How will President Trump respond to his defeats?

President Donald Trump may have learnt a few things from the elections that took place this week in New York City and in the States of New Jersey and Virginia. I say this, albeit with some doubt, from personal experience. I have worked closely with several dictators and other absolutists, and I noticed that they always find a justification for their defeats, when they are not outright claiming victories. They continue along the same autocratic line, while making a few electoral adjustments and finding a few scapegoats, both internal and external enemies. The blame is attributed to these enemies, who are more or less invented and fiercely demonised. The regime's propaganda is then always intensified. I have never seen an authoritarian leader leave office of their own accord or take responsibility for an electoral defeat.

Trump must have noted the reasons for these defeats – or someone in his inner circle will have risked the politically suicidal courage to point it out to him.

Firstly, the cost of living and the voters' economic situation continue to be important electoral arguments. New York is one of the world's most expensive cities. It ranks first when it comes to the cost of rental housing. And the price of essential goods, when compared to the average salary of its inhabitants, is proportionally one of the highest on the planet. New Jersey and Virginia have excessive rates and taxes, unaffordable energy and healthcare systems, and a lack of jobs. The economy is, in democracies, a very strong electoral argument.

Secondly, pragmatism attracts votes. People are starting to tire of the inter-party intolerance, which is fuelled daily by extremists in the USA, with Trump at the forefront. Moderation and realism in the face of day-to-day problems have great electoral advantages. It is a lesson that may be valid in other parts of the world where voting is free, in Portugal or as happened last week in the Netherlands. The citizens of our democracies are starting to be fed up with shouting, exaggerations, and idiotic extremism. They want proposals for solutions that address their fundamental worries and difficulties. They also do not want a media that amplifies verbal radicalism and boorish behaviour.

Thirdly, opposition to the instability, inhumanity, and poor and dangerous governance of Trump is growing. In last week's CNN/SSRS poll, the president's approval rating had fallen to 37%. He continues to be unconditionally supported by a significant fringe of Republicans, but the trend among Independents is in continuous decline. It is also noted that a portion of the Democrats who voted for him a year ago are now regretful.

Trump may be considered a poor governor and a prominent member among the autocratic leaders who are in charge of various countries, but I am sure he knows what all of them know: the essential thing is not to lose power. To achieve this, these people create fictions and false narratives, especially those that can most instil fear, destabilise the electorate, and stimulate hatred against segments of society that can be accused of being outsiders and having different behaviours.

He tried to do this with the winner of the election for New York City mayorship, Zohran Mamdani. This candidate, who ended up defeating not only Trump but also the usual Democratic Party elites, met all the conditions to be an easy political target: Muslim by religion, democratic socialist by conviction, and the son of immigrant parents of Afro-Indostanic origin. He won and showed that religion or immigrant status are not arguments that weigh heavily in an advanced democratic society. Sadiq Khan, the Labour mayor of London, had already demonstrated this when he was elected in 2016. In 2018, Khan was considered by Time magazine one of the 100 most influential people on the planet. I do not see any Portuguese politician on the Time lists.

In the next 12 months, before the federal Congressional mid-term elections, Trump will try to sabotage the governance of Mamdani and the two now-elected governors. He will do the same against all Democrats leading other states and cities. This is how the falsified narrative of the opponents' incompetence is constructed. He will also continue the deployment of National Guard military personnel to Democrat-majority cities, to establish in the public opinion the idea that the Democratic opposition is synonymous with social chaos and an inability to fight crime.

At the international level, he will seek to demonstrate a firm, warrior-like hand against Venezuela, Colombia, and Nigeria, among others.¹ He will not show firmness against Russia or China. Trump's style is one of subordination before the strong and brute force against the weaker. He knows he should not attack strong powers. But the others can easily be defeated, some under the pretext of fighting organised crime that traffics drugs to the USA, others under the invented alibi of defending Christian practitioners. In both cases, we have here matters that can mobilise voters and paint a noble and determined portrait of Trump. In the politics of make-believe, image often counts far more than the truth.

After these defeats, Trump will play hard and dirty, accentuating his authoritarianism. Will Americans and Europeans have the courage to raise their voices and say no, enough is enough?

P.S. Note: This the AI translation of my op-ed of today 7/11/2025 published in Lisbon in the daily "Diário de Notícias"

https://www.dn.pt/opiniao/como-ir-responder-o-presidente-trump-s-suas-derrotas

The future of China's global influence

In the race for dominance, China believes they have time on their side. They know they have the population numbers and that their economy will become as powerful as the American in about twenty years or so. They also count of their centralised and therefore more coherent approach to foreign relations. They think that political changes, party hesitations and the plurality of interests play against the US and its influence in the world. All in all, the Chinese have a more optimistic view of their future influence in the world.

I would agree but for one thing. The Chinese leaders will have to keep an authoritarian control over their population. And that might not be possible in the future. They will insist on Chinese pride and nationalistic views as much as they will try to keep improving the living standards. Is that going to be enough? I am in two minds. I see it as possible, particularly with the generalised use of digital control systems and a strong emphasis on nationalistic propaganda. But I am also convinced that the new generations might be much keener on freedom of opinion and less inclined to accept the authority of the Communist Party than their parents or grandparents.

If one wants to challenge the global influence of the Chinese leaders one must invest in keeping the country’s youth informed about what is going on in those countries where democracy is a central value.

Power and dominance

In responding to a friend that lives in China, I said I am also genuinely concerned regarding the growing tension between his country and the US. We do not believe there will be, in the foreseeable future, an armed confrontation between these two powers. We both know that today's wars are fought in diverse ways, but no longer through the classical approach of bullets and boots on the battlefields. Big countries make use of other means to disrupt and weaken the adversaries. The armies are for smaller fights and to show off. We live in a more civilian world, and we fight with a variety of tools that are available in a multidimensional toolbox. Such means can be very destructive as well, with a wide impact on a number of the things, including on the livelihoods of many people.

And this time the conflict is not about ideology, like during the Cold War, but about what each side sees as its vital national interest. In addition, history has taught us that the dominant power perceives the emerging power as a major menace. That is the trigger. And all this makes the confrontation move way up to a more dangerous level, more multifaceted and certainly far more complex to mediate. Moreover, it brings in other countries that have no choice but end up by being forced to take sides. They will also be dramatically affected by the dispute.

In such a dangerous context, my view is that we should keep talking about international norms and cooperation, as well as about clairvoyant leadership. In all truth, the leadership thing is the key issue. It can bring us back to a more reasonable world or take us to the abyss.

Leadership and perceptions

Leadership is about empathy with the ordinary person on the street. The leader must be perceived as a caring and committed individual.

The delicate EU approach towards Russia

We quite often forget that politics is about the control of power. Consequently, we also lose sight of a very fundamental question: what is, in each given situation, the key source of power?

Political leaders know they must pay special attention to this question.  And that the answer is found in the domestic arena, not in the field of international affairs. Power is based on the way domestic politics are played. The domestic voter must be persuaded. The effective political narrative takes that into account.

Vladimir Putin knows it. And we should keep it in mind when dealing with him. That is my message to President Macron, to the politicians in Italy and all those in the EU who are now advocating a new type of dialogue with President Putin.

Russia’s relations with the EU will always be a mix of tension and commerce. The Russian leaders want to keep a certain level of friction. They will picture the EU as a devilish power, a rival that wants to create chaos in Russia. They must create an external menace, the EU, as a way of justifying their strong hold on power. Therefore, they bet on old feelings about Germany – and more recently, on a new wave of negative feelings about Poland. All this helps them to fuel Russian nationalism, as well as gain voters’ support. It gives them an excuse for a strong hand against their internal opponents, presented as foreign agents, and a justification to spend an extraordinary amount of resources on the Russian Armed Forces and on the internal security structures. In exchange, the Armed Forces and the different Police organisations become key pillars of Putin’s power edifice.

But President Putin cannot ignore the economy. It must turn and generate enough resources, including those resources required to sustain a certain standard of living for the population. That means he needs to maintain open the access to the EU markets. Particularly, for Russia’s gas and oil exports, on one side, and, on the other, to import food and other goods and services from Europe. The Russian dependency on European markets, as suppliers and buyers, cannot be ignored.

The EU relationship with Russia must take such equation present. It’s a combination of power and economic factors. Interests, yes, but not about shared values, or common political objectives. As such, it would be naïve to think we can have a healthy cooperation with Russia, now and in the medium term. It will continue to be a question of balance between conflict and opportunity.

Our present-day Don Quixote's

The world is becoming like a huge maze. There are too many paths, too many dramatic events. It is much easier to get lost at present. And many people do. They do not try to understand the logic design of the maze. They just keep moving around, they take their option as the solution. What an easy way to get confused and get mentally prepared to fight the windmills that Don Quixote could not defeat. The only difference is that the real Don Quixote had a pure and generous heart. That’s not longer the case with the politicians that play the same role today.

Deception and intent

We should always remember the wise aphorism about politics. It goes like this: in politics everything could mean the opposite of what it is said or done. Our job is to try to find out what is behind the words or the deeds. Like asking, what is the point? Sharp minds do that.

About power

I told those listening to my lecture that in today’s world we cannot give a simple answer to complex social and political issues. And I mentioned the power issue, as the most striking example. It is no longer possible to associate power with just the control of the State or the banking system, as some were inclined to do. The sources of power are varied. For instance, Greta Thunberg, the young climate activist, takes her power from her persistence and peaceful style, the clarity of her cause, and the support she gradually got from other young pupils and students across Europe and beyond. She is at present, in many ways, a powerful figure, an agenda setter that all the big people want to meet and take a picture with. It is however more than that. Her message is positively influencing the global agenda and making a difference.

Political power, in a democratic and advanced society, is the result of a struggle between different views, interests and dreams. It is a balanced outcome

Stay on message

There is no problem if one keeps repeating the same message because most people are not listening, even when they pretend to. The only advice is to repeat it clearly and gracefully.

China and the waters

Global geostrategic changes go very fast these days, thanks to the Chinese leadership.

Look at this, for instance.

Back in 2010 – just yesterday, one could say – the Chinese corporations had invested in about 10 of the 50 largest deep-water ports of the world. Now, in 2019, Chinese money is invested in over 30 of those ports. In addition, the Chinese merchant marine is currently the world’s second largest.

Becoming a great maritime power might be a Chinese dream, in the leaders’ minds and political agenda. It is also a major strategic move, to be added to other ambitious, huge initiatives China is implementing, at sea and over land. The overall goal is to be number one by 2049, the centennial year of their revolution. That’s the way the Chinese leadership, and above all, President Xi, see the world of tomorrow: China as the pivot, the centre of the international order.

Politics equals manipulation

In the end, politics is about the manipulation of impetuous passion for the sake of power and control. It is a tough act and not a very transparent or clean one.

Davos 2019: power and planes

Davos 2019 is now underway.

Davos is the annual high mass on globalization and power. This year’s headline is about the absence of key political leaders. The big names – Trump, Xi, Putin, Modi, Merkel, Macron, May – are not attending. They have more pressing matters to address at their respective home fronts. Even second line political leaders are not many this time. Bad omen for the organisers: Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil is the star at the opening.

Almost 50 years down the line, since the first meeting, the World Economic Forum is at risk of becoming no more than a networking venue for major corporate leaders, friendly NGOs heads, and plenty of star media people. Also, one high-visibility opportunity for the elites that love to be seen attending seminars and participating in panel discussions on global themes. Boring as such talks can be, and abstract, so many times, they pretend to identify the key challenges of the day and come up with new solutions. That sounds great and visionary.

But it is not just the question of the elitist image, of powerful people deeply disconnected from the realities of the ordinary citizen meeting on the rocks of Davos. It’s also that nowadays there are many competing initiatives, dozens of conferences in many places that debate the same issues and come to similar conclusions.

Maybe the only true difference is related to private planes. In Davos this year, they expect around 1,500 of them. That’s the ultimate symbol of power. The private plane.

Late thoughts

In democratic politics, success is about votes. The more you get the more successful you are. There is no other measure as it is very difficult to assess the theoretical merit of ideas and political proposals. Therefore, if you get involved in politics you should aim at getting as much support as possible. There is no other way out.

I might disagree with your approaches to public matters. But you get more votes than I, I have to accept that you are in charge. Being in charge does not mean however that you are right. It means you have been able to bring on board, to your side, a good number of people. And that is the basis of political legitimacy. And it gives you the authority to be in charge. 

About political action

In politics, style matters. Today´s politics call for people that look serious, modest and concerned with real problems as they are faced by the people. Rhetoric is now about sounding sincere and clear, nothing else. 

The origin of power...

I spent some time yesterday afternoon visiting a small village in Central Portugal, not far from Pombal but in the municipality of Ansião. It is located about 185 km North of Lisbon and its name is Santiago da Guarda.

 In the middle of the village, there is part of an ancient Roman villa, very well preserved and worth the visit. The dwelling was a large one, around 1,300 square metres. Its size, the design and the quality of the tile floorings show clearly this house was then built for a very powerful family. And that´s particularly intriguing, as Santiago da Guarda is on a mountain in a region that could only be of interest, 16 or 17 centuries ago, for rearing small ruminants.

It is a fact we know little about the basis of political and economic power at the time. We know a bit more about today´s power basis, don´t we?