Trump’s Deterritorialization of Ukraine
Introduction
The return of Donald Trump as US president has triggered global concern, propelling the world towards a state of unrest and anxiety.
Trump’s efforts to redefine the U.S. president’s role in global affairs, along with the impact of his actions and the resulting shifts in the nation’s core principles, will be analyzed through the concepts of territory and deterritorialization as outlined by Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari in their collaborative text, “A Thousand Plateaus.”
Trump’s Deterritorialization of Ukraine
Donald Trump’s influence on the Russia-Ukraine war embodies deterritorialization in its most divisive form. He presents chaos as a replacement for the established order. Trump’s politics are characterised not by totalitarianism, but by an unsettling form of self-destructive behaviour. His policies, often heralded as economic revitalization, overlook long-term consequences.
Trump is a transactional individual who operates with a singular focus on personal gain, prioritizing self-interest over collective well-being. He views every interaction as a means to an end, willing to align with any power — no matter how oppressive — if it serves his agenda. Trump’s mindset has led him to cede to Russia, excusing or even enabling the atrocities in exchange for personal advantage. In doing so, Trump has neglected the needs of an entire nation, dismissing the suffering of Ukraine as self-inflicted and collateral damage. Trump’s loyalty is never to a country, party or people but to his own ambitions, making him complicit in the erosion of democracy and justice.
Trump portrays his promise to end the war as an effort to save lives. Accusing the previous administration and Europe of lacking the skills to open the dialogue and negotiate directly. He portrays himself as a great diplomat who will achieve a long lasting peace by reaching out to Putin. By contradicting NATO members Trump will only succeed in weakening the alliance and emboldening Putin and Russia.
Understanding Territories
A Territory is a collective order crafted from rules and norms. It is the environment within which a group’s core values and practices thrive and are given stability and coherence. A territory gives a sense of belonging and identity, It’s not limited to physical spaces but also encompasses mental, cultural, and social domains. Territories are created by establishing boundaries, rules, and codes, enabling individuals or groups to navigate their existence within a defined framework Our lives are a tapestry of intermeshing territories, some fostering positivity while others nurturing negativity. Territories serve as shields against ever-looming chaos. offering a sense of purpose and belonging amid the uncertainties of life. Despite the comfort and stability that territories provide, we spend our whole lives building, enlarging, escaping and remodeling our territories
Deterritorialization: The Unsettling Process
Deterritorialization is the process of breaking down existing boundaries, structures, and norms that define territories. It involves challenging established hierarchies and destabilising the familiar order. New ideas and frameworks are introduced to replace the comfortable stable symbols and ideas in the process of reterritorialization. There are different forms of deterritorialization.
1. Negative Deterritorialization:
Negative deterritorialization refers to a form of change that aims to maintain the status quo. It involves altering elements within a territory while keeping the overall structure intact. In this process, the existing framework and boundaries remain relatively stable, and the changes introduced may not significantly challenge the fundamental order. Negative deterritorialization may offer the appearance of change while preserving the underlying power dynamics or hierarchies.
2. Relative Deterritorialization:
Relative deterritorialization involves a move to a new territory while still retaining some connections to the previous one. It signifies a transitional phase where elements from the old territory are carried over to the new one. This type of deterritorialization is characterised by a degree of continuity alongside changes. It acknowledges the significance of history and existing structures but introduces shifts that reflect a desire for transformation and adaptation.
3. Absolute Deterritorialization:
Absolute deterritorialization represents a radical departure from the old territory, leading to a new beginning that doesn’t hark back to the previous state. It involves a profound break from established norms, structures, and identities. In this process, elements that defined the previous territory are either discarded or transformed beyond recognition. Absolute deterritorialization often entails the creation of entirely new frameworks, ideas, and practices.
Trump’s appeal lies in his ability to manipulate the perverse desires of the masses. His approach becomes evident at his rallies, where he transforms ordinary political events into vibrant territories of shared beliefs and values. These assemblages enable him to detach his narrative from established norms, reinforcing his chaotic approach.
The Spectacle of Politics
The monotonous grind of daily life often fuels a yearning for change, a disruption that can break the cycle of mundane existence. Trump capitalises on this longing by presenting politics as a spectacle, diverting attention away from substantive issues. This spectacle breeds a distorted sense of change while concealing the destabilising consequences of his actions.
The Dangers of Deterritorialization
The four dangers of deterritorialization — fear, clarity, power, and disgust highlight negative consequences that can arise when established structures and norms are disrupted.
Fear:
When territories break down, individuals or groups might feel anxious about change and losing their established identities and the predictability that comes with them. The uncertainty can lead to apprehension and resistance to change, as the known structures that provided a sense of stability are no longer reliable.
Donald Trump has been known to utilise fear of change as a strategic tool in his political rhetoric and messaging. Here are some ways in which he has employed this approach:
Trump’s slogan “Make America Great Again” appealed to a sense of nostalgia for a perceived better past. By framing the present as a time of decline, he tapped into the fear of change and uncertainties about the future. This approach resonated with people who were uncomfortable with ongoing societal changes.
Trump’s strong stance on immigration, particularly his portrayal of immigrants as potential threats to national security and cultural values, played on fears of demographic and cultural change. This resonated with those who were concerned about the transformation of American society due to immigration.
Clarity:
The process of deterritorialization can promise clarity, wherein new ideas or perspectives seem to offer a better understanding of reality. However, this clarity can be illusory, stemming from oversimplified or reductionist viewpoints. The complexity of the world is often reduced to simplified narratives, which can mask the intricate interplay of factors at play.
Trump’s communication style was characterised by simplicity and directness. He often boiled down complex issues into concise statements, which he claimed offered clarity to the public. This approach resonated with those who found comfort in straightforward messages, even if they lacked nuanced analysis.
Trump’s repeated criticism of the media as disseminators of “fake news” aimed to undermine sources of information that contradicted his narrative. By framing himself as a purveyor of truth and clarity, he seeks to diminish the credibility of opposing viewpoints.
Power:
Deterritorialization has the potential to shift power dynamics, both positively and negatively. While it can challenge existing hierarchies and empower marginalised voices, it can also be co-opted by those seeking to reinforce their power. Deterritorialization can inadvertently enable the emergence of new forms of dominance or control, as those who harness the forces of change may exploit them for personal gain or manipulation.
Trump frequently uses executive orders to bypass Congress and enact policy changes directly. These orders allow him to implement his agenda swiftly without the need for legislative approval. This approach gives him greater control over certain policy areas.
Trump strategically nominated individuals to key positions in his administration, including cabinet members, agency heads, and federal judges. By appointing loyalists or like-minded individuals, he aimed to exert influence over various branches of government and regulatory bodies.
Trump champions individuals who align with his policies and ideologies, regardless of their suitability or sociopathic tendencies. Many officials feel compelled to support his agenda to maintain their political standing.
In many instances, Trump’s efforts to increase his power has sparked debates over the boundaries of executive authority, democratic norms, and the balance of powers between branches of government. Supporters see his actions as decisive leadership, while critics view them as undermining democratic checks and balances.
Disgust:
For Deleuze and Guattari the great disgust is a profound rejection or repulsion towards certain aspects of the world. This feeling of disgust is described as a passionate force that could lead to extreme actions like wanting to “kill and die” or having a “passion for abolition.” It seems to be associated with a rejection of the status quo, a longing for radical change, and a desire to remove or eliminate what is perceived as negative or undesirable.
Trump’s approach to trade, including imposing tariffs on goods from various countries, has led to concerns about potential trade wars and economic disruptions. These radically different policies could have dire effects on global trade relationships and negatively impact all economies.
Trump’s approach to immigration has been characterised by invoking feelings of disgust. He uses graphic language to describe criminal activities attributed to undocumented immigrants, emphasising incidents that would provoke an incitement of extreme actions such as building a wall to keep immigrants out
Trump promoted conspiracy theories that were intended to generate a sense of disgust or unease among his followers. These theories often targeted political rivals or institutions and were used to undermine credibility and create a sense of uncertainty.
In essence, Trump’s use of disgust as a rhetorical strategy aimed to elicit strong emotional reactions and create an impetus for extreme action, such as storming the Capitol by his supporters.
Conclusion
Trump’s return to power represents a profound act of deterritorialization, one that destabilizes established norms and reshapes political landscapes through chaos and disruption. His transactional approach to governance, willingness to align with oppressive forces, and manipulation of public fears have fostered a climate of division, uncertainty, and weakened global alliances. By presenting politics as spectacle and capitalizing on emotions such as fear, power, and disgust, Trump maintains a grip on his supporters while dismantling the very structures that uphold democracy and stability. As the world grapples with the consequences of his leadership, it becomes clear that his deterritorialization is not just a challenge to the existing order but a force that threatens to erode the very principles upon which nations stand. The critical question remains: will this disruption lead to necessary transformation, or will it plunge the world further into instability and authoritarian rule?
References
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (B. Massumi, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1980)
