Midnight over Dawn: an uncertain future for international norms

midnightWith the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States of America (US), the international community may be wondering whether international norms are likely to be respected by the most powerful nation (militarily and economically) in the world.  As one of the permanent five (P5) members of the United Nations Security Council, the US under a Donald Trump presidency may be tempted – as the US has done in the past – to pay lip service to international norms with virtual impunity.  The US is not alone; other P5 members have acted with impunity. Russia in Aleppo is a fine example.

Donald Trump’s take on international norms is untenable, if, in fact, he believes what he was saying on the stump. Demagogues on the constant rant – as Trump has been for the past two years – tend to eventually buy into what was initially convenient claptrap.  While his positions may have resonated with the unwary, they reveal a profound ignorance or utter contempt for many universally accepted international norms.

Will Trump re-introduce torture as an interrogation tool? Will he cajole South Korea, Japan, and Saudi Arabia to go nuclear, as he has suggested they should do? Will he “bomb the shit out of” ISIS? Ask the civilians and humanitarian workers in Aleppo about the consequences of such bombings; ISIS is embedded in urban areas using civilians as human shields. Let’s not even question his irrational, irresponsible, and irreverent positions on immigration, free trade, and the environment.

Trump’s views are as anachronistic as they are divisive.

Trump’s views are as anachronistic as they are divisive.  No telling now whether he will carry through with some of his wacky, illogical, and dangerous ideas – especially those that are blatantly contrary to international norms.

Mind you, Clinton, who by all accounts is relatively hawkish and less risk-averse than President Obama, seemed ready to use military force, including putting boots on the ground (though she denied it) in Syria. She has argued for a no-fly zone over parts of Syria, augmenting the number of US troops training and assisting Iraqi and Kurdish forces, and providing greater assistance to Sunni Arab fighters. Though it is doubtful whether she would have taken Russia to task over the war crimes and crimes against humanity Russia seems to be committing with Bashar al-Assad and his armed forces, she probably would have ratcheted up economic sanctions against Russia over its actions against Ukraine’s territorial integrity.  She might have even expanded the US missile defenses in Eastern Europe. And considering her views on Russian interference in the electoral process, she most likely would have engaged in a bit of tit for tat retaliatory cyber attacks for good measure.  Not exactly a picture of tranquility, but who says that realpolitik is ever tranquil.

Clinton has said in the past that it was “a great regret” that the US is not a signatory to the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Rome Statute, claiming “I think we could have worked out some of the challenges that are raised concerning our membership. But that has not yet come to pass.”  As promising as it sounds, this was empty rhetoric. Even if in her heart of hearts, she wanted the US to sign the Rome Statute (and there is no indication that she harbored such thoughts), there would have been significant pushback from US politicians and high-ranking military officers.  From the perspective of the political and military elite, there is no profit for the US in joining the ICC. It all seems academic now. With Trump as the next US President, expect no change in the US’s policy concerning the ICC.

Clinton, for all her character flaws, would have been a sober President who would walk the talk. She understands the value of international norms and the need to adhere to them. She was clear that she would neither revive nor tolerate torture for the interrogation of captured prisoners or detained unlawful combatants. Her thinking on issues such as the environment, immigration, trade, security and so on – all of which are relevant to the globe at large – were coherent, measured, and pragmatic.  Though not transformative (she is no Obama), her vision of how the US should interact with the rest of the world – the role the US should play and how it should play it – was clear, consistent, and customary.

Trump lives in a different universe. Unlike Clinton, who saw the US in the light of dawn in its relations with the rest of the world, Trump has warned that in the US, having embraced rhetoric over action, it is a minute before midnight; all dark and gloom. Hopefully now that he has been elected, he will re-assess his views and come to the realization that international norms do matter, that the US cannot willy-nilly do as it pleases, and that within the community of nations the US is expected to take the moral and legal high ground in all its affairs.

President Trump can be transformative, but he will first need to jettison the dark rhetoric of Candidate Trump. Time will tell.

comments2

About Author

Share

Author: Michael G. Karnavas

Michael G. Karnavas is an American trained lawyer. He is licensed in Alaska and Massachusetts and is qualified to appear before the various International tribunals, including the International Criminal Court (ICC). Residing and practicing primarily in The Hague, he is recognized as an expert in international criminal defence, including pre-trial, trial, and appellate advocacy.

4 thoughts on “Midnight over Dawn: an uncertain future for international norms”

  1. Mr Trump criticizes International treaties as if other countries don’t have interests to defend too. If he tries just one of the things he promises in America’s relations with other countries, he will be the first American President to be denied entry into some western/friendly countries. The world will be waiting to see what he will do with the current involvement of the US in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan immediately after taking office.

  2. I think Trump was more interested in winning the Presidency at all cost and did exploit the anxiety and ignorance of majority Americans to do so. When he settles it would all be business and business only. Only thing is, he may, like was the case of Obama to dance to the tune of the Military Industrial Complex and not go to war when the deem they are not very prepared, or do so when they deem they are, as they now are. As for the fate of international law, I suppose it has been violated more often than not. The plight of the British Cameroons is the shame of international law and the associated scandals of bribery and corruption, even of top UN officials is what makes International law a sham, worth disrespecting, unfortunately so. Otherwise, it beats one’s imagination why signatories to the UN and ICJ Statutes can circumvent ICJ ruling and get away with it causing such mayhem such as Boko Haram and such unkempt diplomatic policy measures such as multi-track diplomacy, which invariably, in its implementation continue to violate rights of known and unknown persons, with or with them knowing….. Bottom-line, should President Trump violate international law or shorn it, the international community is to blame for making it appear sovereign states are more important than the international community and norms that govern it. The apathy that runs in the execution of International Law is alarming and Trump would not be the first, nor the last.

  3. The good thing about being friends is that we can agree to disagree. For some, Hillary Clinton represented much of what was bad about American and the the people that lead it. Time will tell where Trump fits in.

  4. CNN had a blurb on its page that it was a “cliff hanger”; perhaps it may have been. With that said, having flipped the tabs (web pages) back and forth between “California Dreaming” by The Mamas & the Papas, and “Stayin’ Alive” by the Bee Gees. Thinking if the songs can just soothe one’s soul. Yes, the leaves are and will be brown falling of limbs as it will be cold dark winters for, what it seems, four years to come without reprieve of seasonal norm (referring to spring and summer). All one can do is try to ‘Stay Alive’.

    Thanks,

    West,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *