The inauguration speech delivered in Washington on Tuesday by Donald Trump as 47th president of the United States, ushering in his second presidency, seemed to fall in line perfectly with his persona: hard on details when he wants to be, and leaving plenty of space for manoeuvre.
Almost gloating in triumph, Trump’s speech eviscerated the departing Democratic administration, calling it “radical and corrupt” as a stone-faced outgoing president Joe Biden and vice-president and former presidential contender Kamala Harris sat behind the president in their seats of honour inside the rotunda of the US Capitol where the inauguration was held because of the freezing temperatures.
In his 30-minute speech, which sounded more like a radical work plan than those conventionally delivered at presidential inaugurations, Trump declared that the “deep state” in America had “now been defeated,” painting the picture of what was essentially a failed state incapable of dealing with even “simple crises” such as combatting fires, providing basic services such as healthcare, or managing the economy.
He detailed the steps that would be undertaken on the day of his inauguration, and for which later that evening he signed the needed executive orders.
These included declaring a national emergency at the US southern border and halting all illegal entry through the use of armed troops. Trump said that inflation and prices would be brought down and that more oil would be drilled, making America not only a self-sufficient producer of oil, but also a major exporter.
The Green New Deal for environmental protection would be revoked, and the US once again would start manufacturing automobiles, he said.
The list was long and detailed and included bringing back the spirit of combat rather than “radical theories and social experiments” to the armed forces. Most arresting of all was what almost sounded like a heart-felt wish for Trump – making the world remember him as a man of peace.
“My proudest legacy” he declared “will be that of a peacemaker and unifier. That’s what I want to be – a peacemaker and unifier.”
The only moment at which there appeared to be a semblance of continuity between the new Trump administration and the outgoing Biden administration was when Trump proudly touted the ceasefire deal in Gaza between Hamas and Israel, saying that it had been attained one day before the inauguration.
This was also the only time Biden and Harris stood up to applaud a deal in which their administration had been involved as its final foreign policy act. Nevertheless, Trump gave himself full credit for the deal, on the premise that it was only attained after he had threatened that “all hell would break out in the Middle East” if a deal was not reached prior to his inauguration.
Trump said he wanted to be remembered not only as a peacemaker, but also as a unifier, and he evoked the great American civil rights leader Martin Luther King, whose commemoration day was on the same day as Trump’s inauguration.
Trump comes to the presidency in a strong position, with the hindsight of previous experience and some of the wealthiest individuals ever to serve in a US administration. The judiciary is also largely under his control.
However, his time in office takes place at a time when US society is existentially divided and where the half of the population that did not elect him, which are for the greater part often educated, left wing, and progressive, regard his programme as a threat to America’s core values. The other half of the population that did elect him, often working class and conservative, see his electoral win and his programme as a vindication of what they perceive to be their country’s fundamental values.
In the global arena, there is much trepidation regarding how Trump will deal with the current world order, with Europe bracing itself for the challenges that Trump’s policies could pose in the areas of trade, defence (specifically the war in Ukraine), and international commitments such as those related to the climate and energy.
In other parts of the world, there is the expectation that leeway will always be afforded for the business minded, with deal-making being part of the overtures Trump makes to Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping, whom Trump invited to his inauguration but was represented by Vice-President Han Zheng.
For Trump, opening up countries to US trade and investment continues to be a fundamental aim, a consideration which for him supersedes politics and ideology. Even on the question of Iran, where he is expected to be hawkish and work towards dismantling its nuclear programme, he has in effect repeatedly declared that he will not involve American troops in a war on any party’s behalf. The inference is that this will also apply to Israel in its confrontations with Iran.
A further question is whether Trump, despite his rhetorical belligerence against Iran, will be willing to accept the outbreak of an armed confrontation between Israel and Iran, in view of his repeated promises over the past year to “bring peace to the Middle East” as president.
The Biden administration was unequivocally pro-Israel, with Biden himself visiting Israel in the wake of the 7 October attacks by Hamas and declaring himself a “staunch Zionist.”
Trump has also repeatedly expressed his support for Israel, and all of his picks for key foreign policy positions in his administration are either Zionist or staunchly pro-Israel.
However, in view of his promise of peace in the Middle East, it is not known which course this pragmatically minded president might adopt in what continues to be the intractable Arab-Israeli conflict.
If he were to promise to enable Israel to expand into more Palestinian territory, namely the West Bank, this would be a major impediment to any normalisation deal between Israel and Saudi Arabia, which remains for Israel the jewel in the crown as it would seal a non-threatening, to Israel, new Middle East.
Saudi Arabia has been steadfast in tying any potential normalisation deal with Israel to the latter’s acceptance of a two-state solution with the Palestinians. Another fundamental player in the region is Egypt, whose 50-year peace treaty with Israel remains a cornerstone of US geopolitical interests in what it sees as a volatile region.
The ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas is important to Trump, with Egypt demanding the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Philadelphi Corridor on its border with Gaza and Israel making this contingent on the release of all its hostages detained by Hamas.
It remains to be seen how Trump will balance these interests, particularly given the US history of unequivocal support for Israel.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 23 January, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: