Trump Wades into Issues of Sovereignty
Dr. Vijay Sakhuja
President Donald Trump formal speeches, posts on social digital platforms (Truth Social account) and interactions with the media provide a reasonably good preview of the future trajectory of US’ foreign and security policy, impacts on global trade and businesses, issues concerning technology sovereignty, energy, climate change, global health issues, just to name a few. These articulations by the US President have triggered a mixed bag of comments / observations by global leaders, domestic political establishments, policy makers, industry, academia, and many other constituencies that are impacted by the US’ new policies.
President Donald Trump’s second presidency has chosen to focus on “Make America Great Again” or “America First” claiming that “America will reclaim its rightful place as the greatest” as the “most powerful, most respected nation” and “ inspiring the awe and admiration of the entire world,” These assertions have impacted US’ relations with countries across the globe, big or small.
While it is quite normal for States to react and respond i.e. “tit for tat” to trade and tariff issues, ironically, Trump has waded into three highly emotional issues of national sovereignty. First, Canada with whom there has been a reprisal response. Early this month in February, President Trump once again counseled Canada to be the “Cherished 51st State” of the United States given that it pays “hundreds of billions of dollars to SUBSIDIZE Canada,” and that “without this massive subsidy, Canada ceases to exist as a viable Country.” President Trump has imposed 25 percent Tax on Canadian goods and 10 percent on energy. And as quid pro quo, Canada too announced similar actions with same percent tariffs on $30 billion worth US goods coming into Canada with effect from 4 February.
Personal differences between President Trump and Prime Minister Trudeau came to the fore soon after 5 November 2024 victory in the elections. Trump made an offer to include Canada as the 51st state of the United States. Since then Trump has been making overtures through tweets to bring the country in his fold and even derided Prime Minister Trudeau and offered to make him the “Governor of the Great State of Canada”. There were warnings too that if Canada did not take stringent measures to prevent illicit drug flows and illegal migrants into the US, he would impose 25 percent tariffs on Canadian imports which have now been put into force.
Second, Trump has sent Greenlanders into panic by announcing that the US must purchase Greenland from Denmark for reasons of security, not only that of the US but also the whole world. He even questioned Denmark’s “legal rights” to the Arctic Island and for that reason “they should give it up because we need it for national security.” It is not surprising that the Greenlanders are offended and not hesitated to rebuke Trump for his bizarre thinking. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has replied angrily that “Greenland is for the Greenlandic people” and not for sale.
Third, President Trump has picked out Panama and warned the country for not abiding by Article 5 of the bilateral treaty concerning the canal i.e. “after the termination of the Panama Canal Treaty, only the Republic of Panama shall operate the Canal and maintain military forces, defense sites and military installations within its national territory.” This is, according to President Trump, a national security issue. Also. Panama is violating the “spirit of our treaty” because US merchant ships as well as the Navy are being unfairly overcharged.
Panama government has ordered a security audit of CK Hutchison Holdings, a Chinese company which is currently conducting the operations at two ports on either side of the canal. President Trump has reiterated his concern and has escalated it into a legal and diplomatic issue and vowed to “take back” the Panama Canal through “powerful” US action. Panama President Jose Raul Mulino has noted that any “legal conclusions” concerning the matter can be addressed after the security audit is completed putting to rest fears of “risk that the US would use military force to retake the canal”.
It is fair to assume that some counties may find convergences with President Trump’s interests and see opportunities to consolidate their bilateral relations as also accrue political-economic-strategic advantages. Similarly, there will be those counties whose interest are not aligned and feel that they are disadvantaged. The latter countries are retaliating, with similar if not bigger, avenging measures. In essence the choices are driven by convergences-divergences in the national interests of the US and the other country.
The general feeling is that Trump’s policies are coercive and punitive, and therefore skepticism looms large across the globe and many governments and businesses are worried about the assertive approach by President Trump to international relations.
Dr. Vijay Sakhuja is Professor and Head, Center of Excellence for Geopolitics and International Studies (CEGIS), REVA University, Bengaluru and is associated with Kalinga International Foundation, New Delhi.
