As part of our series on the US presidential election, Paperjam asked Jean Asselborn to share his views based on his experience of this major global political event.
“It’s the most important election of the year, much more important than the last European elections,” says Jean Asselborn, speaking as an observer with no political bias. “This election, even if it is American voters who are casting their ballots, is not just about the United States. The repercussions will be worldwide and will obviously also affect the European Union.” And while he is aware that foreign policy issues will not be decisive in voters’ choice, “the subject remains primordial.” “Imagine an American president--and Trump was well on the way to doing so--who would abandon Nato, who would abandon Ukraine and who would not try to find diplomatic solutions in the Middle East. This cannot be to the planet’s advantage.”
For Asselborn, nobody in Europe, “apart from Hungary and perhaps Slovakia,” wants Trump to come back. “What we want in Europe, and we need to say this to the Americans, is a civilised president who is capable of solving the world’s problems rationally. There are enough criminals in power around the world. We don’t need an American president who is too.”
The election of Barack Obama: a relief
When asked what he remembers most about the US presidential elections, he answers without hesitation the election of Barack Obama in 2008. Obama won the election against Republican John McCain, succeeding George W. Bush, who had held the office since 2001. “When the result was announced, several of us breathed easier,” he confides. He admits that he also felt relief when Joe Biden was elected four years ago.
His worst memory as foreign affairs minister is less the election of Donald Trump in 2016 “with three million fewer votes than his opponent, Hillary Clinton” than the four years that followed. “As someone who has lived through four years of the Trump presidency, I can tell you that he couldn’t care less about multilateralism and international cooperation. He has always preached hard-line patriotism. And we in Europe know where that can lead…”
The day of 6 January 2021 and the storming of the US Capitol by Trump supporters seeking to challenge the results of the November 2020 election while Congress was meeting to complete the electoral process also left a strong impression on Asselborn. Travelling abroad, he watched the event on television. “Clearly, Trump was the instigator of this unrest. He was the one who pushed people into violent action. It was a very strong, irrational moment. And even though it ended well, there were still five deaths, and above all, people were attacking the Constitution. An example that could well inspire others in the future.”
A close election
An example that could even be repeated. And that worries the former diplomat. “Trump has said it over and over again: if he loses, it will be because the election was rigged. To say such things is to destroy democracy. Imagine the greatest democracy on the planet having a candidate who says that... It’s extremely dangerous. Joe Biden said he didn’t think it would go very well... I hope he’s wrong and that Kamala Harris’ advantage will be clear, obvious to voters and in court.” But even if the results are clear and uncontested, Asselborn doesn’t expect Trump to concede defeat. “But like most Europeans, I’m still hopeful that Kamala Harris will win the election. I think there are some extremely intelligent people in cultural, economic and sporting circles who will help to ensure that we don’t give another chance to a guy who has destroyed so much and acted like a criminal. A criminal must not become president of the United States.”
Asselborn is expecting a close election, with the two candidates each fluctuating between 47% and 49% of voting intentions. For him, everything will come down to the swing states--the pivotal states as they are called on this side of the Atlantic--and Pennsylvania in particular. These are states in which neither of the two major American parties consistently wins. In the electoral system, with the exception of Nebraska and Maine, the winner takes all the electors who will be responsible for choosing the president. Having the most number of popular votes is no guarantee of having a majority of these electors. Al Gore in 2000 and Hillary Clinton in 2016 had bitter experience of this.
This article was originally published in .