Back to the Presidential Election from He**: Donald Trump's Foreign Policy

Now that the World Series is over (though the cheering will go on a long time), it is back to the Presidential Election from He**.  In fact, it is hard to believe how much worse the race has gotten in the last ten days.  It reminds me of what Henry Kissinger said about the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s: “It’s a pity both sides can’t lose.”  But that’s not possible, so I thought I would do one last post on the election – and then wait for pitchers and catchers to report.

In the last several weeks, I read The Will to Lead, by Anders Fogh Rasmussen, former Prime Minister of Denmark and Secretary-General of NATO,¹ and listened to a talk, “Road to War: Russia, NATO, and the Threat of Inaction,” by Sir Richard Shirreff, General, British Army, and former Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe, NATO.²

The theme of both Secretary-General Fogh Rasmussen’s book and Sir Richard’s talk was the need for American leadership, and action, in Europe and the world.  While both men focused on what the next president should do in terms of leadership, they were also, in effect, criticizing the approach of our current President.

Secretary-General Fogh Rasmussen talked about the link between American reluctance to use force and the outbreak of fires all over the world.  When the U.S. retreats, or is perceived to retreat, that leaves a vacuum that is filled by bad guys, he said.  Sir Richard emphasized the importance of effective deterrence and credibility vis-à-vis Russia and Vladimir Putin.  Secretary-General Fogh Rasmussen talked about the results of President Obama’s decision to not attack Syria in response to its crossing of his red line on the use of chemical weapons³ and to accept the Russian idea of Syria giving up its chemical weapons instead:

“In terms of chemical weapons it was an effective move, but in terms of the bigger picture it was a disaster.  In the eyes of the world, Obama had gone eye to eye with Assad, and it was Obama who had blinked.” (The Will to Lead, p.14)

The U.S. leading from behind does not work.  Our leading from behind, or not trying at all, is a good part of why the world is where it is today.  The U.S. made mistakes during the George W. Bush administration, but the answer was not to back off and do nothing, which has been President Obama’s default position.  Rather, it was to do things smarter.  As I quoted before, “bad management is not destiny.”

In my opinion, the world is safer, and the United States is safer, if the United States takes a leadership role in the world.  Much of what has happened in the last eight years has been the result of President Obama’s reluctance to lead, either because he thought the United States couldn’t do it right or because he felt the United States should focus on other things (and couldn’t do two things at once).

If you think President Obama’s approach of withdrawing from the world, or at least from a leadership position in it, is the right approach, then Donald Trump is your candidate, at least from a foreign policy point of view.  While Mr. Trump talks about bombing ISIS and building up the military, mostly he talks about withdrawing: cutting back on our NATO commitments, letting South Korea and Japan fend for themselves, etc., etc.  Mr. Trump’s policy would be one of withdrawing from a leadership role in the world, just like President Obama has done.

Mr. Trump may explain his approach in a different way than President Obama explains his, but the two of them get to much the same place:  The U.S. should back off and let the world worry about itself.  (President Obama would say that he is not backing off; he merely wants to lead with diplomacy, not force.  I have no problem with diplomacy.  In fact, I think it is great.  It is just that diplomacy won’t accomplish much without something backing it up.)

Another four years of President Obama‘s approach to foreign policy would be a terrible thing for the United States – and the world.  Four years of Donald Trump’s approach to foreign policy would be the same - for many of the same reasons.
---------------
¹ Secretary-General Fogh Rasmussen’s talk to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs on this subject can be found here.
² Sir Richard has also written a novel, War with Russia: An Urgent Warning from Senior Military Command, on this subject.
³ As Secretary-General Fogh Rasmussen notes, Syria was using chemical weapons as early as August of 2013, a full year before President Obama finally started to consider taking action, which he in any event didn’t undertake. (The Will to Lead, p.13)
⁴ As I quoted here, “[l]ots of folks confuse bad management with destiny.”  President Obama has.