Washington, DC
This month, New York State Judge Juan Merchan handed president-elect Donald Trump an unconditional discharge in his criminal conviction for falsifying business records ahead of the 2016 elections. The sentence means that even though his crimes sometimes carry as many as four years in prison, Trump will not face any jail time, fines or probation.
Merchan admitted that the lenient sentence was a product of the fact that Trump has just been elected president a second time. “The protections [of the office of the president] are… a legal mandate which… this court must respect and follow,” the judge said. “This court has [therefore] determined that the only lawful sentence... is an unconditional discharge.”
The lack of punishment means that even though Trump will be the first convicted felon to take office in US history, he begins his second term with a whiff of preferential treatment and an air of vindication.
That preferential treatment and vindication goes far beyond the New York courtroom where Trump was sentenced. During his first term in office, Trump faced stiff resistance from all quarters, with people arguing that the president should not be given a free pass just because he is the president. Trump was routinely criticised and countered by fellow businessmen, Silicon Valley tycoons and powerful lobbies. He was even investigated by officials in his administration for a range of misdemeanours.
Now, the landscape appears to have changed as individuals and institutions recalibrate for Trump’s return.
In the run-up to the election, billionaire Jeff Bezos―who owns The Washington Post and had previously taken on Trump―directed his editors not to publish an endorsement for either presidential candidate. Bezos was ostensibly concerned that Trump may penalise his business interests if the newspaper endorsed his opponent.
In the same spirit, this month, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg brought his organisation closer to Trump’s political positions by scrapping his platform’s fact-checking measures and diversity hiring initiatives. Zuckerberg was previously a keen supporter of a handful of progressive causes that had put him at odds with Trump.
There are also signs of change within government institutions. Days ago, federal prosecutor Jack Smith, who led federal investigations against Trump for years, resigned from his post.
In effect, Trump now returns to the White House with far greater political capital than he enjoyed the first time. When Trump became president in 2016, many people saw him as an anomalous outsider to Washington who had won office under unusual circumstances. That gave Trump’s political rivals and government institutions a greater sense of freedom to counterbalance him. This time, however, Trump takes oath as a firmly established political figure, forcing those around him to adjust to his quirks rather than counteract them.
Trump’s expanded political capital could prove tricky to navigate for the rest of the world because it makes it harder to differentiate his serious policy ideas from his unserious bombast. Even before taking the oath of office, Trump has made a series of comments that seem somewhat difficult to believe. Over the past few weeks, for instance, Trump has suggested that he would use military force to annex Greenland and capture the Panama Canal. He has also called Canada the “51st state” of the United States and hinted at using economic coercion to acquire it. In the same expansionist vein, Trump vowed to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America.”
Hand in hand: Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the “Howdy, Modi!” rally in Houston, Texas, in September 2019 | AFP
These comments followed other similarly radical ideas such as imposing tariffs on all goods imported into the United States, deporting millions of illegal immigrants and slashing a whopping $2 trillion in government spending.
Understandably, observers and policymakers worldwide are worried about the possibility that Trump may follow through on these promises. Each of them would unsettle global geopolitics, derail economic transactions and potentially cause law and order crises in the US. But, owing to a series of hurdles, most or all of them are unlikely to happen.
In the wake of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, most Americans, including those who support Trump, may not support the deployment of military troops in Canada, Greenland or Panama. Universal import tariffs will almost certainly raise inflation―an issue that had emerged as a key factor in last year’s presidential elections―and will face significant backlash from powerful business groups. Similarly, the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency does not currently have the funding or manpower necessary to identify and deport as many illegal immigrants as Trump has promised.
Yet, even if Trump fails to implement his radical ideas, his rhetoric should still worry both Americans and the rest of the world. Trump’s words inject further uncertainty and volatility into a world that has already been riven by war and geopolitical tensions. In the face of geopolitical risks, particularly owing to the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, and tensions between the US and China, global businesses are already in the costly process of reorienting their supply chains and operations. Trump’s rhetoric only serves to complicate that process and will further hurt investor confidence.
Despite the risks of volatility that Trump will bring to office, there may yet be good news for India. Prime Minister Narendra Modi enjoyed a friendly relationship with Trump during his first term, replete with large political rallies in both India and the US. Modi now looks poised to carry that goodwill forward into Trump’s second term.
There have already been positive signs on issues dear to New Delhi. Over the years, Trump had denounced the H-1B visa programme used by US corporations to hire skilled immigrants, arguing that the programme was “unfair” to American workers. During his first term in office, Trump’s crackdown on the programme had hurt foreign students and workers looking for jobs in the US. Trump now appears to have reversed his position. When asked about the visa last month, he said: “We need competent people. We need smart people coming into our country. We need a lot of people coming in.”
The liberalisation of H-1B visas has long been a policy priority for New Delhi. Indian immigrants have long been disproportionately benefited from H-1B visas, which means that if Trump liberalises the programme, Indian students in the US would enjoy greater access to employment opportunities in the country.
Nonetheless, like most other regional and global powers, India would still need to adapt to a more transactional foreign policy under Trump. Under President Joe Biden, New Delhi had successfully nurtured a partnership centred on countering the challenge from China. In the interest of that shared goal, Biden had invested heavily in the strategic partnership with India, giving New Delhi access to high-end US defence technology while still respecting India’s strategic autonomy posture on issues of US interest.
Trump may prefer a more transactional defence partnership, eliciting more from India in return for similar cooperation. The success of India-US ties may now hinge on the extent to which New Delhi can convince Trump that the alliance is still worthwhile to him.