Is JD Vance the real America Firster?

Donald Trump's Veep pick has a foreign policy vision that centers on economic nationalism and protecting American workers

The recent assassination attempt on Donald Trump has sent shockwaves through the global community, eliciting an unexpected wave of relief at his survival. Allies and adversaries alike have taken a collective breath, temporarily uniting in the face of this brazen act. Trump's close encounter with mortality has prompted a dramatic pivot in his own rhetoric. Trading his typically combative tones for a newfound message of unity, Trump has vowed to heal the nation's divides and perhaps extend an olive branch to the world.

But don’t cue the Kumbaya chorus just yet. While Trump’s revised script calls for harmony, the GOP’s messaging is already showing signs of strain. Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance, Trump’s vice-presidential pick, wasted no time in pointing fingers at the Biden campaign, blaming their rhetoric for inciting the attack.

Globally, Vance won’t be leading us in a revival of “We are the World.” If anything, putting Vance on the ticket signals Trump’s commitment to the America First doctrine that defined his first term. Like Trump, Vance shares a deep skepticism of international alliances and a preference for nationalist, protectionist policies. Vance's rise from a troubled Rust Belt upbringing to a Silicon Valley success story resonates with Trump's base, further solidifying their support.

The MAGA base lauded the pick as a necessary recalibration of American priorities, focusing on national interests over global entanglements. Critics argue that the Trump-Vance ticket represents a pivot away from decades of bipartisan support for international alliances and democratic values, a fear echoed in several conversations with diplomats.

Vance is in the mold of another Ohio Senator, Robert Taft. In 1940, as Hitler's forces swept through Europe, Taft channeled surging isolationist sentiment in America, arguing vehemently against aiding Britain and insisting that resources should be reserved for American needs. This "America First" mentality, which seemed to die with the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, has experienced a modern revival under Trump's leadership. Vance’s national conservatism, rooted in his working-class background, sharply contrasts with the internationalist conservatism of the old Republican Party. This new wave of conservatism emphasizes economic nationalism, a reduced role for the U.S. on the global stage, and a focus on domestic issues. Vance's transformation from a critic of Trump to a fervent supporter underscores this ideological shift within the GOP.

Both leaders have voiced strong opposition to military aid for Ukraine, with Trump suggesting that NATO obligations should be conditional on financial contributions from member states. Vance echoes these sentiments, arguing that American intervention abroad detracts from pressing domestic issues. This perspective has found increasing favor among Republican voters, with a recent Chicago Council on Global Affairs poll revealing that 53% of Republicans now prefer the U.S. to stay out of world affairs.

Unlike Trump's transactional approach, Vance is a true ideologue with a coherent philosophy rooted in economic nationalism. His foreign policy vision centers on protecting American workers and strengthening the nation's competitiveness, especially against China. He believes that America's post-war foreign policy has stretched the nation too thin, undermining its industrial base and harming the American working class.

Vance argues that the current foreign policy paradigm, which prioritizes global alliances and interventions, has led to the outsourcing of American jobs and the weakening of the country's manufacturing sector. He sees a direct connection between the decline of American industry and the economic struggles of the Rust Belt, a region he knows intimately. His best-selling memoir, "Hillbilly Elegy," chronicles the economic and social decline of his hometown and serves as a backdrop for his policy positions.

Vance's economic nationalism calls for a reorientation of American foreign policy to prioritize domestic manufacturing and reduce dependency on foreign goods. He supports broad-based tariffs, especially on Chinese imports, to protect American industries from unfair competition. In a May CBS interview, Vance argued that tariffs are necessary to penalize the use of slave labor in China and to encourage domestic production in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan.

"The main thrust of the postwar American order of globalization has involved relying more and more on cheaper labor," Vance told New York Times’ Ross Douthat (I highly recommend reading this entire interview). "The trade issue and the immigration issue are two sides of the same coin: The trade issue is cheaper labor overseas; the immigration issue is cheaper labor at home." This perspective reflects a deep skepticism of free trade agreements and immigration policies that Vance believes have put downward pressure on wages and eroded the American middle class.

Vance's isolationist instincts also extend to U.S. alliances and international commitments. He has called for Europe to take greater responsibility for its own defense, criticizing countries like Germany for failing to meet their NATO obligations. "For three years, the Europeans have told us that Vladimir Putin is an existential threat to Europe. And for three years, they have failed to respond as if that were actually true," Vance said on the Senate floor.

Vance considers China the primary geopolitical threat to the United States and has advocated for a pivot to Asia, arguing that the U.S. should prioritize its resources to counter China's growing influence. "We do not have the industrial capacity to support a war in Ukraine, a war in Israel, and potentially a war in East Asia if the Chinese invade Taiwan. America has to pick and choose," Vance stated in a Fox interview. He has repeatedly emphasized that China's industrial might poses a long-term threat to American security. "China is a more powerful country industrially than we are, which means they will have a more powerful military in 20 years," Vance told the New York Times. He argues that rebuilding America's industrial base is essential to maintaining its military superiority and ensuring national security.

He envisions a more self-reliant America, less entangled in global conflicts and more focused on its own interests. This includes a pragmatic approach to diplomacy, where the U.S. engages with adversaries like Russia based on strategic interests rather than moral judgments. "The most important lesson of World War II, that we seem to have forgotten, is that military power is downstream of industrial power," Vance emphasized. "We need allies to step up in big ways so that we can focus on East Asia, which is where our most significant competitor is for the next 20 or 30 years."

Vance's staunch support for Israel and his call for the U.S. to prioritize its own defense manufacturing capabilities over foreign entanglements underscore his nationalist approach. "Our goal in the Middle East should be to allow the Israelis to get to some good place with the Saudi Arabians and other Gulf Arab states," Vance said in an interview on CNN's "State of the Union." "There is no way that we can do that unless the Israelis finish the job with Hamas."

One cannot help but marvel at Vance's connection between Christian nationalism and his unwavering support for Israel. Vance, who declares with a straight face that Americans' passion for Israel is inexorably tied to our status as the largest Christian-majority nation, elucidates this connection with the fervor of a Sunday preacher and the precision of a seasoned diplomat. "Our Savior," Vance, a Catholic, proclaimed in a speech at the Quincy Institute, "was born, died, and resurrected in that narrow strip of territory on the Mediterranean," making it clear that any notion of an American foreign policy indifferent to this fact is, in his words, "preposterous."

This curious blend of religious conviction and geopolitical strategy is not merely a quirk of Vance's rhetoric but a cornerstone of the burgeoning NatCon (National Conservative) movement. These modern crusaders envision themselves as the righteous heirs to the Roman Christians who navigated the empire through the chaos of the Dark Ages, with today’s “establishment Republicans” playing the role of the decrepit imperial Rome, and the “woke left” cast as the marauding Visigoths. Vance’s lamentation extends to a broader critique of U.S. foreign policy, questioning whether the nation, as the world's largest Christian-majority country, has reaped the moral harvest it was promised.

In his vision, the rise of a new isolationist and protectionist outlook among the right-wing is not an American anomaly but part of a global shift. Far-right parties across Europe, draped in the mantles of Christian nationalism or conservative nationalism, similarly challenge the post-World War II order and express skepticism about international engagements, such as arming Ukraine. This growing tide, evidenced by polling gains, signals a tectonic shift in the political landscape, where Vance and his NatCon compatriots position themselves as the harbingers of a new, perhaps darker, age.

In an era where history seems to be repeating itself, the echoes of "America First" resonate louder than ever. The failed assassination on Trump and the continued tortured poetry over Biden’s age and mental fitness might position the 2024 election as a referendum on strength and vigor. But a Trump-Vance administration, in which Vance is the GOP heir apparent, will also be an indictment on the future of America's place in the world for years to come.