Why Trump Keeps Betraying His Base on Foreign Policy

This is a strange moment for the Trump administration and its supporters. I am not talking about the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, which led at least a few members of this strange political worship to question their slave dedication to a very defective leader. Instead, I am talking about the recent transformations of Trump’s foreign policy, which is a clear departure from the positions he has taken in the past.

Instead of getting rid of an agreement with Russian President Vladimir Putin and ending the war in Ukraine “within 24 hours”, as he promised that he would do during the 2024 campaign, or stop all assistance in the United States to Ukraine, Trump is now sending to Kyiv more military assistance and even Ukrainian President Voludmir Zelenspy on the pre -advice directly to the story that was going on after the story. Trump does not undertake the support levels that belong to the Biden administration, and there are good reasons to ask whether this new policy will continue, but it is still an amazing shift that has caused sharp criticism of the formerly loyal Maga types such as the deputy of the MP Margori Taylor Green and former Trump assistant Steve Bannon.

This is a strange moment for the Trump administration and its supporters. I am not talking about the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, which led at least a few members of this strange political worship to question their slave dedication to a very defective leader. Instead, I am talking about the recent transformations of Trump’s foreign policy, which is a clear departure from the positions he has taken in the past.

Instead of getting rid of an agreement with Russian President Vladimir Putin and ending the war in Ukraine “within 24 hours”, as he promised that he would do during the 2024 campaign, or stop all assistance in the United States to Ukraine, Trump is now sending to Kyiv more military assistance and even Ukrainian President Voludmir Zelenspy on the pre -advice directly to the story that was going on after the story. Trump does not undertake the support levels that belong to the Biden administration, and there are good reasons to ask whether this new policy will continue, but it is still an amazing shift that has caused sharp criticism of the formerly loyal Maga types such as the deputy of the MP Margori Taylor Green and former Trump assistant Steve Bannon.

Likewise, instead of sharply disengaged from Europe and the axis towards Asia – as officials such as the Deputy Minister of Defense COLBY for a long time – Trump has also expressed new affection for NATO. It does not abandon the Middle East, either: it allows Israel to do what it wants (as all its last predecessors did), but last month, he went to the war against Iran at the request of Israel, and ordered the American forces to bomb Iran in a failed attempt to eliminate its nuclear program. Of course, the neo -conservatives were never like Bill Cristol happy, but former fans like Tikkarmon felt dismay. Finally, Trump recently agreed to allow NVIDIA to resume advanced chip sales to China, indicating that he is retracting previous efforts to strangle Chinese technological progress through export controls.

I do not say that Trump is a new man. He is still committed to his Economic IDF war, and still undermines relations with the main allies that the United States needs the budget of China, and is still participating in a stupid effort to capture the style of scientific community that was dominant in the United States and undermines its distinguished universities. China leaders must be tired: in an era in which scientific and technological mastery is the key to global power, the Trump administration is participating in the unilateral disarmament act.

Trump also continues to take revenge against perceived personal enemies, shows increasing signs of cognitive decline, and heads the most corrupt administration in the history of the United States. In his advanced age, he will not become a different person. But his recent actions are not the foreign policy he promised or that his followers expect.

How can we explain these transformations? I can think about at least three possibilities.

One of the clear explanations is that the foreign “Blob” “Blob” hit him again, despite Trump’s efforts to bring it to the heel. I also argued in my last book, the foreign political establishment thwarted most of Trump’s efforts during his first term because Trump did not understand how the government worked and did not have a clear strategy to overcome the institution nor cadres from loyal officials who will implement his vision honestly. With the exception of commercial policy, American foreign policy did not change much during the first period of Trump. It is true that Trump blamed his many failures for the so -called “deep state” and pledged to do better if he gets another opportunity.

This time, Trump tried to overcome the point by appointing light loyalists, such as Defense Minister Beit Higseth, or the opportunists who were easily manipulated, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio or the Director of National Intelligence Tolsi Gabbard, to the main cabinet jobs or other influential positions.

But the obedient Lackeys situation at the top of the main departments did not succeed as it was hoped. For beginners, Trump is a bad manager who is unable to give his subordinates clear, coherent and consistent instructions that must be followed. Second, as many were afraid, Higseth is an inadvertent and unqualified official, repeatedly mixed and his office is a job defect, according to a former assistant. Rubio is ideological with new new tendencies. He will not link his boss, but he will push him in dangerous directions.

Moreover, although disposal of former leaders and shooting at many civil officials leave the main agencies suffer from employee deficiency and less effective, it does not change the global view of people who remain in their place or prevent them from applying in policies that may be in violation of the Trump instincts. The bottom line is that taking the point will require the president to put many smart people, experience and knowledge in major positions and work with them to develop a coherent strategy that reflects a different set of principles. The president now had two opportunities to accomplish this goal, and he took revenge in both cases.

The interpretation is different and more tempting is that Trump simply adapts to reality. He discovered that his supposed friendship with Putin did not give him a lot of influence on the Russian leader, and that Putin was not about to end the war just because Trump wanted him. Trump may not share the opinion of former President Joe Biden that Putin as an evil leader must decisively be defeated, but he now realizes that the Russian president will not negotiate seriously as long as he was ultimately confident in the end, which led him to approach Biden’s approach. US aid to Ukraine is supposed to re -pressure Putin to reduce an agreement, although Trump’s aid level is not enough to achieve this goal. However, in this interpretation, the recent Trump attacks are evidence that he is learning, and not a sign of the impact of the deep state.

One can tell a similar story about the Middle East. Like Biden, Trump will not put any serious pressure on Israel, which is why the genocide against Gaza continues to be angry with the support of the active United States. Iran will never agree to Trump and Rubio to abandon its ability to fully enrich the nuclear. With the freezing of diplomacy, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was able to persuade Trump that air strikes could eliminate the Iranian nuclear program once and forever and strengthen Israel’s regional domination.

However, the war did not achieve these goals, and Israel is still very small so that it could not establish a real hegemony in the region. But in this recognized charitable interpretation, Trump was practically amending American policy with the development of events in the region as well as resisting calls for long air campaign or increasing ground force.

As for China, the president and his advisers realized that the comprehensive economic war with Beijing would have hurt the American economy and did not stop the technological progress of China. If so, the lifting of the ban on exporting NVIDIA chips and negotiating a kind of temporary commercial deal is logical.

I would like to believe that this interpretation is the right situation, and that Trump is trying to adapt to the changing conditions, but it involves a degree of cohesion and strategic vision that is difficult to distinguish. Israel helps kill more Ghazan and allow it to bomb the Houthis, Lebanon and Syria whenever it wants not to make the United States or Israel safer, and it is likely that Iran will be convinced of its death in the enemy of the nuclear bomb instead of choosing to remain just a state of nuclear weapons. Sending more national missile systems or other weapons to Ukraine will not change the situation in the battle account or Putin’s political account, and the administration did not propose a political solution that both sides may accept or admit that he has no solution and chooses to move away. (Trump flirted with the last option earlier this year, but he finally retreated). Yes, the White House Trump reviewed its policies in the light of events (as must all presidents), but it requires a lot of staring at a sophisticated strategy behind its various responses.

What leaves Option 3: Trump’s recent shifts revolve around the ego. He sends more weapons to Ukraine not because he has a new commitment to the independence of that country, but because Putin was making him seem bad. He decided that NATO was fine after Amin NATO Mark Retti falked him with complimenting a medieval engine. He jumped in a useless war in the Middle East to inflate things made it seem responsible, regardless of the results.

Trump’s approach in the forefront of customs tariffs is completely compatible with this interpretation: He loves definitions because they keep everyone’s attention. They rise, go down, are temporarily stopped, then return them, and every time the media goes to a stream and start talking about it again.

For some observers, such as Yanan Ghanish from Financial timesTrump’s lack of a consistent or coherent or uncompromising global vision with his own image is the best than homogeneous extremism common at the Maga base, because his lack of any real political convictions or deep policy preferences (regardless of his installation on the definitions and his commercial deficit) makes it easier for him to change the path as needed.

I am not sure. Since Trump cannot separate the national interest from his personal interest, he is still a terrible judge of talent, which is subject to annexation, the American foreign policy on his watch proves to be more wrong, inconsistent internally and returned ever.

Washington can get away with this when it was the only superpower (although it paid a large price for its various foolishness), but global conditions are much lower today. In an era in which the United States is facing the most amazing peer competitors in its history as a great power, the presence of a reckless and irregular leader provides orders for subordinates who were chosen for their loyalty instead of their efficiency is a bad recipe for success.

The Americans can only hope that German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck will be right when he said it is assumed that “God has a special provision for the population, fools, and the United States of America.” The country may need this.