by Boaz Bismuth
Hat tip: Dr. Jean-Charles Bensoussan
They thought Assad could butcher his people unhindered • They thought Trump was in Russia's pocket • But then the American president launched 59 cruise missiles and sent a clear message that everything they thought about him was wrong.
U.S. President Donald Trump
|
Photo credit: Reuters  |
Many who have been following the latest
developments in the White House over the last week probably think that
U.S. President Donald Trump has gone mad. But they are wrong. It is true
that he has set new rules, shaped in his own image, but his conduct
toward America's allies indicates that the last thing he wants is
confrontation. Certainly not now, when he is deep in the Syrian conflict
(and its implications on U.S. relations with Russia) while
simultaneously trying to prevent a North Korean crisis (and its
implications on U.S. relations with China).
Meanwhile, Trump's detractors continue to take
aim as if they were programmed. They celebrate every slip by a member
of his staff (like the unfortunate remarks
by White House spokesman Sean Spicer this week. But reality has proven
that Trump has a knack for defying his detractors and pleasantly
surprising everyone.
It has been almost 100 days since Trump took
office, and it seems that the media hasn't yet recovered from his
election victory. Over the last three months, Trump has managed to
surprise just about everyone, proving that he knows how to govern the
same way he knows how to campaign -- in his own unique way, without
consulting any manual. That is why it is very difficult to anticipate
his next move. That's who he is, and it is time for his critics to
understand that.
Those who thought that Trump was in the
Russians' pocket got a salvo of American cruise missiles in the heart of
Syria last week in a move that embarrassed the Russians but cut their
Middle East ambitions down to size. Those who thought that Trump was
going to let his strategic adviser Steve Bannon run the White House
learned that it was actually Trump's Jewish and relatively liberal
son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who had his ear. Anyone who thought that
Trump would undo Obamacare without a second thought realized that the
new president was actually willing to keep in place certain elements of
the health care reform that he so vehemently criticized during his
campaign. In fact, Trump is determined to prove at every possible
junction that he will not hesitate to do what it takes, both
domestically and abroad, when leadership and strategic decisions are in
order and when America is put to the test, like it is now.
In fact, the White House has gone out of its
way to communicate a message that there is no such thing as a "Trump
doctrine." Unlike previous presidents, Trump has no intention of making
adjustments to fit some ideological mold. As far as Trump is concerned,
doing that only invites trouble.
Everyone can probably recall how, in 2013,
Trump's predecessor President Barack Obama hoped to change the reality
in the Middle East by insisting on diplomatic engagement involving
carrots and sticks, even when the carrots were tiny and no one felt at
all threatened by the sticks. But at least Obama, unlike the current
president, knew exactly what he was doing, or so the commentators would
have us believe.
Obama thought that withdrawing the U.S. from
the Middle East and leaving a vacuum in our region would somehow lead to
political stability because the locals would be forced to take their
fates into their own hands rather than relying on the U.S. to do it for
them (he was also influenced by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which
he opposed). Therefore, at every possible opportunity, including in
August 2013 when Syrian President Bashar Assad launched chemical weapons
on civilians, Obama opted to sit idly by so that, heaven forbid, the
U.S. wouldn't get sucked back into the Middle East. Only he neglected to
consider that the Russians would swoop in and fill every bit of vacuum
he left behind. And indeed, that is what they did in September 2015 in
what became the biggest Russian intervention in the Middle East since
the Cold War.
So if Obama's doctrine was essentially to not
do too much and "allow diplomacy to work" then you can say that Trump's
doctrine is to take fast, decisive action and surprise as many as
possible.
To be honest, it seems that Trump's first
three months in office served to drive home the formulation that
appeared in the Atlantic during the campaign: "The press takes him
literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not
literally." The strike in Syria once again demonstrated this point
clearly. It was enough to see the learned commentators forecasting
Trump's response to Assad's chemical attack in Idlib Province only to
read how wrong they were in the weekend papers. Unpleasant indeed, but
all those commentators scrutinizing Trump's every move could use a
little humility.
Here's another example: One expert wrote about
the negative response that the American strike was likely to elicit in
the Arab world. But unfortunately for the experts, the Arab world did
just the opposite. "Abu Ivanka," (Ivanka's father) as the Arab press
dubbed Trump, did not let the Arab world down when he took action on
behalf of the "beautiful Syrian babies." To find any condemnation of
Trump's decision you'd have to go as far as Iran, where President Hassan
Rouhani (Obama's buddy) accused America of assisting terrorism. Because
Assad, Iran's benefactor, is a leading candidate for the Nobel Peace
Prize, right?
"We have learned that Trump is not so
isolationist as many Europeans feared he would be -- he appears to care
about victims of a gas attack in Syria," said Charles Grant, director of
the Center for European Reform in London, to The New York Times, which
described Trump's doctrine as the "don't follow doctrine."
The New York Times asserted that on the one
hand, Trump's conduct is influenced greatly by the circumstances, but on
the other hand, his refusal to "get roped in by doctrine" allows him to
engage on a deeper level with other countries, easing the concerns of
America's allies.
Ironically, it is the man whose campaign
slogan was "America first" who is now engaging with allies and working
toward a shared interest of defending Western values, while the 44th
president, who was considered a great liberal, barricaded himself within
his own conceptions for eight years, whereby America was merely an
onlooker in whatever was happening in the world -- even when it was
obvious that American intervention could really have changed the course
of the events. Syria, and even Iraq, are good examples of that.
"Our decisions will be guided by our values
and our goals -- and we will reject the path of inflexible ideology that
too often leads to unintended consequences," Trump said when announcing
the missile strike in Syria. It was without a doubt one of his better
speeches. He hardly mentioned the events in Syria, or in the Middle
East. It was a speech that sought to permanently end American
ambivalence in the world. The U.S. would no longer kowtow to the U.N.
Security Council or the international community or even Congress. The
rules of the game have changed. Trump's America is also America of the
world.
Trump may not have been delighted to adopt the
role of global policeman -- and it was precisely for that reason that
he insisted several months ago that the U.S. should not become involved
in Middle East conflicts -- but he also knows very well that failing to
decide is a decision. Refraining from intervening, the way Obama did
after Assad's chemical attack in 2013 (his 14th such attack according to
French intelligence sources), will guarantee a deterioration and will
ultimately force the U.S. to direct even more attention at the region.
Refraining from action in one arena on the
global stage can send the wrong message to another arena. Ever since
Obama's failure to decide in August 2013, North Korea has stepped up its
ballistic missile and nuclear testing, Islamic State has stepped up its
terrorist attacks in Europe and the Syrian situation has only
deteriorated. And Iran is a story in and of itself. Trump realized that
without a military stick there can be no diplomatic carrot. Obama had
hoped that the carrots would ultimately replace the missiles -- last
week, Trump proved that Obama was wrong, certainly in the short run.
Speaking of Iran, it was quite symbolic that
former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced his plan to run
for re-election this week. So what has changed in Iran since Obama and
the "historic" nuclear agreement? It's sad to admit it, but not much.
Much has been said about Trump's instinctive,
improvisational style. The American media has attributed another motive
to many of the 45th president's decisions: to do the opposite of Obama.
Politico Magazine even ran a piece titled "President Not-Obama" last
week, explaining that in many cases, Trump consciously takes the path
that Obama would reject.
The day after Trump decided to launch missiles
on a Syrian airbase, a mere 63 hours after the Syrian regime used
chemical weapons on the Syrian people, Politico asked in the same
article: "Was this the week Donald Trump found a foreign policy? Or a
foreign policy found him?"
"At a time when so much remains uncertain
about Trump's approach to the world ... his I'm-not-Obama stance may
well be the most consistent theme of Trump's foreign policy so far,"
Politico argued, "from the near-impossible task of trying again to
broker peace between Israel and the Palestinians after Obama-brokered
talks went nowhere, to reaching out to Russian President Vladimir Putin
at a time when he and Obama were barely on speaking terms."
The most consistent thing about Trump at this
point is his effort to fix, on his own terms, the failures that Obama
left behind. It is as though he purchased real estate from someone who
went bankrupt and is now trying to build the most impressive building he
can on top of it to obscure what was there before. That is precisely
what he is doing with Obama's foreign policy. He hopes to do the same
domestically as well.
According to The New York Times, "Mr. Trump's
first instinct after the Syrian chemical attack was to blame Mr. Obama
for not enforcing his red line. ... Even as he announced the missile
strike on Thursday night, Mr. Trump asserted that his predecessor's
handling of Syria had 'failed very dramatically.'" But again, anyone who
thinks that the only sentiment guiding Trump is "not Obama" isn't
getting it. That's taking things too literally. Obama feared that
decisive American action in the Middle East would be interpreted as
American aggression or excessive intervention and harm the U.S.'s image,
but Trump measures America on an entirely different scale. Trump
understands that an American action reverberates through the entire
world. He knows that a strike in Syria is felt in Iran and in North
Korea too.
Contrary to what people may say about him,
Trump thinks strategically. The strike in Syria was designed to send a
strategic message. First and foremost it proved that he was capable of
being a "madman" even in the face of another superpower (Russia), and
secondly, it sent the message of "don't test me." Trump understands that
his country can't shirk the role of the world's policeman. Unlike
Obama, who thought that he could just disappear from the scene or "lead
from behind."
Upon completing almost 100 days in office, the
new sheriff in Washington has made it clear to the world that, unlike
the Nobel Peace Prize laureate who preceded him, he is not afraid to
fight to protect babies from dying in gas attacks.
The Atlantic, a magazine that went out of its way to
warn Americans against voting for Trump before the election, ran a piece
in its latest issue that Trump could never have dreamed of during his
campaign, calling his foreign policy "brilliant." The long article
argues that "the United States periodically debates whether to do more
or less abroad. Trump won by promising both."
Boaz Bismuth
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=41765&hp=1
Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment