Pros and Cons of Trump’s chaotic foreign policy
Preventing War but at what cost?
When it comes to US President Donald Trump, there is little that I agree with him on. As a Muslim-American, I understand his total disdain for political Islam and his demonization of the first Muslim women elected to the US House of Representatives was abhorred. But, like with most everything, there is always a silver lining to be found in any situation. I want to preface my forthcoming argument with this; I sincerely do not believe that Trump does anything that does not better him in some form or another. The forthcoming arguments are in no way an endorsement of him or his policies, but a byproduct of his off-the-cuff, ad-hoc style of his foreign policy.
Appeasing Trump and how dictators get what they want from Trump.
Whether intentional or not, the president pigeonholed himself during his 2016 presidential campaign when he announced the end to protracted wars in the Middle East and beyond. The America First rhetoric revolves around the idea that America is over with being the policing force in the world. As a pacifist, I welcome this. I have long argued that our presence in the middle east and asia does more harm than any good intended. We have learned that we cannot force a democracy on peoples and our relentless campaigns of regime change have proven to backfire almost every time.
It has been interesting, to say the least, when observing Trump’s foreign policy. On the one hand the president’s character flaws, such as his incessant need to appear as a victor in almost every circumstance, is used as weapon by adversaries to get concessions from the world’s greatest power. Most leaders around the world understand that to get what they want, they have to play to Trump’s personal needs and emotions. This is evident by the strange pen-pal relationship between Trump and Kim. As Kim conducts more missile tests and continue to build their nuclear program, he is also sending personal letters to the President. From his tweets and “Chopper Talk,” Trump has been very open about how he feels about those letters. He is very receptive to praise from Kim. He is not really concerned with their nuclear program or whether North Korea is a threat to our interests and allies in the pacific.
Similarly, in Afghanistan, Trump has cornered himself into a position of few options. He ran vehemently against the war in Iraq and have promised to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan. The problem again was that he wanted to accomplish this in a bombastic fashion, where he is the center of attention. His recent invite to the Taliban to meet at Camp David over the weekend smelled of another Singapore-styled summit. He saw this as an opportunity to take credit for a possible peace accord that has been in the works for almost nine years. After the Taliban refused to meet him in the States, he confirmed the invitation and then falsely claimed that he cancelled it. His need to be seen as the one who dictates everything backfired once again. He had no reason to announce the secret meeting, especially since it never happened.
With North Korea, this kind of tactic works. No one wants a war with North Korea and there is some room for clash of personalities. However, with the Taliban, this kind of tactic puts people at real risk. The Taliban understand that the US elections are just over a year away and that Trump needs this peace plan to help him get reelected. It is for this reason that this administration was willing to invite the Taliban for talks on US soil just days before the 18th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. As absurd as that sounds, there were other implications that seem to have been overlooked.
The peace plan that was agreed on last week was not a good plan. Republican, Democrats, academics and analysts all argued that this was essentially appeasing the Taliban. There was no mention of guarantees of basic human rights to the Afghani people, namely the Afghan women. All the US would have gotten out of this deal was a vague guarantee that the Taliban would not allow Afghanistan to be a safe-haven for terrorist organizations. I return to my previous point, that for Trump, it's all about personal politics and perception. Unfortunately, he believes that the world works like his reality show. He does not understand brinkmanship.
Throughout his entire life he has surrounded himself with a bunch of “yes men” and he believes the rest of the world respects him like his “yes men.” The problem is that our adversaries can see through this and are using it to their advantage. Other world leaders are either waiting out this presidency or are racing to get as much as they can. Netanyahu has been a master at this. He knows that he has about a year left to do what he wants in regards to Palestine. The Indian government is encroaching in Kashmir, understanding that this administration will not even make a statement of condemnation. None of our allies can take anything he says, or rather tweets, with any seriousness. One minute he wants to nuke Iran and the next minute he wants to have a summit.
The Pros of Donald’s Foreign Policy
We live in an era, in which everything is scrutinized and put through a microscope. If the president was not a reality tv star, I believe that not every political move will be a national news story. But I would also argue that if Trump was not so obsessed with himself, the media would not cover it. It is the same argument I use with people who defend his foreign policy. They argue that he is preventing us from going to war and that if anyone else was in charge we would be at war with North Korea and Iran. This is true in some manner. I am appreciative that Trump looks at war and foreign policy through the lense of economic costs. This is probably the only silver lining of his presidency.
I welcome his decision to fire Former National Security Advisor, John Bolton, albeit he hired him in the first place because he saw Bolton on Fox and Friends. Bolton has advocated or has been responsible for some of the US’ major foreign blunders, such as the Iraq war. He has advocated for strikes against Iran and pushed for military intervention in Venezuela. It is not a radical idea that should Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz been the president, we might be in multiple wars. In conclusion Trump’s America first policy may be temporarily preventing us from engaging in another war, but at the same time it is emboldening authoritarian regimes and adversaries alike.
