Donald Trump's first term gave the world a taste of deliberately disruptive, unwanted involvement in the domestic affairs of other countries, with examples ranging from Britain in the throes of Brexit to North Korea, where the 45th US president attempted a personal make a deal with Kim Jung. On.
However, American technology billionaire Elon Musk has taken this to a whole new level. Musk seems willing to meddle in the affairs of other countries by using his personal influence with specific decision makers, governments and institutions, or by attacking them from the sidelines of social media to reshape them into what he wants them to be. Trump, on the other hand, is more pragmatic and could make a deal with any country, provided it is in line with his 'America first' mission and gives him what he demands.
Over the past six months, many countries have been subjected to Musk's “personal foreign policy” initiatives. Until recently, there were two schools of thought regarding his interest in world politics. Initially, Musk was just “a mischievous antagonist” who simply liked to shock and seemed largely driven by social media.
But that has given way to nervousness in the face of Musk's increasingly deliberate attempts to destabilize governments, including his continued populist support for far-right parties and possibly funding populist allies. This comes as current President Joe Biden warns of the growing power of the ultra-rich in his final address to the nation before he leaves office.
Musk wields enormous global influence, not just because of his wealth, connections and fleet of companies. But probably because he is a self-proclaimed populist, with increasingly far-right political preferences. From January 20, he will also be a key member of the Trump administration.
His political toolbox includes supporting or (more commonly) targeting individual politicians (for example, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, or German Chancellor Olaf Scholz). He also supports populist parties such as Reform UK and AfD in Germany. He criticizes government officials in other countries, judges and broadcasters in places where he does not live.
Musk's political involvement appears to be largely focused on supporting populist individuals, parties and causes, and actively eroding centrist parties in other countries. However, Musk's political interference has expanded recently, with a clear eye on the election results.
Examples of this are countries where the elections are still far away (Canada by attacking Prime Minister Justin Trudeau), or much earlier (Germany), giving him room to criticize the established parties while supporting his chosen opposition party.
Musk's focus has expanded, from attacks on Starmer to support for Italy's Georgia Meloni and Argentina's Javier Milei.
Whose foreign policy?
The concern for those in foreign policy is that Musk has proven effective in the role of Trump's favored disruptor before the inauguration, and may be deployed on behalf of the US government to continue his meddling and destabilization. The challenge then will be to distinguish where Musk's personalized foreign policy ends, and where exactly American foreign policy begins.
Musk is positioning himself as the global defender of free speech, softening the ground for Trump's favored combination of far-right populism and protectionist, tariff-driven trade approaches.
Musk's way of working is to encourage national communities and leaders to “buck the rules,” giving far-right parties and industry leaders a chance to deregulate key sectors.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently announced a massive transformation of the social media giant's content moderation policy in the US. The European Parliament's far-right group Patriots for Europe backed Musk's call for greater media freedom.
Both neatly dovetailed with Musk's approach to the EU and EU regulations as “institutionalized censorship,” paving the way for Trump himself to start a number of rows.
The buffer zones of common sense, including former British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg as (now former) head of policy for Meta, have been left behind. Zuckerberg's thinking now reflects that of companies, regulators and politicians who agree with Trump.
Disruptive and divisive
Musk represents both indirect and direct state interference as a solo global disrupter and as Trump's favorite frontman. Sitting at Trump's right hand and – from January 20 – leading the new US Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) – means it is unclear who is acting, and in whose interests, and crucially: who benefits.
Will countries be less likely to tell Musk and Trump to back off, aware of the risk of an outpouring of anger with very real consequences in terms of trade wars? This is certainly the approach of many, including Marietje Schaake, former European parliamentarian, who states that: “Musk should be seen as a representative of the US president when he gambles against the leadership of key European countries, which are thus far allies.”
Or will countries just as well ignore Musk, assuming that the ramped-up performative bullying inherited from Trump can be largely ignored?
RESPONDING TO INTERFERENCE
While many may shy away, only a few are able to make a difference in global politics, and the EU is an example of this. The European Commission made it clear that it was closely monitoring Musk's recent X-livestream session with Alice Weidel, leader of the German far-right party AfD. This was to decide whether
The European Commission – in its role as enforcer of the European Digital Services Act (DSA) – could impose high fines or blocks. But that will require serious political will, as well as irrefutable evidence proving that X causes risks to the public by increasing unlawful hate speech.
What are the consequences of Musk's rollercoaster ride in global affairs? Deregulation will probably be the order of the day. Maga has long pushed for a “small state/big business” approach and this is likely to continue under Musk's Doge leadership.
Trouble may also lie ahead for those who don't understand Musk's role. The victims here could include future Secretary of State Marco Rubio, along with US foreign policy officials in Washington (and their counterparts around the world), all of whom could be confused by whose agenda is being implemented.
But a slew of angry international allies is a bad start for any new government. Violating “norms of responsible behavior” – no matter how flippantly Musk views them – will ultimately not help Trump himself be effective, but rather only more disruptive.
(Author: Amelia Hadfield, Head of Politics Department, University of Surrey)
(Disclosure Statement: Amelia Hadfield has received funding from Jean Monnet/Erasmus+ and Horizon Europe from the European Commission)
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Our staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)