liberation day

Liberation Day

In an insightful SMH opinion piece (4/4/25) Waleed Ali, asserts that commentary on the Trump Tariffs, has yielded insufficient attention to the name Trump chose for the day – “Liberation”.  Drawing on the “globalisation trilemma” identified by Harvard economist Dani Rodrik, he argues the day is about much more than economics, it is about Trump’s vision for US sovereignty. He goes on to say the world has failed to properly combine sovereignty, democracy and globalisation. In various ways two have been combined but never three.

Clearly Trump is abandoning globalisation, notwithstanding Americans under Reagan were largely responsible for its ubiquitousness.  It looks as if he may also wish to abandon democracy or at least shape it in his own image.

Whilst grateful to Waleed for his insights, I wish to argue that for the sake of the civilised world every effort must be made to combine all three, indeed, to say that if this goal is abandoned the future for life on the planet is bleak.

Globalisation

There is far more to globalisation than economics, although free trade is a very important part of it. Following two disastrous world wars it was considered necessary to enact a new world order. First the League of Nations and then the United Nations was born. Associated with this body are its organisations focussing on law, health, environment, humanitarian relief etc.  To secure its founding, veto in the body that has teeth, the Security Council, was granted to China, Russia, France, the US and the UK. As a result, appropriate and necessary international intervention does not occur. Israel with the backing of the US, refuses to accept any external jurisdiction, worse, does everything in its power to belittle and demean such authority.  Countries such as Australia simply turn a blind eye.

The problems global humanity face need global cooperation and submission to global order.  The covid pandemic from which the world is still struggling to economically emerge is a good example.  In the face of a global pandemic there must be cooperation, the sharing of expertise, including the sharing of vaccines. The climate crisis the world now faces is beyond the wit of any nation to face on its own. There must be global commitment to prevent irreversible tipping points, supposing there is still time. We know what the problem is.  We know what needs to be done. We lack willingness. A false sense of national sovereignty always gets in the way.

Humanity has always been on the move. However, there has never been a time when human movement has happened on such a monumental scale, driven by poverty, violence, natural disaster, or desire for a better way of life.  There must be global agreement and cooperation in the provision of aid and shelter, but also in addressing the issues causing the movement.  Putting the scythe through USaid is a very clear statement of hand washing on behalf of the US.
Trump is clearly of the view that acquiescing to any international agreement is an afront to US sovereignty. Paul Keating has claimed that Trump’s tariff declarations have ended NATO. The claim makes no sense based on the tariffs alone but makes perfect sense in that Trump’s version of sovereignty leaves no room for obligation to others. He is bizarrely of the view that the US is the global centre around which everyone and everything revolves.

Sovereignty

Of course, sovereignty, dignity and identity of every nation state must be defended. It should be the obligation of nations to come to the aid of those denied this right, in the present circumstance Ukraine and Palestine.

 Australia has every right, indeed obligation, to protect biodiversity, act against the introduction of harmful diseases and exotic species, make its own media regulations, and protect its commitment to accessible pharmaceuticals. More broadly we have the right to set migration targets.

However, it is equally true we are one of nearly 200 sovereign states who share this planet. We do not have the right to engage in activity that adversely affects other nations, equally we share responsibility to mitigate the threats and challenges we all share. Sovereignty can never be absolute, to behave as if it is, as Trump appears to be doing, is to fall into pariah statehood.  Is this what ‘being great again’ looks like?
​
Democracy

It is essential that government is chosen by the people.

But here is the rub. Democracy elected Trump.  Democracy voted in favour of Brexit.  The latter is almost universally acknowledged as a disaster for the British, and Trump looks certain to be a disaster for the very people who elected him.

People will always vote for what looks like security - i.e. sovereignty in its various forms.  That is why politicians love conflict, real or manufactured, to channel their perceived superior leadership. Nationalistic movements are always driven by false views of sovereignty.

People will also always vote in protection of their hip pocket.

The difficulty is that information provided upon which an appropriate vote can be cast is weighted to suit the binary leaning of one side or the other.  Truth is never binary.  Truth is always a combination, or balance, of factors some of which may seem incompatible. In modern democracies the need of each party to be in power takes precedence over the creation of good policy. Either side of our political duopoly present ‘this’ but never ‘that’. To have us vote for them, parties tell us what they want us to hear, not what we need to hear.

We do not need more parties. The proliferation occurring in Australia is a mistake.   But we do need more independents. In the last parliament some of the very best ideas have come from independents. Hopefully any future government will neither govern in its own right, nor establish a cosy partnership with another needy party, but will be forced to govern in negotiation with a growing number of independents.

Globalisation, Sovereignty and Democracy

It is unthinkable the world becomes a planet of sovereign states who have no obligation to work together for common good.

It is also unthinkable that peoples be denied sovereignty, as is currently the case for Ukrainians and Palestinians.
​
And it is unthinkable that democracy should continue to weaken or even fail, a is the contemporary trend, leaving the world to be governed by self-appointed dictators and or plutocrats.

 Will those capable of leading the world into a future which combines global cooperation, national sovereignty, and democracy, please stand up.