Sticking to his guns

Mr Trump promises bipartisanship, but his speech was divisive

United States President Donald Trump’s annual State of the Union address to both houses of the US Congress was billed by the Republican administration as an exercise in bipartisanship. That is what, presumably, is necessary at a time when once again the US has to deal with a House of Representatives that is controlled by one party and a White House that is controlled by another. But that is not at all how things turned out. While Mr Trump did gesture towards bipartisanship at times, most of his speech was focused on energising his base, and he showed no sign of abandoning his hard line on several issues — particularly immigration. He spoke of an “urgent national crisis” at the US border with Mexico, demanding funds to build the border wall that has already this year shut down the government for over a month. 

He also made it clear that in his view, “legislation” could not co-exist with “investigation” — that, in other words, House Democrats should not examine his record, his ties with Russia, or other problematic aspects of his 2016 campaign. The only moments of genuine bipartisan applause were when he committed to eliminating HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, in 10 years, and when he mentioned criminal justice reform that became law in December with support from both Democrats and Republicans. The record number of women legislators — all female Democrats in Congress dressed in suffragette white for the speech — was also another shared applause line. 

Mr Trump praised the strength of the US economy, and warned that only “war and investigation” could derail it. While he is wrong about those two — and his unmistakable desire to get out of Afghanistan as soon as possible will vastly imperil the security of South Asia and the world — it is certainly true that the economic recovery is fragile and a divided Washington will struggle to keep the revival going.  Infrastructure building, for example, which both parties agree is necessary, might be impossible to put into place given the sharp divisions in polity. Another aspect of his speech with economic implications was his continuing tough line on China. “The theft of American jobs and wealth has come to an end,” said Mr Trump, underlining his economic nationalist approach. Mr Trump also asked for more tariff-setting authority for the White House — but, although the Democrats have traditionally been less of a free-trade party than the Republicans, it is not sure that the House majority will be willing to cede more power to a Trump White House. Indeed, bipartisan legislation has been introduced last week to limit, and not expand, the president's powers to prosecute a trade war. 

For the world and for India, the implications of a divided Washington are worrying. An inward-looking US will continue to see its role in the world diminish. Those areas of bipartisanship that remain are likely to be net negative for India — such as the possibility that the US will strike a bad deal with the Taliban and exit precipitately from Afghanistan.