Will new President turn inward, and intervene less abroad

Donald Trump’s stunning performance literally painted the map of America red and made his victory a really historic one by crashing Hillary Clinton’s dream of becoming the first US woman President. After months of an intense campaign, characterised by personality clashes, bickering and scandals rather than issues vital to their nation’s future, the American people decided to make Mr Trump their 45th President.

Throughout the campaign there was negativity all around. Voters had a choice of two candidates, but they weren’t the most desirable ones. Ms Clinton, the Democratic nominee, was projected as unreliable and corrupt, while Mr Trump was seen as someone incapable of handling the responsibilities that came with the job of leading the world’s sole superpower. Outgoing President Barack Obama even called him unfit for the job, who could only divide America and the world. Voters had to eliminate the least suitable of the two, so that the other could lead them.

Mr Trump claimed the elections were rigged by a corrupt media spreading false allegations about him in a bid to get Ms Clinton elected. The media projected that Russia’s Vladimir Putin was interfering, influencing the US polls to get Mr Trump elected, and that Mr Trump would support Russia. In turn, he pointed to Bernie Sanders’ candidature in the primaries being allegedly sabotaged by the Clinton camp, and the way FBI director James B. Comey had exonerated Ms Clinton in the email case, how the FBI had reopened the case October 28 claimed it checked 650,000 emails so fast that she was cleared before the elections.

All that is history. Mr Trump will be the next President. So what does it portend for India and the world

Being the sole superpower, an outward or inward-looking America has an immediate impact on the world’s politics and its economy. Prior to polling day, the US media said Mr Trump was wildly inconsistent, who, if elected, would unleash huge changes in the economy, trade policy, taxes and immigration, that could be disastrous for not just the US but the entire world. His “America First” policy could jeopardise North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta), the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and even threaten the World Trade Organisation. His poll promises could lead to a new trade war with China that could result in a recession in America, affecting millions of American jobs.

It was said a Trump presidency could change Obamacare, and that he could stop support to Nato unless Europe was ready to pay the costs and stop support to climate change policy. There was even talk of re-negotiating the nuclear deal with Iran. More important, his determination to build a 2,000-mile wall to stop immigrants from Mexico and his opposition to Muslim immigrants made him a man whose policies could drag the US into uncharted territory and prove utterly divisive.

But one must remember poll promises are one thing, but policy decisions after taking charge is a totally different matter. The US Constitution is such that what a President can do at home is subject to constraints by Congress, the courts and various other “checks and balances”.

In his victory speech early on Wednesday, soon after he crossed the magical 270 mark, Mr Trump called for unity, promised to serve all the people and spoke of utilising the potential of people to rebuild America. He talked of fresh infrastructure investments to create millions of jobs. More important, he said while America’s interests were of key importance, he would deal fairly with all issues and get along with all countries. While the rest of the world has to be worried about some of his strong views, it is important to understand that he is new to holding high political office, and would be smart enough to weigh the pros and cons before deciding on new policies.

Had Hillary Clinton won, she was widely expected to take a hawkish line on foreign policy issues, and had supported US interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and elsewhere. After Russia’s recent Syria intervention that made it a dominant Middle East player, Ms Clinton, who is known as a hardliner on Russia, might have followed a more aggressive line in Syria to disrupt Russia. She might have backed escalation of freedom of navigation issues in the South China Sea, and US policies under her leadership could have led Russia and China into getting closer. Such a scenario seems unlikely in a Trump presidency as he may focus more on building America and try to be less of an interventionist abroad.

What will his presidency mean for India One shouldn’t get too carried away by his recent remarks on Pakistan or on terrorism. On Pakistan, which is of major importance for us, India would like a US President to put pressure on Pakistan to deter it from adventurism and cross-border terror, but at the same time not try to be a mediator. India hopes Mr Trump understands this. India would not like US policy measures that could destabilise the regional and global multilateral trading systems, but it may not be too unhappy if Mr Trump dumps the TPP.

The writer is a retired diplomat who recently served in the US