Japan must prepare for Trump 2.0 and world chaos
ENDO Ken / Professor, the University of Tokyo
March 11, 2024
When it comes to the 2024 presidential election in the United States, many people are shifting the premise of their thinking from "if Trump is elected" to "when Trump is elected."
It is difficult to readily understand why a man who has been charged with 91 crimes in four criminal prosecutions, including a serious case challenging the very foundation of democratic politics, could become president again. However, he has won Republican primaries back to back, and is on track to possibly win a head-to-head battle with President Biden in opinion polls.
Of course, in the world of politics, "the future is a closed book." No one can predict who will win the race in the fall. However, we are talking about the most powerful country in the world, and thus need to explore every possibility. Many countries, including Japan, depend on the U.S. for national security, although the relative weight of reliance has been reduced in recent years.
Since Mr. Trump has already served as president once, some Washington watchers are optimistic that what he will do upon his return to power is predictable to some extent. However, former military personnel who served in the previous administration and yielded some influence over the commander in chief, such as White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and Secretary of Defense James Mattis, have long since distanced themselves from their former boss. Others, such as former deputy national security adviser Matthew Pottinger -- himself a former military officer with ties to the Japan government -- have dismissed Trump for his involvement in the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol attack in 2021.
Many people would want to join a future Trump administration, but few decent people surround him. Many are conspiracy driven QAnon followers or Make America Great Again people who are not familiar with political processes. Trump 2.0 could be more out of control than before.
Even without Trump, the world order is seriously undermined. In Ukraine and the Gaza Strip, the aggressors treat other nations and ethnic groups as nothing. In the end, the so-called international community has been unable to respond effectively to countries that deprive the victims of water, food, livelihoods, and dignity without hesitation.
A bit of hope was felt over the unity of the Western countries shortly after Russia began its invasion of Ukraine. At that time, the West was convinced of its "righteousness" and jointly sanctioned Russia and supported Ukraine. If left unchecked, the foundations of international order would be shaken, the countries thought.
However, the war in Ukraine has reached a stalemate as it enters its third year. Even more problematic than the conflict is the split in the attitudes of Western countries in the face of a similarly atrocious Israel, and that some countries, such as the United States, support the Middle East country. Washington has blocked a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire and is still supplying Israel with weapons.
The fact that the immediate trigger for the Gaza war was the massacre of Israelis by the Islamic group Hamas has been drowned out by the long history of oppression of the Palestinians and the devastation in Gaza, and the so-called Global South has turned its back on the West's "righteous" narrative. Public opinion within the West is also sharply divided, and it is no longer as confident as it once was.
Order is ultimately based on the beliefs of the people who think it is important. Its foundations are wobbling. If we take opposite attitudes toward such misery as invasion, massacres, and displacement, people will inevitably conclude with disgust that "order" is limited to particular groups.
So Trump is not re-emerging in an international political vacuum. His potential return to power would happen in a fluid, muddy ground prepared by the Biden administration.
Yonosuke Nagai, a political scientist who was influential half a century ago, divided the image of international politics into three types: organizational, institutional, and situational.
At that time, Nagai contrasted the United States against China under Mao Zedong. He argued that Washington took an organizational stance by traditionally adopting a jurist-like approach and aspiring to bring about peace through international law and mechanisms. Beijing, in contrast, took a situational approach by seeking to liquidate order -- essentially, blur the boundary between war and peace -- through world revolution, Nagai posited. He then placed in-between the two a European-style institutional model that seeks to balance power, with the intention of defending the international order.
Half a century later, there is no trace of the U.S. organizational approach. Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and his proteges seemed to have rooted the balance of power (regulatory) way of thinking in U.S. diplomacy, but a situational president like Mr. Trump emerged and made the post-World War II international order fluid at once.
In his mind, allies are enemies that suck the sweet juice of the United States. Organizations such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU), which post-war Washington has almost consistently supported as contributing to American national interests, are considered obsolete. It is unclear to what extent the U.S.-Japan security treaty and the U.S.-South Korea alliance will continue to be considered important.
When even allies are treated this way, Ukraine would be among the first to be removed from the list of countries receiving US assistance if Trump returns to power. The people of Gaza would increasingly disappear from view. Everything would be subject to Trump-style dealing.
In areas other than diplomacy and national security, for example, the World Trade Organization (WTO), which supported free trade in the postwar period, would be targeted again. Mr. Trump is raving about raising tariffs on Chinese goods to more than 60%. International organizations involved in climate change, refugee protection, and children's education would all be rejected under the slogan of "America First."
The most powerful country would be getting caught up in a situational approach. Such a near future development is something we need to prepare ourselves for.
Since the end of World War II, Japan has maintained a light armament under Article 9 of the Constitution and largely outsourced its national security to the United States. This is the so-called "Article 9-US-Japan Security Treaty System" according to Professor Tetsuya Sakai of the University of Tokyo. Under these circumstances, Tokyo has engaged in global governance and has been oriented toward an organizational approach in dealing with international politics.
The premise of this posture was the stability of the United States and its capacity to project power. When the roots of this system become fluid, the system itself is shaken, and it reverberates not only in international politics, but also in domestic politics on this side of the Pacific.
A four-year term for the U.S. president isn't short enough to get away with a clinch. Shinzo Abe, who was close to Trump last time, is no longer in this world.
If Japan wants to avoid volatility in the world and in its own territory, it should think about what it should do now and invest where necessary. Should we rely on the strengthening of our own power, or the formation of a major grouping with allies and like-minded countries for institutional stability, or the maintenance of an organizational structure in cooperation with Europe and other countries, or the improvement of relations with hostile countries?
Japan, which is in the midst of domestic problems such as a slush fund scandal involving ruling party politicians, is forced to make a choice in the face of looming world chaos.
Ken Endo is a professor at the University of Tokyo. This is a reposting of the article that appeared in the morning edition of Mainichi Shimbun on February 8, 2024.
It is difficult to readily understand why a man who has been charged with 91 crimes in four criminal prosecutions, including a serious case challenging the very foundation of democratic politics, could become president again. However, he has won Republican primaries back to back, and is on track to possibly win a head-to-head battle with President Biden in opinion polls.
Of course, in the world of politics, "the future is a closed book." No one can predict who will win the race in the fall. However, we are talking about the most powerful country in the world, and thus need to explore every possibility. Many countries, including Japan, depend on the U.S. for national security, although the relative weight of reliance has been reduced in recent years.
Since Mr. Trump has already served as president once, some Washington watchers are optimistic that what he will do upon his return to power is predictable to some extent. However, former military personnel who served in the previous administration and yielded some influence over the commander in chief, such as White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and Secretary of Defense James Mattis, have long since distanced themselves from their former boss. Others, such as former deputy national security adviser Matthew Pottinger -- himself a former military officer with ties to the Japan government -- have dismissed Trump for his involvement in the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol attack in 2021.
Many people would want to join a future Trump administration, but few decent people surround him. Many are conspiracy driven QAnon followers or Make America Great Again people who are not familiar with political processes. Trump 2.0 could be more out of control than before.
Even without Trump, the world order is seriously undermined. In Ukraine and the Gaza Strip, the aggressors treat other nations and ethnic groups as nothing. In the end, the so-called international community has been unable to respond effectively to countries that deprive the victims of water, food, livelihoods, and dignity without hesitation.
A bit of hope was felt over the unity of the Western countries shortly after Russia began its invasion of Ukraine. At that time, the West was convinced of its "righteousness" and jointly sanctioned Russia and supported Ukraine. If left unchecked, the foundations of international order would be shaken, the countries thought.
However, the war in Ukraine has reached a stalemate as it enters its third year. Even more problematic than the conflict is the split in the attitudes of Western countries in the face of a similarly atrocious Israel, and that some countries, such as the United States, support the Middle East country. Washington has blocked a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire and is still supplying Israel with weapons.
The fact that the immediate trigger for the Gaza war was the massacre of Israelis by the Islamic group Hamas has been drowned out by the long history of oppression of the Palestinians and the devastation in Gaza, and the so-called Global South has turned its back on the West's "righteous" narrative. Public opinion within the West is also sharply divided, and it is no longer as confident as it once was.
Order is ultimately based on the beliefs of the people who think it is important. Its foundations are wobbling. If we take opposite attitudes toward such misery as invasion, massacres, and displacement, people will inevitably conclude with disgust that "order" is limited to particular groups.
So Trump is not re-emerging in an international political vacuum. His potential return to power would happen in a fluid, muddy ground prepared by the Biden administration.
Yonosuke Nagai, a political scientist who was influential half a century ago, divided the image of international politics into three types: organizational, institutional, and situational.
At that time, Nagai contrasted the United States against China under Mao Zedong. He argued that Washington took an organizational stance by traditionally adopting a jurist-like approach and aspiring to bring about peace through international law and mechanisms. Beijing, in contrast, took a situational approach by seeking to liquidate order -- essentially, blur the boundary between war and peace -- through world revolution, Nagai posited. He then placed in-between the two a European-style institutional model that seeks to balance power, with the intention of defending the international order.
Half a century later, there is no trace of the U.S. organizational approach. Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and his proteges seemed to have rooted the balance of power (regulatory) way of thinking in U.S. diplomacy, but a situational president like Mr. Trump emerged and made the post-World War II international order fluid at once.
In his mind, allies are enemies that suck the sweet juice of the United States. Organizations such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU), which post-war Washington has almost consistently supported as contributing to American national interests, are considered obsolete. It is unclear to what extent the U.S.-Japan security treaty and the U.S.-South Korea alliance will continue to be considered important.
When even allies are treated this way, Ukraine would be among the first to be removed from the list of countries receiving US assistance if Trump returns to power. The people of Gaza would increasingly disappear from view. Everything would be subject to Trump-style dealing.
In areas other than diplomacy and national security, for example, the World Trade Organization (WTO), which supported free trade in the postwar period, would be targeted again. Mr. Trump is raving about raising tariffs on Chinese goods to more than 60%. International organizations involved in climate change, refugee protection, and children's education would all be rejected under the slogan of "America First."
The most powerful country would be getting caught up in a situational approach. Such a near future development is something we need to prepare ourselves for.
Since the end of World War II, Japan has maintained a light armament under Article 9 of the Constitution and largely outsourced its national security to the United States. This is the so-called "Article 9-US-Japan Security Treaty System" according to Professor Tetsuya Sakai of the University of Tokyo. Under these circumstances, Tokyo has engaged in global governance and has been oriented toward an organizational approach in dealing with international politics.
The premise of this posture was the stability of the United States and its capacity to project power. When the roots of this system become fluid, the system itself is shaken, and it reverberates not only in international politics, but also in domestic politics on this side of the Pacific.
A four-year term for the U.S. president isn't short enough to get away with a clinch. Shinzo Abe, who was close to Trump last time, is no longer in this world.
If Japan wants to avoid volatility in the world and in its own territory, it should think about what it should do now and invest where necessary. Should we rely on the strengthening of our own power, or the formation of a major grouping with allies and like-minded countries for institutional stability, or the maintenance of an organizational structure in cooperation with Europe and other countries, or the improvement of relations with hostile countries?
Japan, which is in the midst of domestic problems such as a slush fund scandal involving ruling party politicians, is forced to make a choice in the face of looming world chaos.
Ken Endo is a professor at the University of Tokyo. This is a reposting of the article that appeared in the morning edition of Mainichi Shimbun on February 8, 2024.
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
迫りくる「世界無秩序」カオスもたらすトランプ2．0
遠藤 乾 / 東京大学教授
2024年 3月 11日
「もしトラ」から「ほぼトラ」へ――。もしもトランプ氏が米大統領に返り咲いたらという仮定から、ほぼトランプ氏になりそうだという想定へ。多くがそのシナリオに備え始めている。
民主政治の根幹にかかわる重大事件を含め、4件の刑事訴追がなされ、91の罪に問われている人が、なぜまた大統領になりうるのか、にわかには理解しがたい。しかし、共和党の予備選では連戦連勝で世論調査でもバイデン大統領との一騎打ちを制する勢いだ。
もちろん、政治の世界は「一寸先は闇」。今秋の大統領選を誰が制するのか、今から予言できる者はいない。けれども、ことは世界最強の国の話であり、想定外では済まされない。相対的に比重を減らしたとはいえ、日本をはじめ多くの国がその安全保障を頼っている。
すでに一度、大統領職を経験しているので、ある程度政権の傾向は読めると楽観する向きもある。しかし、前回の政権では、首席補佐官だったケリー氏や国防長官だったマティス氏など、元軍人が抑えとなっていた――彼らはとうにそっぽを向いている。ポッティンジャー元国家安全保障問題担当副補佐官（彼自身も元軍人）のように、日本政府とつながりのある人も、議会襲撃に関与した氏を見限った。
制御不能の可能性
政権入りしたい人は山ほどいるが、周囲にまともな人は少ない。陰謀史観に満ちたQアノン＝1＝系か、MAGA（米国を再び偉大に）系の政治に不慣れな者が多い。トランプ2・0（第2期政権）は以前より制御不能となりうる。
そうでなくとも、世界は混沌（こんとん）とし、秩序の底が抜けてきている。ウクライナでも、パレスチナ自治区ガザ地区でも、侵略者は他国や多民族を無きものと扱う。水や食料、生活、尊厳を奪っておいてなんとも思わない国々に対し、いわゆる国際社会は、結局のところ、効果的な対応を取れずにいる。
いくばくか希望が持てたのは、ロシアによるウクライナ侵攻の際であろうか。その時、西側諸国は「正しさ」を確信し、対露制裁や対ウクライナ支援で結束した。放置すれば、国際秩序の根幹が揺らぐからだ。
しかし、ウクライナ戦争は膠着（こうちゃく）状態のまま3年目に入る。より致命的なのは同様に暴虐をふるうイスラエルを前に、西側の態度が割れ、米国のように支持する国があることだ。停戦を求める国連安全保障理事会決議をブロックし、いまだ武器を供給している。
直接のきっかけが、イスラム組織ハマスによるイスラエル人の虐殺だった事実も、長年のパレスチナ圧殺の歴史とガザでの惨状にかき消され、いわゆるグローバル・サウスは西側の「正しさ」ナラティブ（語り）に一層背を向けた。西側内部の世論も鋭く対立し、かつてほどの自信はもはやない。
秩序はつまるところ、それが大事だと思う人々の信念による。その根幹がぐらついた。侵略、虐殺、離散のような悲惨に正反対の態度を取れば、「秩序」も特定の集団だけのものかと、白けるのは必須である。
従ってトランプ氏は、国際政治的な真空の中で再登場するのではない。すでにバイデン政権のもとで流動化し、ぬかるんだ地盤の上で起きることだ。
流動化する「根幹」
半世紀前に論壇で活躍した政治学者の永井陽之助は、国際政治像を機構型、制度型、状況型の三つに分別した。
当時の永井は、米国が伝統的に法律家的なアプローチを採り、国際法や機構によって平和をもたらそうとする機構型を志向するのに対し、毛沢東のもとの中国が世界革命を通じて戦争と平和の境目、つまり秩序を流動化させようとする状況型を対置した。その間に力の均衡を図る欧州流の制度型を挟み込んで、それにより国際秩序を弁護する意図を込めた。
半世紀たち、米国の機構型アプローチは見る影もない。キッシンジャー米元国務長官とその弟子たちにより、勢力均衡（制度型）の思考法が米国外交に根づいたかと思いきや、トランプ氏のように、戦後の国際秩序を一気に流動化させる状況型の大統領が現れる。
彼の脳内では、同盟国は米国の甘い汁を吸う敵。北大西洋条約機構（NATO）や欧州連合（EU）のように、戦後の米国がほぼ一貫して支持し、その国益に合うはずの組織は時代遅れとされる。日米安保も米韓同盟もどこまで重視されるか不明だ。
同盟国ですらそうなのだから、ウクライナなどは真っ先に切られるだろう。ガザの人々はますます視界から消える。すべてがトランプ流取引の対象だ。
外交安全保障以外の領域でも、戦後の自由貿易を支えた世界貿易機関（WTO）＝2＝が再び攻撃対象となろう。関税を6割に上げると息巻いている。気候変動や難民保護、児童教育に携わる国際機構もすべて「米国第一」のかけ声の下で否定される。
最強の国が自ら状況型にはまりゆく。我々が備えねばならないのは、そんな近未来だ。
日本自身で選択を
戦後の日本は、憲法9条の下で軽武装を貫き、安全保障をおおむね米国に外部委託してきた。いわゆる「9条＝安保体制」（酒井哲哉東京大教授）である。そのもとで世界的なガバナンスにも参与し、機構型を志向してきた。
この体制の前提は、米国の安定と力の投射であった。その根っこが流動化するとき、体制自体も揺らぎ、国際政治のみならず、国内政治にもはねかえる。
4年という任期は、クリンチで逃れるほど短くはない。前回トランプ氏と親しかった安倍晋三氏はもはやこの世にいない。
もし世界と自国の流動化を避けたいのなら、今から日本自身が何をすべきか考え、必要なところに投資をしていくべきだろう。依拠すべきは自国の力の増強なのか、制度型の安定を目指して同盟国や同志国と一大勢力を形づくるのか、あるいは欧州などと協力して機構型の維持を図るのか、はたまた敵対国との関係改善なのか。
筆者は東京大学教授。本稿は2024年2月8日の毎日新聞朝刊に掲載された寄稿の再掲である
民主政治の根幹にかかわる重大事件を含め、4件の刑事訴追がなされ、91の罪に問われている人が、なぜまた大統領になりうるのか、にわかには理解しがたい。しかし、共和党の予備選では連戦連勝で世論調査でもバイデン大統領との一騎打ちを制する勢いだ。
もちろん、政治の世界は「一寸先は闇」。今秋の大統領選を誰が制するのか、今から予言できる者はいない。けれども、ことは世界最強の国の話であり、想定外では済まされない。相対的に比重を減らしたとはいえ、日本をはじめ多くの国がその安全保障を頼っている。
すでに一度、大統領職を経験しているので、ある程度政権の傾向は読めると楽観する向きもある。しかし、前回の政権では、首席補佐官だったケリー氏や国防長官だったマティス氏など、元軍人が抑えとなっていた――彼らはとうにそっぽを向いている。ポッティンジャー元国家安全保障問題担当副補佐官（彼自身も元軍人）のように、日本政府とつながりのある人も、議会襲撃に関与した氏を見限った。
制御不能の可能性
政権入りしたい人は山ほどいるが、周囲にまともな人は少ない。陰謀史観に満ちたQアノン＝1＝系か、MAGA（米国を再び偉大に）系の政治に不慣れな者が多い。トランプ2・0（第2期政権）は以前より制御不能となりうる。
そうでなくとも、世界は混沌（こんとん）とし、秩序の底が抜けてきている。ウクライナでも、パレスチナ自治区ガザ地区でも、侵略者は他国や多民族を無きものと扱う。水や食料、生活、尊厳を奪っておいてなんとも思わない国々に対し、いわゆる国際社会は、結局のところ、効果的な対応を取れずにいる。
いくばくか希望が持てたのは、ロシアによるウクライナ侵攻の際であろうか。その時、西側諸国は「正しさ」を確信し、対露制裁や対ウクライナ支援で結束した。放置すれば、国際秩序の根幹が揺らぐからだ。
しかし、ウクライナ戦争は膠着（こうちゃく）状態のまま3年目に入る。より致命的なのは同様に暴虐をふるうイスラエルを前に、西側の態度が割れ、米国のように支持する国があることだ。停戦を求める国連安全保障理事会決議をブロックし、いまだ武器を供給している。
直接のきっかけが、イスラム組織ハマスによるイスラエル人の虐殺だった事実も、長年のパレスチナ圧殺の歴史とガザでの惨状にかき消され、いわゆるグローバル・サウスは西側の「正しさ」ナラティブ（語り）に一層背を向けた。西側内部の世論も鋭く対立し、かつてほどの自信はもはやない。
秩序はつまるところ、それが大事だと思う人々の信念による。その根幹がぐらついた。侵略、虐殺、離散のような悲惨に正反対の態度を取れば、「秩序」も特定の集団だけのものかと、白けるのは必須である。
従ってトランプ氏は、国際政治的な真空の中で再登場するのではない。すでにバイデン政権のもとで流動化し、ぬかるんだ地盤の上で起きることだ。
流動化する「根幹」
半世紀前に論壇で活躍した政治学者の永井陽之助は、国際政治像を機構型、制度型、状況型の三つに分別した。
当時の永井は、米国が伝統的に法律家的なアプローチを採り、国際法や機構によって平和をもたらそうとする機構型を志向するのに対し、毛沢東のもとの中国が世界革命を通じて戦争と平和の境目、つまり秩序を流動化させようとする状況型を対置した。その間に力の均衡を図る欧州流の制度型を挟み込んで、それにより国際秩序を弁護する意図を込めた。
半世紀たち、米国の機構型アプローチは見る影もない。キッシンジャー米元国務長官とその弟子たちにより、勢力均衡（制度型）の思考法が米国外交に根づいたかと思いきや、トランプ氏のように、戦後の国際秩序を一気に流動化させる状況型の大統領が現れる。
彼の脳内では、同盟国は米国の甘い汁を吸う敵。北大西洋条約機構（NATO）や欧州連合（EU）のように、戦後の米国がほぼ一貫して支持し、その国益に合うはずの組織は時代遅れとされる。日米安保も米韓同盟もどこまで重視されるか不明だ。
同盟国ですらそうなのだから、ウクライナなどは真っ先に切られるだろう。ガザの人々はますます視界から消える。すべてがトランプ流取引の対象だ。
外交安全保障以外の領域でも、戦後の自由貿易を支えた世界貿易機関（WTO）＝2＝が再び攻撃対象となろう。関税を6割に上げると息巻いている。気候変動や難民保護、児童教育に携わる国際機構もすべて「米国第一」のかけ声の下で否定される。
最強の国が自ら状況型にはまりゆく。我々が備えねばならないのは、そんな近未来だ。
日本自身で選択を
戦後の日本は、憲法9条の下で軽武装を貫き、安全保障をおおむね米国に外部委託してきた。いわゆる「9条＝安保体制」（酒井哲哉東京大教授）である。そのもとで世界的なガバナンスにも参与し、機構型を志向してきた。
この体制の前提は、米国の安定と力の投射であった。その根っこが流動化するとき、体制自体も揺らぎ、国際政治のみならず、国内政治にもはねかえる。
4年という任期は、クリンチで逃れるほど短くはない。前回トランプ氏と親しかった安倍晋三氏はもはやこの世にいない。
もし世界と自国の流動化を避けたいのなら、今から日本自身が何をすべきか考え、必要なところに投資をしていくべきだろう。依拠すべきは自国の力の増強なのか、制度型の安定を目指して同盟国や同志国と一大勢力を形づくるのか、あるいは欧州などと協力して機構型の維持を図るのか、はたまた敵対国との関係改善なのか。
筆者は東京大学教授。本稿は2024年2月8日の毎日新聞朝刊に掲載された寄稿の再掲である
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟