Whoever takes White House

By Choi Sung-jin

The much-troubled, controversial U.S. presidential election is finally over now. Would that it was so, but it is not.

Ballots have been cast, but final results will come days, or weeks, from now. If the loser ― most likely the incumbent president if the opinion polls were correct ― refuses to concede defeat, the consequent partisan conflicts and national turmoil could last for months.

Is this America as we have known it?

The latest event was the most significant presidential poll in nearly a century, a historic election as many political scientists agreed. The selection of a U.S. leader has always been the focus of global attention because of the country's unquestionable influence on the rest of the world. The 2020 election was far more so, as the White House's current occupant has no parallels or precedents in many ways ― in bad ways mostly.

Donald Trump's America has made it clear that it will no longer play the global police. Nor should it, if the Trump administration's dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic and other global crises, such as climate change, is any indicator.

There is no shortage of reasons Trump should not be the U.S. president for another four years. I am not talking about his pressure on South Korea to shoulder more of the cost of stationing American troops. That may be a relatively minor issue in a global context.

It may look somewhat awkward for a foreigner to talk too much about another country's election. For South Koreans, however, the U.S. president is not just a foreign leader, not least because America can start a disastrous war on this peninsula without even informing Seoul of its plan in advance or with only very short notice. Washington reportedly attempted to do so at least twice ― in 1994 and 2017 ― according to U.S. reports. In 1950, even a U.S. secretary of state made a decision that changed the fates of Koreans.

Anyway, I believe it's time for Trump to leave the White House for the good of all global citizens, probably except for white supremacists and some foreign dictators. Above all, the 45th U.S. president has too many character flaws. Some of the virtues required of a leader include honesty, integrity, modesty and empathic ability. President Trump seems to have none of these. A leader should create and unite, but Trump destroys and splits. Trump's denial of climate change and his decision to leave the Paris Agreement threaten to destroy not only America but the entire planet. Likewise, his fondness and praise of autocrats while estranging democratic leaders breaks up international unity at a time when various global problems direly need concerted actions of the international community.

His racist policies, ignorance of LGBT rights and making Americans the biggest victims of the coronavirus by neglecting science are all bad enough. Personally, however, I think most glaring of all is Trump's ripping away of refugees' and illegal immigrants' children, including toddlers, from their parents for months on end. The number of such children once reached 30,000, resulting in some deaths and their parents' suicides. Reports say about 600 children are still in detention camps. This is not just cruel but inhumane, resulting in trauma that will stay with them throughout their lives.

If elected, Joe Biden will likely have to spend his first year restoring the U.S. back to its previous self both internally and externally. On the external front, he will make America rejoin the Paris Agreement and the World Health Organization and normalize relations with allies and enhance NATO. Biden will also revive the scrapped nuclear deal with Iran. However, Biden and his Democratic Party are likely to inherit Trump's policy to keep resurgent China in check, especially in technology and human rights issues, although Washington will cooperate with Beijing on global issues of common concern, such as addressing climate change.

For South Korean leaders, including President Moon Jae-in, Biden's election will be a mixed blessing diplomatically.

In his contribution to Yonhap News Agency days ahead of the election, Biden made it clear that he would go a different way from Trump in managing the existing bilateral alliance. Biden said he would strengthen the relationship with South Korea, rather than “extorting Seoul with reckless threats to remove our troops,” referring to Trump's demand to raise South Korea's cost-sharing drastically.

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un must have wished for Trump's victory so that they can keep exchanging love letters. Biden said he is also willing to meet Kim but attached an unmistakable string ― Pyongyang should first show noticeable improvement in denuclearizing efforts.

Some right-wing media outlets here commented that the South Korean public cheered Biden because of his prioritizing of the alliance, while President Moon and his party, who put inter-Korean thaw ahead of all else, rooted for Trump.

If past experiences are any guide, however, that may prove to a shortsighted and narrow-minded observation. Yes, Trump praised Kim but gave little, if any, of any substance, and vice versa. Their camaraderie, especially on the part of Trump, was nothing more than a theatrical performance or a show for a home audience. Biden's bottom-up approach could lead to more substantive progress, given the former vice president under Obama said he would not follow his former boss' “strategic patience” policy of doing nothing. If Biden takes up where another of his Democratic predecessors, Bill Clinton, left off by any chance, Seoul will have to be ready to take the driver's seat in the three-way process.

Trump or Biden, there can be little difference in what South Korea should do ― break open and enhance ties with North Korea first and use it as leverage in moving the U.S., too. Decades of past experiences showed the opposite way does not work.

Choi Sung-jin (choisj1955@naver.com) is a Korea Times columnist.