NAFTA and TPP by the United States of America will trigger a massive down fall that could see the nation attain unreasonable budget.

A realist never tolerates hatred and unnecessary disagreements. Trump is an ambassador of hate who is at the forefront in championing enmity in Israel driven by egocentric mindset (Rasmussen, 2017, 178). It came as a big blow for economists after learning of the evil plans of president trump aiming to move US embassy to Jerusalem contrary to where it used to be, Tel Aviv. For a long time, US embassy in Israel has not faced the challenge 0of movement from one place to the other due to a proper way of understanding between former American presidents and the government of Israel. Trump comes up with such a strategy targeting to disrupt peace coherence between Palestinians and Israel. The Israel prime minister declared that allowing the construction of US embassy in Jerusalem would create a lot of tension to the extent of attracting serious tag of wars that would enable America to exploit Israel in the name of peacekeeping (Payne,2017, 13. Netanyahu argued that encouraging the trump idea would predict and discomfort among the Israelites thus assuming him for the well-being of the citizens.

In conclusion, president trump is not a realist but an ill-motivated leader whose dreams are far away from being valid. A realism-oriented person would not dwell on curtailing immigration. Instead, he would preach harmony for mutual benefits. Seeking to be eliminated from prominent trade organizations is a method of lagging the economic affairs of America behind. Weaponry show of might will attract third world war. Briefly, President Trump should work on bringing togetherness without discrimination as well as sticking to provisions of international relations for social, political and economic benefits.

References

Banerjee, S. (2017). Changes in the US Foreign Policy of President Trump (post inauguration).1-12

Bourne, R., Tax, C.E., Trump, P.D., Glaser, J., Kastoryano, S., Bisschop, P., Coyne, C.J. and Briefing, F.P., 2017. Books & Publications. Policy.48-55

Cha, T., 2016. The Return of Jacksonianism: the International Implications of the Trump Phenomenon. The Washington Quarterly, 39(4), pp.83-97.

Coffee, J.C., 2017. How Should the EU Respond to Brexit and Trump?: The Lessons from Trade Wars.78-91

Crane, B. and Maguire, E., 2017. First: Aid: The future of US foreign aid in the Trump administration. Conscience, 38(1).23-42

Engle, E., 2016. FEATURE ARTICLES: Trump's Foreign Policy: Realist Economic Nationalism. Loy. U. Chi. Int'l L. Rev., 14, pp.91-175.

Frühling, S. and O’Neil, A., 2017. Nuclear weapons and alliance institutions in the era of President Trump. Contemporary Security Policy, 38(1), pp.47-53.

Gordon, P., 2017. A Vision of Trump at War. Foreign Affairs.55-59

Gordon, P., 2017. A Vision of Trump at War: How the President Could Stumble into Conflict. Foreign Aff., 96, p.10. 5-18

Grevi, G., 2016. Lost in transition? US foreign policy from Obama to Trump. EPC Discussion Paper, 2 December 2016.65-77

Harris, P., 2017. Donald Trump and Washington's Arab Gulf Allies. IndraStra Global, (3), p.3.15-26

Kahan, J.H., 2017. Revisiting the Iran Nuclear Deal. Orbis, 61(1), pp.109-124.

Lanoszka, A., 2017. Goodbye to all that? Institutionalist theory, US alliances, and Donald Trump. Contemporary Security Policy, 38(1), pp.41-46.

Mares, I., 2017. A Discussion of Christopher H. Achen and Larry M. Bartels' Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Perspectives on Politics, 15(1), pp.159-160.

Mayda, A.M. and Peri, G., 2017. The economic impact of US immigration policies in the Age of Trump. Economics and Policy in the Age of Trump, p.69.68-81

Mettler, S., 2017. Democracy on the Brink: Protecting the Republic in Trump's America. Foreign Aff., 96, p.121.112-116

Payne, R.A., 2017. Trump and American Foreign Policy; A Threat to Peace and Prosperity? 11-13

Pillar, P.R., 2017. The Big Lie and Foreign Policy. The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, 36(2), p.15.56-58

Rasmussen, M.V., 2017. Nationalists, National Liberals and Cosmopolitans: Danish Foreign Policy Debates after Brexit and Trump. Danish Foreign Policy Yearbook, p.51.176-188

Rudd, K., 2017. UN Reform under the Trump Administration: The Way Ahead. The Washington Quarterly, 40(1), pp.95-107.

Sabl, A., 2017. A Discussion of Christopher H. Achen and Larry M. Bartels' Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Perspectives on Politics, 15(1), pp.157-158.

Spalding, E.E., 2017. The Enduring Significance of the Truman Doctrine. Orbis.76-80

Swers, M.L., 2017. Cracks in Republican unity between Trump and Congress are already beginning to show. USApp–American Politics and Policy Blog.58-63

Weber, C., 2017. The Trump presidency, episode 1: simulating sovereignty. Theory & Event, 20(1), pp.132-142.