By the time this weekly column is published, the results of the March 1 “Super Tuesday” primaries will be known.

　　　　　Heading into these contests, which could largely decide the nominees for both parties, the American press appeared to be intensely focused on how Donald Trump could be stopped. The Washington Post, which staunchly supports the Democratic Party, sent a strongly worded message to the Republican Party through its editorials on February 24 and 25, stating that “…history will not look kindly on GOP leaders who fail to do everything in their power to prevent a bullying demagogue from becoming their standard-bearer.”

　　　　　The next day, the Post carried an article by Robert Kagan, its contributing columnist and a senior fellow of the Brookings Institution, asserting: “Let’s be clear: Trump is no fluke…He is, rather, (the GOP’S) creation, its Frankenstein monster, brought to life by the party, fed by the party and now made strong enough to destroy its maker.”

　　　　　Judging that no one, except the voters, will be able to stop Trump from becoming the GOP presidential nominee, the daily has apparently taken this unusual step to directly appeal to people to “understand the menace he represents.”

　　　　　Meanwhile, The New York Times couldn’t hide its glee in its coverage of the February 25 debate in which Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio launched their first full-fledged attacks on Trump. It sounded as though a great load had been lifted from the minds of the editorial staff, finally freed to go after Trump.

　　　　　In one exchange, Rubio was quoted as saying: “My mom was a maid at a hotel, and instead of hiring an American like her, you’ve brought over thousands of people from all over the world to fill those jobs instead.”

　　　　　Rubio’s remarks were a criticism of Trump having benefited from cheap foreign labor in many of his hugely lucrative businesses.

　　　　　The Times further quoted Rubio as casting Trump as a huckster who outsourced the manufacturing of the clothing that bears his name to countries like Mexico and China, even as he promised to wage a trade war against those nations. When Trump tried to protest, Rubio interrupted right back: “Make them in America!”

Abnormal Political Sentiments

　　　　　Trump retorted, “But you wouldn’t know anything about (our businesses) because you are a lousy businessman.” Rubio countered: “Well, I don’t know anything about bankrupting four companies.”

　　　　　During the eighth Republican debate held in Iowa early last month, Rubio was severely criticized by New Jersey Governor Chris Christie for repeating himself, causing his support rate to, at least in the short term, drop markedly. Hinting at that incident, Trump chided Rubio: “I watched him repeat himself five times four weeks ago,” to which Rubio wittily retorted: “I just watched you repeat yourself five times five seconds ago…”

　　　　　The above highlights the fierce words exchanged between Rubio and Trump during the Houston debate as reported by the Times, obviously reflecting the eagerness of the daily to see Rubio as the GOP nominee.

　　　　　Meanwhile, another article in the Washington Post by Professor Daniel Allen, a political theorist at Harvard University, was filled with a sense of sadness about the present state of the nomination processes of both parties. Stating that he believes Hillary Clinton will win the Democratic nomination and that he intends to vote for her, Allen said “but it is also the case that she is a candidate with significant weaknesses,” as her party knows “very well,” expressing concern that the results of “a head-to-head contest between Clinton and Trump would be unpredictable.”

　　　　　Therefore, Allen emphasized, the responsibility to stop Trump falls on the Republican Party, not on the Democratic Party. In this vein, Allen highly lauds Jeb Bush for dropping out of the nomination race early, and urges the remaining candidates to pull back as soon as possible in order to rally behind Rubio. Simultaneously, Allen urges Rubio to “rescind your pledge to support your party’s nominee if it is Trump.”

　　　　　However one looks at it, American politics—whether reflecting the views of average voters or those of intellectuals who contribute to the editorial pages of the major dailies—has fallen into a period of unprecedented chaos. An unsettling political sentiment is taking root in the US as Donald Trump, a businessman notorious for his bigotry and xenophobia, steadfastly refuses to discuss specific policies while resorting to abusive language and accusations that politicians with some degree of common sense would naturally refrain from. He thinks nothing of making enemies, and fuels hate and animosity. A wide range of analysis has sprung up about the “Trump phenomenon.”

　　　　　How has Trump come to the fore? I believe the view that the Republican Party must primarily be held accountable is correct. It is true that the GOP has failed to come to grips with the grievances of the relatively low-income working class. Also, the party took Trump lightly, letting him do as he pleased until very recently.

　　　　　However, a much more crucial cause of the Trump phenomenon can be traced to the politics of Obama’s two terms in office. It was quite unexpected that New York Times columnist Ross Douthat would write (on February 27) that behind this reality is “an escalating celebrity component, a cultish side that’s grown ever-more-conspicuous with time.” Some quarters feel Obama’s expansion of “executive authority in almost every dimension, while ignoring Congress,” has led to the growing support of the Trump way of doing things.

　　　　　Viewed from Japan, or anywhere in the world outside the US for that matter, one cannot help wondering why none of the presidential candidates from either party has taken up the threat from China and Russia as a crucial topic for debate.

Unresolved Wars

　　　　　Russia’s bombings in Syria have already created nearly 5 million refugees. Refugee problems with no solutions in sight have led to a proliferation of jingoism in the US as well as Europe. Influenced by ultraconservatism, public opinion is becoming extremely inward-looking.

　　　　　The curious thing is that leading Democratic and Republican presidential candidates, including Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, are all against the TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership). Mario Rubino is the lone exception. Don’t they realize that the TPP will constitute the basic foundation of the 21st century international community? It will not affect only US interests. Why do they fail to recognize the TPP as one of the most realistic bases of a long-term strategy for peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region, countering the threat from China?

　　　　　Against such a backdrop, the Wall Street Journal in its February 25 edition carried another editorial entitled “America’s New Libyan War,” highlighting the decisive failures of Obama’s foreign policy and calling on the President to learn from the bitter lessons of prematurely declaring victory and going home from the Middle East and Afghanistan.

　　　　　By the end of 2011, Obama managed to pull US forces out of Iraq, but is now forced to send back several thousand troops. Although Obama had hoped to complete a total pullout of American troops by the end of 2016, he has been forced to abandon the plan in light of the rapidly expanding forces of the Islamic State. And now, Obama has won permission from the Italian government for armed US drones to carry out operations against the Islamic State in Lybia.

　　　　　Obama understandably does not like to see wide press coverage of these issues. Due to his bungling policies, the “wars” in these countries in the Middle East and Africa will inevitably be left for the next president to resolve.

　　　　　To just imagine that such tasks may be entrusted to Trump makes one cringe with anxiety. As for how all of this affects Japan, we must assume we will be facing an increasingly chaotic situation internationally and prepare as rapidly as possible for any contingency.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column no. 695 in the March 10, 2016 issue of The Weekly Shincho)