EAI Commentary: The Dawn of American Primacy: Uncertainty Between the `Untrodden Path` and the `River of No Return`

[Editor's Note]

On January 20th, Republican President-elect Donald Trump was inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States. Unlike former President Obama, who emphasized America's international leadership, President Trump strongly reiterated "American Primacy" in his inaugural address, signaling a firm resolve to minimize sacrifices for the nation. In response, Professor Son Byung-kwon of Chung-Ang University expressed concern that the values of liberal democracy, which the U.S. has long upheld, might be suspended under the guise of excessive protectionism, packaged as "unity" and "patriotism." He further predicted that this approach could exacerbate political conflict, manifesting in governance as top-down authoritarianism rather than dialogue or cooperation.

On January 20, 2017, Republican President-elect Donald Trump was inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States. Given the importance of ROK-US relations, analyzing the content of President Trump's inaugural address is an essential prerequisite for formulating our response strategies.

As the saying goes, "All rules are negated." To analyze the content of President Trump's inaugural address, for convenience, I will begin the discussion by first introducing a few sentences from the inaugural address of President Obama, who was inaugurated eight years prior. The following passage is from President Obama's 2009 inaugural address.

"On the defense of our nation, we reject the false choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers [...] penned documents that would secure the rule of law and human rights. [...] These ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for the sake of convenience. [...] And so to all the nations, men and women, children who are searching for hope, from the great cities to the small villages where my father was born, know that America will be a friend to those who seek a future of peace and dignity. We are ready once again to lead the (world: author's insertion)."

In his 2009 inaugural address, President Obama made it clear that despite facing the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, he had no intention of abandoning the political ideals espoused by America's founding principles. Furthermore, President Obama declared America's willingness to lead the world as an embodiment of these American ideals and as a friend to all nations and peoples pursuing them. Although the domestic economic constraints on America's supply of global public goods were considerable, rather than retreating into nationalistic self-interest, he used the inauguration to reaffirm America's commitment to continuously pursue its ideals and demonstrate global leadership.

In stark contrast, President Trump's inaugural address eight years later, in 2017, starkly reveals the essence of American primacy. Amidst the current international political landscape shaped by the rise of nationalistic tendencies, evidenced by Brexit, anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe, and the global surge of right-wing populism, Trump's American primacy, as presented in his inaugural address on the 20th, suggests a potential minimization of U.S. contributions to global public goods. Moreover, his address implies that America's traditional values of liberal democracy may be suspended in the name of "unity" and "patriotism," citing America's economic challenges and security threats, which further fuels concern. It remains to be seen whether Trump's American primacy will pave an "untrodden path" to restore America's authority and pride and foster its resurgence, or if it will lead to an irreversible decline, becoming a "river of no return" for America's international leadership.

First, President Trump's address does not appear to be the result of careful preparation and refinement after extensive deliberation. Rather, it is more accurate to view it as a series of statements that directly reflect President Trump's personality, much like during his campaign. The minimization of conceptual expressions, the use of simple vocabulary, the repetitive use of the same words, the prevalence of short sentences, and the consistent arrangement of strong contrasting phrases all contribute to the impression that the inaugural address was an extension of campaign slogans.

The reason President Trump's inaugural address feels like an extension of his campaign speeches may be due to a lack of time for thorough preparation, given the subsequent cabinet appointments. Alternatively, it could be that President Trump himself drafted the address or provided the guidelines for it. Considering President Trump's personal preferences, it also gives the impression that he did not place significant emphasis on the content or word choice of the speech itself. Consistent with his tendency to demonstrate his stance through "action" rather than "empty words," the inaugural address may have been considered sufficient if it repackaged the campaign message.

It is difficult to find new information in President Trump's inaugural address that significantly differs from what he presented during his campaign over the past year. Apart from the perfunctory inclusion of a message calling for American unity and solidarity, the message of American primacy is strongly reiterated in the two areas of economy and security. While inaugural addresses by past U.S. presidents rarely contained specific policy details, it is uncommon to see terms suitable for campaign slogans, such as "American primacy" or "Buy American, Hire American," presented in a novel way as "vision" and "principles," as in President Trump's address. Specific policy details or directions for the Trump administration are likely to emerge in the 2017 State of the Union address. However, given the potential for delays in setting national agenda priorities or insufficient preparation due to coordination issues with the Republican Party, it is possible that this address may also lack specific content.

Specifically, President Trump's inaugural address, much like his 2016 campaign speeches, employs a thoroughly dichotomous rhetoric based on the confrontation between "us" and "them." Trump's speech, which contrasts the "people" or "citizens" representing the American middle class with the "Washington establishment," the loss of American jobs, and the free-riding by other nations on American security cooperation and economic prosperity, consistently emphasizes the sacrifices of the American middle class and America's losses. He then declares the dawn of a new era under the vision of American primacy, where these unilateral sacrifices of the middle class and America will end. President Trump, who claims to fight for the American people and the American middle class, unequivocally presents himself to the domestic and international public as a leader of nationalistic populism.

Meanwhile, similar to his victory speech after the election, President Trump again refers to the "movement" aspect of his election and inauguration in his address. In his victory speech, President-elect Trump emphasized that his campaign was not merely an election campaign but a movement of the American middle class for change. In his inaugural address, he defines his election as president as the "beginning of a historic movement for citizens or the people to take ownership of their country," thereby revealing his intention to maintain a certain distance from institutional politics.

As mentioned above, President Trump praises a broad sense of "protectionism" by emphasizing America's sacrifices that have contributed to the growth of other nations, ignoring the positive aspects of globalization and its long-term strategic necessity, while highlighting job losses and the decline of the middle class due to globalization. In this regard, he proclaims American primacy in areas such as trade, taxation, immigration, and foreign policy, asserting that "protection will lead to great prosperity and strength," which stands in stark contrast to the willingness to exercise international leadership expressed in President Obama's inaugural address, introduced at the beginning of this article.

First, regarding the economic aspect of American primacy, President Trump, similar to his victory speech, mentions the urgency of rebuilding American infrastructure and then presents two simple principles: "Buy American goods and hire American workers." Subsequently, in terms of military affairs, he pledges to eradicate radical Islamic terrorism and, while acknowledging the importance of existing alliances, expresses his intention to rectify the neglect of American security and defense spending for the sake of other nations' security, thereby reaffirming American primacy in security matters.

The content of the inaugural address also contains some concerning aspects related to domestic democratic political processes in the United States, particularly concerning the emphasis on unity and patriotism. President Trump's remarks, such as "The bedrock of our politics will be a total loyalty to America" or "Respect for each other will flow from a respect for our nation, and when we open our hearts to patriotism, there will be no room for prejudice," can be interpreted from some angles as suggesting that pluralistic political processes may be limited in favor of patriotism or unity, thus revealing an aspect of his authoritarian tendencies.

Furthermore, his inaugural address, which prioritized 'action' over 'empty words,' could manifest as prioritizing cooperation with the Republican Party, the majority party in Congress, over dialogue and cooperation with the opposition Democratic Party, or even as top-down governance centered on the White House. This could lead to intensified political conflict. The immediate declaration of war on the media after his inauguration, the signing of executive orders to amend Obama Care, and the withdrawal from TPP demonstrate his authoritarian tendencies, which disdain pluralistic political processes, and his determination to convey his message through direct action rather than regulations, procedures, or deliberation, raising concerns.

It is difficult to predict at this moment whether Trump's political tendencies—a starkly nationalistic American-first ideology, populism that distinguishes between citizens or the populace and established powers, a simplistic critique of the 'free-rider' problem of the world on American sacrifice, and an emphasis on unity and patriotism while implicitly revealing anti-pluralistic and authoritarian leanings—will indeed pave an 'unbeaten path' to restore America's prosperity, or if they will lead America to an endless decline along a 'river of no return,' as seen after the eight years of the Bush administration. However, given that there are no precedents in either Korea or the United States where a government that declared war on the media upon taking office smoothly managed state affairs, the future of the Trump administration, which is currently quibbling with the media over the size of the presidential inauguration crowd, does not appear particularly bright. Considering the importance of Korean Peninsula security and the related ROK-US relationship, it is disheartening to find ourselves in a situation where we must now worry about the president of another country. ■

Author

Son Byung-kwon_ Professor of Political Science and International Relations at Chung-Ang University. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Michigan. His primary research areas include American politics, U.S. foreign policy, and comparative legislative and party politics. Recent works include "Causes of Distrust and Conflict in the ROK-US Alliance: With a Focus on the Roh Moohyun Era" (2016), "Parliamentary System of Unified Korea" (2015), and "The Tea Party Movement and the Reshaping of Republican Conservatism" (2013).

〈EAI Commentary〉 is a commentary series planned to provide a platform for discourse where experts from various fields can offer in-depth analyses and policy recommendations on major domestic and international issues.

Please cite the source when quoting.

EAI is an independent research institution unaffiliated with any partisan interests. The arguments and opinions presented in reports, journals, and books published by EAI are solely those of the individual authors and do not represent the views of EAI.