The United States politics is as topsy turvy as can be in the second Donald Trump administration.
And one can only hope that some of what we've heard is political bluster and not a definite plan, although one can never tell. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's recent speech at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia is a case in point. Hegseth discussed debatable items like fat servicemen and servicewomen, physical fitness, and beards. Most scary was the Secretary's idea that the military should be used against American citizens. An encouraging point was the military bearing always maintained by the officers, which showed both submission to civilian authority and an unwillingness to politically back what was being said by with public show of affection.
The scary nature of our politics could have ramifications for our foreign policy. Hegseth's speech was followed by a Trump speech. Neither Hegseth nor Trump said much about the dangerous China/Russia authoritarian orbit, preferring to talk about the enemy within. Does anyone really know what will become of the course were on? I don't think they do. However, it doesn't hurt to speculate. Is the Trump administration willing to cede a sphere of influence to Russia and China? Perhaps.
What does it mean if they do? It most likely means that China and Russia will be able to act freely in the areas where they are most influential, and the Trump administration might make sure America stays active in the Western hemisphere. Of course, this would cover my fear of the administration using the military to stir up political passions in opponents. There are also worries about a possible war with Venezuela, an authoritarian power that represents Bolivarian socialism, a movement of the left.
But if the great powers retreat into their own sphere it would mean that the US, and the world in general, are heading toward what would be called spheres of influence in international relations. This means great powers will dominate their respective spheres and balance each other at the same time. Because there's no coordination between the great powers then each of the powers must balance each other, we'll have high military budgets for as long as we can see and certainly no movement toward international law and peace.
The political trend in the world's spheres of influence is toward authoritarianism and away from the ways of the democratic nation-state, as the big boys in each sphere are authoritarian or run by authoritarian governments. Is there a way out? Yes, that's a rebirth of the ways of the democratic nation-state. We've seen movements that fight for democratic ways over the years the demonstrators in the late 1980s in China at Tiananmen Square, the movement behind Alexei Navalny in Russia, and the No Kings rallies against the Trump administration here in the United States. Despite a major challenge, the ideas just won't die.
The ways of the democratic nation-state allow for honest discussions of war and peace because civil liberties are protected. In an authoritarian form of government, one at least partially leaves those questions to a leader of an authoritarian movement. What's the way out of this? Authoritarianism must be fought on the ground by people who are opposed to it. Perhaps a movement of various people of different ideologies who are willing to stand for principles like free and fair elections, the rule of law, civil liberties, civilian government, and, of course, peace. Maybe Solidarity in Poland could be a model?
If those ideas prevail, then maybe we could leave the balancing act that the spheres of influence requires. Perhaps the nation-states of the world could cooperate in building a peaceful international order. Maybe we could return to Franklin Delano Roosevelt's idea of the four policemen (original vision for the United Nations) where the main powers police the world and other powers are allowed nothing more powerful than a rifle. Of course, each power could police its sphere of influence but would not be allowed to invade other countries in that sphere. There would be no Russian invasion of Ukraine, American invasion of Venezuela, or Chinese invasion of any country.
We would make the ideas of Hugo Grotius a living reality. How do we arrive at our destination? History will tell the story, and let's hope it tells a happy story.
Jason Sibert is the Lead Writer of the Peace Economy Project
