Special Edition: Manifest Destiny 2.0 (January 20, 2025)

The peaceful transfer of power in America is always something to be applauded. This one, though, felt a bit hollow. In part it was because it didn’t happen four years ago, and as has been pointed out by others, what makes the transfer impressive is when the loser participates and embraces it. As, for example, Richard Nixon and Al Gore both did following elections they could reasonably have claimed to have won. It doesn’t take a lot to embrace democracy when you are the winner.

A second reason the day felt off despite the impressive pageantry were the eleventh-hour pardons issued by President Biden. It began nearly two months ago with Hunter Biden and came today to include anyone who could potentially be targeted by the new administration, including those Trump considers to be political enemies and members of the Biden family. I understand why Biden thought it necessary to issue such pardons, but it is depressing all the same that he thought it so and might have been right. I am equally depressed at this wholesale use of the pardon power for the precedent it reinforces, as I expect it will be employed by Trump and others to justify any January 6 pardons. I understand the prerogative is protected by the Constitution, but there is something about it that belongs more in a monarchy than in a democratic republic.

The third and most important reason today felt hollow was the inaugural address itself. I am well aware the Biden administration got a lot wrong, including but not limited to the border, inflation, wokeness, Afghanistan, and the Middle East. That after all helps explain why Trump won the election. But the speech was graceless. Would it have been too much for Trump to acknowledge the tireless efforts of Biden and his administration to bring about the release of the Israeli hostages? Or the Biden administration’s commitment to a peaceful and seamless transfer of power? And there was no need for an inaugural address meant to bring the country together after a close election to so denigrate the state of the country and the efforts of the outgoing administration. The last I checked the economy is growing at close to three percent and is the envy of the world, inflation is down, and employment is up. The United States is already the largest oil producer in the world. If that is evidence of American decline, we should all hope for more of it.

All that said, I want to focus on where foreign policy was mentioned and ignored in the inaugural address. There was little emphasis on the world at a time there is a major land war in Europe, conflict in the Middle East, and growing instability in the Indo-Pacific. The 47^th president declared his ambition to be a peacemaker and to measure success most of all “by the wars we never get into.” Fair enough. But what kind of peacemaker? We want a wary peacemaker, not one who will agree to peace at too high a price, be it with Russia over Ukraine or China over Taiwan.

While the omissions were notable, what Trump chose to include was even more worrisome. In particular, he spoke of manifest destiny, the Gulf of America, and issued a direct threat to take back the Panama Canal. And then there was the shoutout to the twenty-fifth president, William McKinley, someone whose tenure was defined by tariffs, the Spanish-American War, and American imperialism.

Add it up – the absence of specific reference to the country’s very real enemies, lack of support for its allies, unconditional commitment to be a peacemaker, and the focus on the Western Hemisphere — and you could be forgiven for thinking that the new president is attracted to spheres of influence. The idea (the subject of a write-up this week in the Wall Street Journal) is that major powers enjoy special rights and privileges in their own regions: the United States in this hemisphere…but also Russia in Europe? China in Asia? It would bring about an alternative order in which might makes right, where sovereignty offers no protection. It would be a world of more conflict, more nuclear weapons in more hands as countries lose faith in this country’s commitments, and less prosperity and freedom. I am not predicting this future, but I am increasingly worried about it, certainly more than I was before this speech.

---

Check out The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens