Xi and Trump: insecure 'strongmen' who had nothing to offer in a crisis but vanity
Opinion: By Peter Hartcher Political and International Editor for The Sydney Morning Herald, April 21, 2020 https://www.theage.com.au/national/xi-and-trump-insecure-strongmen-who-had-nothing-to-offer-in-a-crisis-but-vanity-20200420-p54ldc.html The leader of which great power has done these five things during the COVID-19 outbreak? First, misled the world – and his own country – by pretending that there was no problem at the outset. Second, once community transmission was already known to be happening in his country, lied about the extent of it. Third, cracked down on principled truth tellers. Fourth, blamed another country for the creating the pandemic as a way of deflecting his own failures. Fifth, dyed his hair an improbable colour. The leaders of both of the world's superpowers are guilty of all five. Xi Jinping and Donald Trump have bungled the epidemic shockingly. Mass death is the result. Although there are many brave and honourable people doing selfless work in both countries, they have been betrayed by their leaders. How many people around the world have died needlessly because Xi suppressed the truth of the original outbreak last year and pretended there was no virus? How many Americans have died because Trump misled them into continuing risky behaviour with his January 21 claim that "we have it totally under control" and "it’s going to be just fine"? Rather than acting on the early warnings of Wuhan doctors, Xi's regime had them threatened by the police. Rather than acting to save the lives of the crew of the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt, Trump's administration removed and insulted the captain who'd asked for help with an onboard outbreak. Confrontation between the superpowers was already intensifying before the world had heard of COVID-19. By blaming each other for creating the crisis, Beijing and Washington are not addressing the public health problem. Of course, the US has truth on its side in pointing out that the pandemic is a made-in-China phenomenon. The Chinese Foreign Ministry's response – to claim that the US Army started the infection in China – is just pathetic. But each is using the accusations against the other to deflect blame for their own incompetence and betrayal at home. The virus itself is an exercise in the purest globalisation, recognising no borders. International cooperation against a universal enemy would be the responsible course. But the national responses of the US and China are the the exact opposite. They are intensifying their geopolitical contest and accelerating the trend to so-called "decoupling". With the advent of the corona contest "it is already irreversible that the two are decoupling in terms of economy and technology" says Wang Jisi, a well-regarded scholar at Peking University. He predicts "the most difficult phase since the establishment of US-China diplomatic relations in the 1970s". The two superpowers are setting up their handling of the crisis as a contest between two forms of government – China's authoritarianism versus American democracy. In truth, these two leaders have demonstrated that both forms can produce disastrous outcomes. Democracy's advantage is that the people, if they so choose, can bloodlessly remove a bad leader. China's people have no such option. And if you thought that Trump was the only one of the pair to dye his hair an implausible colour, do you really think that a 66-year-old Chinese man could have naturally jet-black locks? This isn't an irrelevance. It's a human detail to illustrate the point that they are both vain men, and it is political and personal vanity that is their shared weakness. The reason that Xi and Trump have so fallen so low in high office is that they have treated a public health crisis as a test of their personal and political status. Like most leaders who like to posture as "strong men" types, they are actually very fragile. This is not a crisis of autocracy nor a crisis of democracy. It is a crisis caused by overpoliticisation. Different types of politics, yes. But they have both bungled so badly because they refuse to set aside their political projects and personal vanities to deal with a medical and biological crisis. Australia is – so far – responding successfully to the problem because its state and federal leaders generally have set politics and personal rivalry aside to deal squarely with a common threat to the national interest. Xi and Trump saw a virus as a threat to their personal and political status. That's why they tried to hide it, diminish it, refuse to take responsibility for mishandling it. The virus is no respecter of vanity. But it's all these insecure little "strongmen" had to offer. Neither emerges with any honour. As the two superpowers intensify their rivalry, where does that leave Australia? It would be a fatal error to treat this is a matter of moral equivalence. So what if Xi and Trump are as bad as each other? Australia can't treat this as an interesting intellectual exercise. This is not about the relativities of morality but the absolute of the national interest. Which choices will best advance our security, sovereignty and wellbeing? For Australia, the defining difference between the conduct of the superpowers is that Beijing wants to control other countries, including ours. Washington wants us as its ally. They are both self-interested great powers. It happens that Australia's interests are better served by an alliance with one rather than yielding to the other. For all the many failings of the current US President, the Australian alliance with the US remains a national asset. We have only one alliance. It would be reckless to discard it. It would also be naive to put full trust in it. In a more intense effort than Australia has ever had to make, we need to build deeper and stronger relations with all the nations that share our interests. Including our interest in preserving our sovereignty from Beijing's relentless control impulses. Isn't this the wrong time to be thinking about such things? Not at all. It's exactly the right time. Nations will be judged for many years on how they behave in this crisis. Australia's emerging success in managing the virus is a national advantage that we should use as a "soft power" asset. Australia has started working to help the small states of the Pacific cope. Now, Canberra needs to start offering advice and assistance to a much wider range of nations as part of an invigorated network of national influence. You don't easily forget a neighbour who injures you when you are vulnerable, nor one who offers a helping hand in a crisis. Xi and Trump have demonstrated that they cannot be trusted in a crisis. Australia has an opportunity to show that it can be. -- Cheers, Stephen _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
