{"id":25875,"date":"2016-04-13T14:30:08","date_gmt":"2016-04-13T04:30:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=25875"},"modified":"2016-04-13T16:02:03","modified_gmt":"2016-04-13T06:02:03","slug":"letter-from-washington-trumps-bizarre-and-dangerous-foreign-policy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/letter-from-washington-trumps-bizarre-and-dangerous-foreign-policy\/","title":{"rendered":"Letter from Washington: Trump\u2019s bizarre and dangerous foreign policy"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/p>\n
Following Senator Ted Cruz\u2019s much expected defeat of Donald Trump in the 5 April Wisconsin primary, Trump\u2019s goal of winning the majority of delegates by the time the Republican Party holds its convention in July has now become even more elusive.<\/span><\/p>\n Although the odds of becoming his party\u2019s presidential candidate are against him, it\u2019s still possible that he could receive the nomination even if he doesn\u2019t win in the first ballot. He is, after all, a great deal-maker\u2014<\/span>as he keeps reminding everyone<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n Accordingly, it\u2019s important to examine Donald Trump\u2019s views of some of the critical international issues he would need to deal with were he to get to the Oval Office. And, quite frankly, based on the few statements on foreign affairs he\u2019s made on the campaign trail\u2014most of them incoherent and unfocused\u2014there\u2019s little to feel confident about. Quite the contrary; were Trump to implement some of his convoluted and confused ideas on foreign affairs, the world would undoubtedly be a more dangerous place.<\/span><\/p>\n Let\u2019s look at some of the remarks he\u2019s made on foreign policy, particularly on three issues that would have deep ramifications for the Asia\u2013Pacific region and beyond.<\/span><\/p>\n In a wide-ranging<\/span> interview<\/span><\/a> with <\/span>The Washington Post <\/span><\/i>in March, Trump was asked what he thought about China\u2019s aggressive behaviour in the South China Sea and how he would deal with the situation. He argued that the best way to halt China\u2019s militarisation of the artificial islands would be to threaten its access to the US market. He repeated that threat in another long<\/span> interview<\/span><\/a> with <\/span>The New York Times. <\/span><\/i>While<\/span> China does hold<\/span><\/a> some $4 trillion of US reserves, in the long-run China\u2019s access to the US market is critical for its continued economic growth which is heavily dependent on being able to export its cheap products. But more importantly, continued economic growth is vital to the survival of the Chinese Communist Party. So if such a measure were implemented by a Trump administration, it\u2019s unlikely that Beijing would simply roll over. Furthermore, the financial knock-on effects for the rest of the world of a trade showdown between its two largest economies would be enormous.<\/span><\/p>\n Staying in the Asia\u2013Pacific, Trump has<\/span> repeatedly stated<\/span><\/a> that he doesn\u2019t believe the US gains anything by having bases in South Korea and Japan. Accordingly, he<\/span> said<\/span><\/a> that he would pull US forces from the two countries unless the host governments \u2018substantially increased their contributions to the costs of housing and feeding those troops\u2019. Scaling back the US military\u2019s presence in such a manner would be welcomed heartily by Beijing, as those bases are the linchpin of American primacy in Northeast Asia. It would also ring alarm bells with America\u2019s edgy regional allies and friends who are already worried about Washington\u2019s commitment to the rebalance. It would force regional countries to increase their defence spending to compensate for the US withdrawal. But, more worrisome, it would most likely make regional allies less supportive of America\u2019s approach to the region which would in make it easier for China to assert itself in the Asia\u2013Pacific.<\/span><\/p>\n However, much more alarming than the military vacuum which an American departure from Northeast Asia would create is<\/span> Trump\u2019s statement<\/span><\/a> that he would be \u2018open to allowing Japan and South Korea to build their own nuclear arsenals rather than depend on the American nuclear umbrella\u2019. Such a dangerous policy position goes against the many international agreements and protocols designed to limit nuclear weapons proliferation. If such a position became official policy in a Trump administration, it isn\u2019t possible to sufficiently stress how destabilising it would be to have two additional nuclear-armed countries in an already highly toxic and dangerous environment as is Northeast Asia. Moreover, it would give the green light for other countries to develop their own nuclear weapons, essentially beginning an Asia\u2013Pacific arms race.<\/span><\/p>\n