By Atanu Biswas
Even before he took office for the second term, Donald Trump openly and frequently mused about annexing Greenland, a Danish-controlled self-governing protectorate. He even suggested that the US annex Greenland by force if needed.
Its impact on Greenland’s March elections was intriguing. Elections were won by a centrist party that favours gradual independence from Denmark, which many voters appeared to think would best position Greenland to resist Trump. Jens-Frederik Nielsen, the party leader, has publicly and frequently attacked the US president, claiming that he poses “a threat” to their “political independence”.
With Canada’s vote in April, a similar Trump effect was observed. The US president was clearly a deciding factor in the just-concluded Canadian election too. Trump advocated for Canada’s annexation as the 51st state of the US before taking office this year. In fact, Trump has seriously hurt the Canadian ego by enforcing high tariffs, referring to Canada as the 51st American state on multiple occasions, and referring to Justin Trudeau, the then-Prime Minister of Canada, as “Governor Trudeau”. In effect, this has inflamed and strengthened Canadian nationalism. While Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre and his party suffered for their inability to disassociate themselves from Trump’s shadow, incumbent PM Mark Carney was able to successfully position himself (and his Liberal Party) as the defender of Canadian nationalism and as being anti-Trump, capable of facing down the powerful Don across the southern border. Poilievre was characterised as a Trump ally and a Trump-like figure amid a strong nationalist sentiment among voters.
Given Trump’s recent attacks, Greenland and Canada might be two obvious cases of the “Trump effect” in global elections. Key international polls, however, show political movements fuelled by the US president’s rhetoric and tariffs. And the just-concluded Australian election did the same. Inflation and other factors made the Australian Labour government and PM Anthony Albanese unpopular. The opposition, conservative Liberal-National Coalition or Coalition, was ahead of the Australian Labour Party in the opinion polls in December. However, the opposition leader Peter Dutton was unable to distance himself from Trump-like policies and rhetoric and the incumbent Labour Party led by Albanese rode an anti-Trump wave to clinch a smashing victory.
The Trump-effect turbulence even hit places with a long history of quiet elections. Singapore held national elections on May 3, the same date as the Australian election. The People’s Action Party, which has ruled Singapore for 66 years and was poised to win again, earned another overwhelming victory in the country’s general elections. Amid worries about global volatility due to sweeping US tariffs, voters chose stability.
The ability to preserve commercial interests and the security connection with Washington may play a significant role in the Philippines’ mid-term elections in May as well. The June presidential election in South Korea, which is being held to replace former President Yoon Suk Yeol, is likewise anticipated to be impacted by the Trump effect. However, the left-leaning Lee Jae-myung has also risen to the top of the South Korean presidential race because of Trump’s tariff attacks, which he is especially enraged about. Trump and his tariffs are also expected to play an important role in Japan’s Upper House elections this summer.
A Sydney Morning Herald piece dated May 4 by Matthew Knott argued that although anti-incumbent sentiment and conservative populism were on the increase globally going into this year, the elections in Canada and Australia signal a “revival of social democratic politics”, perhaps reviving centre-left alliances. Voters chose stability, both geopolitical and economic, and the Conservatives’ adoption of Make America Great Again (MAGA)-style ideas was viewed as a “booby trap”. Dutton was never a Trump clone, but he fell for the trap of MAGA-style politics, as was perceived by Knott.
Voters’ concerns about President Trump’s role have replaced the anti-incumbency trend, as seen in a series of international elections. Does this imply that Trump and Trumpism have lost so much support around the world that anti-Trump rhetoric, in the midst of Trump’s trade war and other policies, has become essential to winning elections abroad as well?
Not really. Maybe there is no way to generalise either. For instance, in the German election held in February, the far-right party AfD achieved its best-ever performance. Additionally, Romanians recently cast ballots that helped George Simion, an ultra-nationalist Trump admirer, win the first round of the presidential elections.
In addition to calling for the “Melonistan” of Europe (a reference to Italy’s far-right Prime Minister), Simion has harshly denounced the European Union’s (EU leadership, opposed military aid to Ukraine, and called himself a “natural ally” of Trump. He has stated that he wants to form an EU alliance “in the spirit of MAGA”. Calin Georgescu, a far-right, anti-EU, Moscow-friendly leader, won Romania’s first ballot last November. After declassified intelligence documents exposed a purported Russian influence operation in Georgescu’s favour, the constitutional court cancelled the vote, and Georgescu was also not allowed to compete in the rerun. The public’s outrage over the cancellation and Georgescu’s disbarment undoubtedly helped Simion.
So, what’s the take? The electorates’ mentality and, of course, the campaign’s ability to inspire them will determine whether Trumpism and supporting Trump can result in political triumph or disaster in a country this time around. There is no easy way to predict whether supporting (or opposing) Trump will result in an election victory. One thing is certain, though: thanks to his tariffs and other decisive policies, Trump now has a far greater influence on elections than one might perceive that a US president might have in many other countries across the world. The Trump effect is undeniably real and significant, albeit the fact that it may go either way.
The writer is professor of Statistics, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata.
Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal and do not reflect the official position or policy of FinancialExpress.com. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.