Trump doesn’t talk softly, but does he carry a big stick?
US President Donald Trump boasts that he is an agent of big change at home as well as abroad. But a closer look at the likelihood chances he’ll upend past foreign policy decisions, including those of his predecessor Joe Biden, suggests that the extent of his changes might not match his New Golden Age rhetoric.
Overturning established policy from presidency to presidency is relatively rare. Loose promises of dramatic shifts can be politically risky when they backfire, experts point out.
“Across administrations—even ones as different as those of Biden and Trump – foreign policy is something like an iceberg,” Richard Fontaine, CEO of the Center for a New American Security, wrote recently. “The visible portion is gleaming and jagged and draws much of the attention. Yet it also has a far bigger and underexamined foundation, one that tends to remain mostly unchanged.”
There are recent examples of promises implied or made but not kept.
Clinton case: China MFN status
In 1991, when Democratic Party presidential candidate Bill Clinton campaigned against Republican incumbent George H.W. Bush, Clinton accused the first President Bush of being soft on China, ignoring its human rights record for trade advantages. Clinton promised that he would be tougher.
He was not.
Soon after Clinton arrived in Washington, human rights took second place behind American business peoples’ desire to cash in on China commerce. Clinton offered China the trade advantages conferred by most-favored-nation status, which guarantees non-discriminatory treatment between trade partners. If China would just make a minor democratic gesture or two at home, it would get the advantages.
Chinese leaders rebuffed the plea. Clinton provided MFN anyway.