IN PRAISE OF MR TRUMP
He has demystified Foreign Policy and the Making of it
Say what you will about Real Estate entrepreneur Trump, his approach to foreign policy has shattered the 300-year-old mould for making it.
Western Chanceries have long clung to two sacrosanct principles that define their craft in formulating foreign policies: An obsession with consistency and a fixation on rigid, long-term strategic planning. These have shaped foreign policy for centuries. Trump’s style challenges both, offering instead a bold, if chaotic, principle-void course for navigating the global stage
The first shibboleth is consistency, rooted in Western rationalist, linear thinking. It is notable how often the word “consistent” is invoked by Western governments to expound or defend an official position, even as geopolitical realities are shifting. The assumption is that resolute commitment to a set course will yield results. Eventually.
The second is the veneration of “strategy”, probably the most overused word in Western policymaking lexicon. It aims to define national interests over decades. The assumption is that long-term strategic planning pays dividends by maintaining focus on set goals, adjusting tactics when required, and promoting alliances while deterring adversaries.
These two tenets of Western foreign policymaking are rooted in the traditions of the 17th-19th Centuries, honed by figures like Richelieu, Talleyrand and Palmerston. This period saw diplomacy operating in a fluid environment, heavily influenced by religion and dynastic ambitions, transforming into the more formalised post-Westphalian framework, focusing on Sovereignty and the balance of power.
Their era was different. Slower communications and fewer global players allowed for deliberated diplomacy to determine the balance of power among them. Today, in the Age of Cascading Information, both these principles are faltering. In an interconnected globe, a plethora of complex situations arise, which call for spontaneous reactions.
Bald consistency, often a placebic crutch, can calcify old thinking, especially when policymakers prioritise it over adaptability or moral considerations. Think Gaza.
Similarly, strict adherence to long-term strategic objectives may retard innovative options to align with the fast-changing geopolitical landscape. Think Ukraine.
Enter Mr Trump. He might have the vocabulary of a “third grader and the impulses of a toddler”, but he has single-handedly upended both these conventions that have survived a concatenating series of crises in recent centuries.
Mr Trump redefines America’s interests and how to achieve them almost daily. Foreign policy objectives are transactional; there is no consistency from one day to the next; there is no ideological purity. The Art of the Deal includes off-the-cuff negotiations, often skirting America’s established long-term strategies. Instead of negotiations, bilateral “deals” are announced unilaterally, with the other parties oblivious of them.
Mr Trump has no qualms about interfering in other nations’ affairs, as his sanctioning of the Judge hearing the Bolsonaro trial in Brazil shows. This subdues the principle of territorial integrity formalised at the 1815 Vienna conference to counter Napoleonic tendencies, which has been a cornerstone for judging national behaviours since.
No wonder geopolitical analysts are left floundering, valiantly trying to interpret a movable feast of instant policies birthing at the Resolute desk.
And yet, Trump’s style of bypassing policymaking agencies, such as Foggy Bottom, does reveal a couple of tangible accomplishments: he can claim credit for the Abraham Accords and increased spending by NATO allies to share the burden of the Alliance.
But the most radical shift from his unconventional methods is that he has brought foreign policy to the public square. Crafting foreign policy behind diaphanous curtains and its hushed conduct in the corridors of power are old hat. Mr Trump’s tweets and Truth Social serve as his megaphone to broadcast raw, loud, and unfiltered edicts on foreign policy issues.
This is no bad thing. For too long, foreign policy has been an insular affair, sequestered from scrutiny of, and opaque to, the public in whose name it is implemented. Mr Trump’s style of marketing policies, suffused with distortions, from the gold-laden Oval Office, Louis XIV style, is a far cry from Richelieu’s intimidating Chambers or Talleyrand’s intelligence-gathering salons.
He has successfully planted his foreign policy objectives at the street level. His MAGA supporters may not be aware of the nuances of foreign policy, but they think they know, rightly or wrongly, what would Make America Great Again in foreign eyes. And so, they forgive his political and personal failings.
Mr Trump’s legacy is a wake-up call. His upending of elite-driven traditional diplomacy – a convenient symbol of the “Deep State” – exposes the constraints of rigid consistency and strategic dogma. His approach compels policymakers to reckon with a world in which flexibility trumps convention. The challenge for today’s budding diplomats and foreign policy wonks is to strike a balance between public engagement and avoiding the pitfalls of populism.
For all that, love him or loathe him, Mr Trump deserves a measure of recognition.
