| This is Bloomberg Opinion Today, the non-aligned movement of Bloomberg Opinion's opinions. On Sundays, we look at the major themes of the week past and how they will define the week ahead. Sign up for the daily newsletter here. One of my favorite sea creatures is the pistol shrimp. It's a small crustacean with one really big claw — about half the length of its body — that can slam so forcefully it shoots out superheated bubbles (nearly the temperature of the sun!!!) at interstate highway speeds, creating a snapping sound louder than a gunshot. So loud that it can stun prey. So loud that it can interfere with a warship's sonar. So loud, in fact, that I've heard them through the hull of a boat lolling in the Fijian archipelago. Watch one in slo-mo here. Cool, right? But the brave pistol shrimp has one major problem: It's virtually blind, and thence at the mercy of predators. Enter the Mighty Goby! OK, the goby fish isn't exactly mighty, but at a few inches in length it's big enough to protect the little shrimp, and all it wants in return is A TOTALLY EXTORTIONATE SECURITY RELATIONSHIP! You see, as the brave little shrimp burrows into the sea floor, the goby swoops in and appropriates the yummy goodies that accumulate atop the lair, slips inside the hole for comfort, and even lays eggs down there for safety — while maybe dropping a few crumbs down to the hungry crustacean. Scientists call this mutualistic symbiosis, because both creatures benefit. But let's face it, it's a protection racket, pure and simple.  An offer he can't refuse. Source: Public domain Which brings us to Volodymyr Zelenskiy (he's the valiant pistol shrimp, obviously) and Donald Trump (he's, well, Donald Trump, obviously). The US president summoned Ukraine's Zelenskiy to Washington on Friday to pay protection money in the form of hundreds of billions of dollars worth of critical minerals. (My skeptical colleague Javier Blas doesn't think all that glitters is molybdenum.) Then things sunk quickly. The two presidents got in an Oval Office tussle, Vice President JD Vance turned into a thresher shark in feeding frenzy, and:  "The winner of this clash, as in all of Trump's catastrophic missteps of the last month, is Putin," writes Andreas Kluth. "If the West had stayed united in backing Kyiv, Russia would not have been in a strong position when peace negotiations started. Its economy is in dire straits, and victory on the battlefield remains elusive. But with Trump essentially defecting from the West and siding with Moscow, Putin has an opening. Gone is any notion that America still stands for the the sovereignty of nations such as Ukraine, for international rules and norms, for the right of victims of aggression to defend themselves." [1] Zelenskiy wasn't the only European leader to have a rough visit with the leader of the not-quite-as-free-as-it-used-to-be-world. "Trump spent much of the week trying to get other, smaller gobies to guard the burrow while he raked in the yummies. "When it comes to European security, Trump is swapping talk therapy for shock therapy," Hal Brands writes. "After years of US leaders asking nicely, or not-so-nicely, for higher military spending, he is now aiming to force the allies to take responsibility for the continent's defense. At the same time, he is seeking a de-risked relationship with Putin as a way of reducing violent instability in Eastern Europe, shifting focus to Asia and, perhaps, weakening a dangerous Russia-China alignment. If that requires blessing a Russian sphere of influence in the former Soviet Union, so be it."  And one by one, they seem to be swimming into line. Consider the president of the species gobius gallicus, Emmanuel Macron, who "arrived at the White House with the obvious aim of preventing any final rupture with Europe's long-time ally and protector," writes Marc Champion. "He knows the continent isn't yet ready to protect itself, let alone Ukraine, without a US backstop. So, he pulled his punches and his UN veto, trying instead to stroke Donald Trump's vanity. The bromance approach, after all, had some success during the US President's previous term. But this is Trump 2.0. He intends a revolution at home and abroad, and has full control of the levers of power." Next supplicant: UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer. "Thus far, the British PM has been cautious, leery of contradicting or criticizing Trump over threatened tariffs that would kick the ladder away from his attempts to rebuild the UK economy, or over the president's move to cut both Ukraine and Europe out of a peace deal with Russia. Even when he rejected Trump's allegation that Volodymyr Zelenskiy is a dictator, he was careful not to frame his words as directed at the US," wrote Rosa Prince on the eve of Starmer's trip to the US. "To achieve what he wants and protect Britain's interests on the world stage, the mild-mannered lawyer has to learn how to be a tough guy." How'd the Labour leader do? After the meeting, Rosa said it was evident that Trump was charmed by Starmer's "beautiful accent" and the hand-delivered letter from King Charles III. But Starmer found visiting Washington to be expensive, very expensive. In the form of a pledge to raise defense spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027, and 3% by some unspecified point in the 2030s. "After President Donald Trump's angry rhetoric about North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies freeloading on defense, Starmer realized he couldn't visit the White House empty handed on Thursday," writes Martin Ivens. "Starmer has no choice but to play nice and play for time. He must flatter Trump that he's won a victory by forcing Europeans to stump up more for their own defense. The UK and Europe must aim to build up their armed forces and firepower — in case this American president, or another, pulls the plug on NATO." Starmer's party might not like the fact that he is going to pay for a bigger military by slashing foreign aid, but Britain's defense industry is all for it. Look what has happened to BAE Systems since Vance's blistering speech at the Munich Security Conference: "Some describe the US volte-face on European security as a betrayal," writes John Authers. "Others as exactly the boot up the backside that Europe needs to get its act together. So far, the market seems to prefer the latter." The biggest of the little gobies is trying to rally resistance. "That aura of German indecision and inaction is starting to change," writes Lionel Laurent. "Almost 40 years on, thanks to a new incoming coalition in Berlin under center-right leader Friedrich Merz. His calls for deeper European integration in defense are getting more strident as US President Donald Trump threatens to throw his allies under the bus over Ukraine three years after Russia's invasion. 'America First' is doing what Vladimir Putin alone couldn't: Helping lay the groundwork of a new Franco-German grand bargain." But Germany's 75-year-history of military apathy, and the nation's strict "debt brake" on budget deficits, make that grand bargain unlikely. "Long an ardent transatlanticist, Merz now says Europe must become 'independent' from the US and that 'the fate of Europe matters very little to certain Americans,' as he explained on Sunday immediately after his win," writes Chris Bryant. He's right to worry about the US's shifting priorities and betrayal of Ukraine, but Germany's defense budget difficulties are of its own making, not Donald Trump's." And let's face it, Germany can beef up its military all it wants, but it will learn the lesson of the pistol shrimp: No matter how big your gun, the bully always wins. Bonus Weird Fishes Reading: What's the World Got in Store? - Trump addresses Congress; March 4: — Mike Johnson's Shrinking Power Is No Accident — Nia-Malika Henderson
- Mexico and Canada tariffs begin; March 4: The Mastermind of Tariffs Already Gave Us a Preview — Jonathan Levin
- China National People's Congress, March 5: DeepSeek and Ne Zha 2 Are Bringing Back What Xi Ignored — Shuli Ren
Trump's not the only bully in the sea: China has been busy, too. Last week it sent three warships to the international waters near Australia and New Zealand and conducted live-fire drills, causing some commercial airlines to divert flights. "Smaller countries are understandably worried, so what should they do when superpowers run amok? History has some valuable lessons," suggests Karishma Vaswani. For one thing, Karishma says, they could call out the great powers acting badly: "The tiny city-state of Singapore offers a good example. Defense Minister Ng Eng Hen spoke to some of these concerns earlier this month when he called the US out for 'now willy-nilly' changing from 'liberator to great disruptor to a landlord seeking rent.' These are unusually harsh words from a country that has typically adopted a hedging approach, balancing its relations with both Washington and Beijing. Singapore will no doubt still have to do that, but should have a renewed focus on consistently advocating for a liberal international system." The rest of the neighborhood may be losing its nerve, however. Case in point is Vietnam, the latest victim of the doge of DOGE, Elon Musk. The southeast Asian nation will let Musk's Starlink provide satellite internet and maintain full ownership of subsidiaries — an abrupt reversal of the local rules. "The move exposes a new reality: Musk's proximity to the US president, known for his transactional approach to foreign policy, is impacting how countries are writing regulations — and in ways that stand to further enrich the billionaire," writes Katherine Thorbecke. "Vietnam's change of heart reveals how this new era of techno-imperialism is quietly reshaping policy in developing countries." Perhaps, as Karishma suggests, the developing world could unite. "There's safety in numbers. The Non-Aligned Movement was a product of the Cold War, designed as a way for countries to remain independent or neutral, so that they didn't have to forge an alliance with either the US or the Soviet Union," she adds. "The alternative is that every country just does what it wants, and the world becomes a more dangerous place." And in dangerous places, protection rackets thrive. Notes: Please send shrimp cocktail and feedback to Tobin Harshaw at tharshaw@bloomberg.net. |
No comments:
Post a Comment