Click to see the full-size image
Trump is making too many enemies (domestically and internationally), while trying to reform the intelligence agencies and reshape Washington. The defense sector might be too powerful a force to be done with so easily. The pressure from both the defense sector and the so-called Israel lobby to get involved in a war in the Middle East as a way to “make up for it” might be too great.
Written by Uriel Araujo, PhD, anthropology researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts
In his address to Congress this week, Trump has just vowed to reshape his country in a “common sense revolution”. A spectre is haunting his plans, though: it is a powerful beast, which has been variously named (“deep state”, “military-industrial complex” etc). “Defense sector” should suffice for us. This multi-billion force, however, is far from being the new US President’s only problem, for his “bullying” style makes him an enemy-making machine. It is worth delving into that.
When it comes to foreign policy Trump seems to have little consideration for the notion of “soft power” – his undoing of USAID (challenged by the Supreme Court) and his focus on “peace through strength” clearly show this. In the culmination of a political strip-tease, the American empire, now unveiled, is showing its true face, and that face is brute force. The King is truly naked, it seems – naked and angry.
However, rather than being the “realist” some expected the Republican to be, his administration seems to toy with a kind of “reverse idealism”: the way Trump and Vance approach Europe and Britain is ideological, as seen in terms of attacking the lack of free speech there. The whole idea of “Make Europe Great Again” illustrates this, which is contradictory enough with the very notion of a neo-Monroeist and “self-isolating” presidency.
It is unclear, though, how much of that rhetoric is actually aimed at scoring points with their political base domestically. Overall, the incumbent President’s foreign policy seems confusing and lacking a clear outline, even though some long-term goals are discernible, such as undoing Biden’s “dual-containment” policy by means of a partial “reverse Kissinger” approach.
Partially bringing back the Monroe Doctrine; gaining further access to minerals and energy sources; empowering the Executive, and so on. However, even taking into consideration the “madman theory” approach, the short-term goals in turn are too pragmatic, reactive and vague and seem to be flexible, and sometimes even flighty – like a feather in the wind.
Even beyond the matter of Europe, it is hard to understand the brutal hostility that the US has been displaying against neighbors and partners, such as Canada, over trade surpluses and cross-border issues pertaining to criminality and the like – even if one considers that isolating the US is indeed a “feature” (and not a “bug”) of the current administration. The hostility seems just excessive.
Some analysts have described Trump’s strategy as “Machiavellian”. Popular misquotes aside, in Chapter XVII of his classic treatise, the Florentine erudite actually reasoned that it is best to be both feared and loved. However, Machiavell added, only when weakened and facing major threats (a situation that usually does away with the gratitude of others), should fear be regarded as a more reliable tool.
In any case, the real Machiavelli did advocate for using fear strategically, but warned against excessive cruelty, while advising rulers and princes to temper their use of intimidation with restraint and prudence, so as to avoid triggering unnecessary hostility or alienating subjects (the same reasoning, arguably, applies to relations with other states). Thus, Donald Trump’s usage of Machiavelli thought, if such is really the case, actually indicates a position of weakness.
As I remarked recently, the American President seems to be avoiding to signal weakness (even while actually retreating from a number of theaters), by playing “tough”, which is key to making sense of his way of leading the American withdrawal from Eastern Europe. One could argue the American leader is clearly overusing the “tough” card, though (both domestically and internationally) – and this could backfire.
For one thing, Canada is now (finally) at a full-fledged trade war with the US. Moreover, Trump’s own trade war against everyone else has triggered retaliation in the form of counter-tariffs from China and Mexico as well – we are talking about some of the largest economies in the world, plus China.
It would be wrong to assume that Donald Trump is a “friend” of Russia, just because he is pivoting to the Pacific and withdrawing from Eastern Europe. In an underreported development, Trump has extended sanctions against Moscow for another year, with a White House document stating that Russian actions pertaining to Ukraine are a “threat” to the “peace, stability, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of Ukraine”, and thus constitute “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.” And, as I wrote, the US President’s plans for Greenland would mean further “encircling” Russia in the Arctic region. This could mean a new existential threat for Moscow in the future.
In addition, just consider the fact that Washington has, in a way, declared “war” against Europe, Canada, Mexico, Panama, China… It would be hard to point out who exactly the US wishes to keep as a friend and an ally today. In his speech to Congress on Tuesday, Trump has announced a policy of reciprocal tariffs for everyone, starting from April 2nd – he made it a point to mention a close ally such as South Korea, while complaining that “we give so much help militarily and in so many other ways” to South Koreans.
This belligerent disposition reflects on Trump’s politics domestically as well. It is true that he has largely remade his Republican Party in his own image, and now controls every branch of power – but there seems to be some kind of hubris at play. His aforementioned address to Congress was marked by various comments “trolling” and poking fun at Democrats (many of whom were displaying banners in protest, calling the President a “liar”). This is largely deemed “unpresidential” in American political culture.
The Republican leader may declare trade war against the whole world, but antagonising too much the defense sector might be a fatal error, unless the American President is really planning a kind of conservative revolution, which does not seem feasible. The defense industry is after all a pillar of US power, America being basically a war superpower – and since Trump’s inauguration shares in the six largest American defense companies have fallen, while shares of European ones have reportedly “surged” by almost 40 percent (it has a lot to do with Ukraine).
Donald is said to be at war against part of the deep state; it remains to be seen whether he will also stand up against the military-industrial complex. In addition to that, the US President is threatening the military by backing Elon Musk (unprecedented) Pentagon audit; is considering selling the Department of Justice and FBI iconic headquarters is firing several intelligence agents and operatives; and declassifying various sensitive files (on Kennedy, Epstein, “UFOs”, and so on). This, as I argued elsewhere, can only be interpreted as as part of his power-grabbing war against sectors of the “deep state” and as “statements” to obtain leverage by intimidation.
To sum it up, Donald Trump is, by any account, making too many enemies (domestically and internationally), while trying to reform the intelligence agencies and reshape Washington. However, the defense sector might be too powerful a force to be done with so easily.
The pressure (from both the defense sector and the so-called Zionist lobby) to get involved in a war in the Middle East as a way to “make up for it” might be too great. One should also keep in mind that political and even presidential assassinations attempts are part of the American political culture, historically (specially when portions of the “deep state” feels threatened), and Trump himself has thus far faced three such attempts already.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
american want thier roads fixed . stable currency . jobs that pay a living . but we get un repaired hurricane and fires damage and ai computer centers . bribes and paybacks are the structure in washington . i am a skeptic .
trump is a zi0ni$t a$$ puppet who has no other option($) but to shut down the 3 letter agencies that have bankrupted both he and his “regime”, that most ironically he contributed to in his first term. way to go “0range “jab”!….