In 1941 Bertold Brecht published his play ‘The resistable rise of Arturo Ui’ as a parable of the dynamics and tactics that brought Adolf Hitler to power. A key feature of the play is the pattern of gradual entanglement of initially well-meaning but naïve characters surrounding the mobster Ui, the exploitation of their personal weaknesses by him and his cronies, and bullying them into acceptance of his supremacy. Another key feature is that at virtually every stage of the play Ui’s rise is not inevitable, yet what makes it happen is the lack of resistance.

The play was written for the American audience, at a time when much of the country and its leadership were worried about Germany and Japan, but undecided about entering the war. Being seen as too controversial to present in 1941, the play never made it on to American stage when it would have mattered most, premiering in the country only in 1963.

Civil society in the USA, organisations and citizens coming together spontaneously show the early resistance that is necessary in the face of disastrous policies and ways of decision-making in the inner circle of the new US government. Also some countries are openly critical of the rapidly emerging pathway of Donald Trump’s Presidency. Interestingly they are those who one would term as friendly nations. Yet some of the closest allies, which have a vested interest in a US government which is rational and equitable in its policy, takes its international responsibilities seriously, and respects its own institutions and international law, remain far too quiet. The UK government has even rolled out the red carpet for what may prove to be a compromising visit by Trump. It may compromise the ethics and values of government, the credibility of its institutions, and undermine the UK’s option for a foreign and global economic policy determined independently from the dynamics in the US government. Theresa May has stepped on a long sticky tongue which may well not allow her to get off it again. Whether or not Trump is and stays President in the USA is a matter for the American electorate and Congress. But whether he and his cronies are allowed to succeed with their bully tactics to push forward with their narrow minded ideology and political agenda on the international scene is dependent on the stance taken by other leaders and governments. There will be those who will seek to exploit the destruction in long standing relationships caused by Trump’s administration. Others will seek to contain, salvage and protect the achievements of cooperation and rights based international relations. The latter ones have a particular role to play today. If one believes in government accountability to its people, then those in power in such countries owe it to their citizens to resist Trump’s pathway from early on, too.