Foreign Policy Restructuring
The election of Donald Trump to the helm of the United States presents an interesting scenario in relations between states and the Americans. The President-elect has greatly popularised his actions on social media which have elicited support and condemnation in equal measure. The Donald has praised with regards the Taiwanese considerations, applauded the European Union and embraced Iraq. The likelihood of propaganda application is certain. Diplomacy has a history of secrecy, and the American style is nothing far from it. This, however looks different.
The international platform has had sentiments that favour the role of developing states in global prosperity. The level of cooperation between the global north and the south had grown and the terms of engagement availed choices which are an improvement. The change of guard might come along with stricter terms by The United States. The developing countries should now strive to improve their economic terms as a bargain with a business-borne head of government and the many typos that might find themselves in power.
Under the previous United States governments, military-strategic importance and human rights observance lent incentives for negotiation except on special cases like that of a rogue Saudi on matters human rights. The US allies world over, have to restructure their policy projections away from aid and hosting defence outposts. Local policies that support foreign investments, harnessing the growth of businesses and competent governance structures that can influence a successful macro-economic environment will make “potus” have a choice to consider. This makes the impression that trends, behaviour and actions of states should display utmost pro-economic taste.
The economic-induced conflicts will also likely attract the attention of the Pentagon. The United States has always been at the fore condemning rebels who violate human rights through rape and many other obscene acts, regimes that suppress its population and terrorists that target civilians. The new administration might assume the tendency to condemn non-peaceful acts that derail the exploitation of resources in conflict zones. The Democratic Republic of Congo, if the assumption holds will host the bit of great powers rivalry. The Middle East intrigues likely prolonged. The oil wars support from a President who does not believe in climate related effects from fossil fuels looks cheaper.
This dynamic of the playing field will rub many African countries the wrong way and shift the focus to Asia and Europe, leaving the continent vulnerable to an imbalance that can result in manipulation by a club of established states. I do recognize the strides African countries are making, however the rating indices are wanting. China is making forays into Europe on infrastructure labels, notable being the road linking Europe to China. The Chinese have moved in fast to amass territories in Asia in strategic parts that favour international trade leading to a heightened competition on the Asian region. In the event the incoming administration turns down the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a substitute has to be displayed for adoption. Counter alliances will likely suffice, transforming the complexity while downplaying the African team.
The new normal of a capitalist manifestation needs objective moves that earn World Bank flashy ratings. A Trump Tower for Africa? The social media sideshows are gimmicks and could conceal the advancement of clandestine interests, nevertheless they need closer scrutiny to strike balance between propaganda and public diplomacy.
The international platform has had sentiments that favour the role of developing states in global prosperity. The level of cooperation between the global north and the south had grown and the terms of engagement availed choices which are an improvement. The change of guard might come along with stricter terms by The United States. The developing countries should now strive to improve their economic terms as a bargain with a business-borne head of government and the many typos that might find themselves in power.
Under the previous United States governments, military-strategic importance and human rights observance lent incentives for negotiation except on special cases like that of a rogue Saudi on matters human rights. The US allies world over, have to restructure their policy projections away from aid and hosting defence outposts. Local policies that support foreign investments, harnessing the growth of businesses and competent governance structures that can influence a successful macro-economic environment will make “potus” have a choice to consider. This makes the impression that trends, behaviour and actions of states should display utmost pro-economic taste.
The economic-induced conflicts will also likely attract the attention of the Pentagon. The United States has always been at the fore condemning rebels who violate human rights through rape and many other obscene acts, regimes that suppress its population and terrorists that target civilians. The new administration might assume the tendency to condemn non-peaceful acts that derail the exploitation of resources in conflict zones. The Democratic Republic of Congo, if the assumption holds will host the bit of great powers rivalry. The Middle East intrigues likely prolonged. The oil wars support from a President who does not believe in climate related effects from fossil fuels looks cheaper.
This dynamic of the playing field will rub many African countries the wrong way and shift the focus to Asia and Europe, leaving the continent vulnerable to an imbalance that can result in manipulation by a club of established states. I do recognize the strides African countries are making, however the rating indices are wanting. China is making forays into Europe on infrastructure labels, notable being the road linking Europe to China. The Chinese have moved in fast to amass territories in Asia in strategic parts that favour international trade leading to a heightened competition on the Asian region. In the event the incoming administration turns down the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a substitute has to be displayed for adoption. Counter alliances will likely suffice, transforming the complexity while downplaying the African team.
The new normal of a capitalist manifestation needs objective moves that earn World Bank flashy ratings. A Trump Tower for Africa? The social media sideshows are gimmicks and could conceal the advancement of clandestine interests, nevertheless they need closer scrutiny to strike balance between propaganda and public diplomacy.
This is quite an interesting and thought provoking analysis on the Trump administration. Indeed we could see the Trump administration move away from the emphasis on foreign aid to an interest in trade between partners of interest. Continue with the amazing writing!
ReplyDeleteWinnie Rugutt
Thank you.
ReplyDelete