Another Violent Election?

View this email in your browser 

Insights, analysis and must reads from CNN's Fareed Zakaria and the Global Public Square team, compiled by Global Briefing editor Chris Good

Seeing this newsletter as a forward? Sign up here.

September 13, 2024

Another Violent Election?

America was warned.

In 2020, as then-President Donald Trump sowed doubt about US elections—notably, questioning the validity of mail-in ballots—some wondered if he would accept a loss. Fareed observed in late September 2020 that Trump might lose the election, refuse to admit it, and try to stay in the White House anyway. The violence of Jan. 6, 2021 was predicted, too, although not so widely. For instance, writing in the centrist publication The American Interest, Stephen John Stedman and Thomas Westphal warned in June 2020: "[E]ven when evidence and consensus points to a clear loss at the polls, an incumbent may refuse to accept the verdict and urge followers to resist forcefully." All of the forms of political violence they acknowledged as possible during or after the 2020 vote "result in broken lives and begin a cycle of violence that will be difficult to de-escalate," Stedman and Westphal wrote.

So, what will happen this time?

The Economist insists the US will see power transferred, but the magazine also warns of danger. If Trump wins in November, Democrats could mount legal challenges. (That's a normal post-election development, usually undertaken by both major parties after various state and federal contests. But it usually does not reach the scale of 2020's myriad claims by Trump supporters of outright fraud.) Defeated Democrats could also follow Republicans' January 2021 precedent and attempt to block certification of the presidential result. But Harris will likely concede if she loses, the magazine suspects.

"If Ms Harris wins," The Economist writes, by contrast, "Mr Trump will not be so gracious. In that … scenario, the complexity of America's voting system collides with the MAGA conspiracy machine. … As a legal strategy this would probably fail again, as it did in 2020. … Yet a new 'stop the steal' movement could fail legally while succeeding politically. In the last election a shocking number of House Republicans voted to reject the result. Since then the party has only become more beholden to Mr Trump. Members either sincerely believe the other side wins only when it steals elections, or go along with that idea in public. … One possible consequence of this myth is political violence. The Capitol will be so well policed in January 2025 that there will be no repeat of the riots on January 6th. But local police, the Secret Service and the FBI will have to prepare for protesters descending on statehouses, and for the risk of assassination attempts against lawmakers."

A solid margin of victory for either candidate would probably minimize the risk. But, as The Economist notes, that's not how this election is shaping up. Polls indicate a near-even race both in key swing states and nationally.

Harassment and threats have taken their toll on election workers. At Foreign Policy in June, Bruce Hoffman and Jacob Ware cited militant threats on both the right and left. At Axios this month, Zachary Basu, Erin Doherty, and Sophia Cai wrote that five factors are producing a "perfect storm of election chaos" this year: Trump's wild claims about election integrity, a close race, lawsuits already filed by the Republican National Committee, the violent recent history of 2021, and a "cesspool of disinformation."

Michel in the Middle

France's political crisis reached something like a conclusion this month, as President Emmanuel Macron appointed as prime minister Michel Barnier, a 73-year-old former Brexit negotiator and veteran of the center-right Les Républicains party. (In France's hybrid presidential–parliamentary system, the president enjoys much power, but a government still must be formed under a prime minister as in other parliamentary democracies.)

Not everyone was happy about it. In a July snap election, a left-leaning coalition won the most legislative seats, finishing ahead of Macron's centrists and Marine Le Pen's far-right National Rally (RN). The irascible leftist leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon called Barnier's appointment a theft of the election.

At GZero Media, Ian Bremmer predicts the far-right Le Pen will enjoy significant power in France's still-fragile legislative politics. At the Wilson Center, William Drozdiak writes: "Despite his party's weakened status, Barnier was chosen to serve as prime minister largely because he is considered one of the few political dealmakers in France capable of negotiating the painful compromises that will be necessary to govern. … But Barnier said he has no illusions about the struggle he faces in building an effective majority among such fiercely antagonistic factions. 'We are in a grave moment,' Barnier said just before taking office. He promised to listen to and respect 'all political forces' and avoid the kind of arrogance that has plagued Macron's top-down presidency."

Whatever comes next, it won't be easy, Andrew Hussey writes for The New Statesman: "Many ordinary French people are simply bitter and cynical, and have been for a long time." Barnier is of neither the left, nor Macron's centrists, nor Le Pen's far right. In a political cartoon in Le Parisien, Hussey notes, a wife tells her husband: "So that means we'll never know who really won the election."

Humanity's Scourges Return

The detection of polio in war-ravaged Gaza has worried global public-health officials. But on last Sunday's GPS, Fareed explored a broader problem: the return or rise of other diseases, like dengue and mpox.

The world may still be experiencing pandemic fatigue after Covid-19 strained our collective capacity for disease prevention, but Fareed detailed why it's important to maintain efforts.

Gaza's Diplomatic Ripples?

Even allies disagree about the war in Gaza. In a Foreign Policy op-ed, Francesca Emanuele of the DC-based Center for Economic and Policy Research argues that war will cause subtle diplomatic ripples as far away as Latin America.

Emanuele writes: "Colombia, for example—among the most outspoken critics of Israel in Latin America—has suspended its weapons purchases from and halted coal exports to the country, which previously accounted for more than 50 percent of Israel's annual coal supply. Yet despite this strong regional stance, the Washington, D.C.-based Organization of American States (OAS)—the primary forum for multilateral dialogue in the Western Hemisphere—has not echoed these sentiments. This divergence will further erode the OAS's legitimacy in the region and may drive countries to other deliberative bodies where the United States holds less influence."

China Next Time

Tension between the US and China remains, in many ways, one of the biggest stories in world politics. But as Americans prepare to vote in November, we haven't heard much on the topic, Nikkei Asia's Pak Yiu and Ken Moriyasu write. Managing US–China ties "appears to be a neglected issue in the election or framed narrowly as Beijing's economic threat, despite the two countries having one of the world's most consequential relationship," they observe.

At Bloomberg Opinion, Hal Brands writes that President Joe Biden's China policies earn mixed grades. The Biden administration has done an "outstanding" job of strengthening US alliances in the face of China' rise. Missing are clear strategies for China's military buildup, Asian trade broadly, and China's cooperation with fellow autocracies. The next president, whoever it is, will be left with questions to answer, Brands writes.

As Jake Werner writes in The Nation, Republicans and Democrats share a confrontational stance toward China. As far as trade is concerned, a Foreign Affairs essay by Niccolò W. Bonifai, Nita Rudra, Rodney Ludema, and J. Bradford Jensen argues that tariffs—implemented by Trump, kept and tweaked by Biden, and promised by Trump to be raised further if he wins office again—are counterproductive. The US is no longer losing manufacturing jobs to China, the Foreign Affairs authors write, and tariffs aren't creating new American jobs. Rather, they argue that lower tariffs would boost US employment, because US firms could buy intermediate components more cheaply. "The United States, in other words, is fighting the last trade war," they write.