“Stupid endless wars” are now at the center of President Donald Trump’s national security agenda, encapsulating a break with and disdain for the Republican political establishment’s approach to foreign policy.
During President Trump’s first term, many of his senior national security advisers viewed the president and his worldview as dangerous and consistently undermined his policies. President Trump has vowed to make personnel improvements in his second term, but some members of his Cabinet may once again disagree sharply with him on key foreign policy issues.
Sen. Marco Rubio, the first official confirmed to the new Trump administration, is a prime example. The same category includes other candidates, especially those labeled as national security “hawks,” who have learned the difference between being tough and engaging in old-fashioned foreign adventurism. It’s possible that you don’t understand.
During the 2016 campaign, President Trump’s endless criticism of war centered on American interventionism in the Middle East after 9/11, particularly the George W. Bush administration’s disastrous war against Iraq.
Mr. Rubio has long been a vocal advocate of the war, until it became politically inconvenient. In fact, he changed his tune when he ran for president in 2016, when it became clear that American voters overwhelmingly regretted the tragedy in Iraq and had little interest in those defending Iraq. It was only when I did it.
No matter what Mr. Rubio says today to align with Mr. Trump, Mr. Rubio’s views on the most incompetent and unforgivable foreign intervention of the 21st century will help Mr. Trump prevent the next ridiculous endless war. It does not inspire confidence in Mr. Rubio’s effectiveness or inclination to help.
If Iraq represented the most foreign policy disaster in voters’ minds in the 2016 election, Russia’s war against Ukraine, which began under the Biden administration, will take that place in the 2024 campaign. Ta. President Trump has declared that negotiating a peace deal between the two countries is a priority rather than continuing to provide endless military aid to Ukraine while risking nuclear conflict with Russia.
Once again, the incoming secretary of state supported what President Trump considers the grave provocation that led to the Russian invasion: the West’s flirtation with Ukraine over NATO membership. There is no question that Russia is the aggressor in the current war, but President Trump has made it clear that it is a scenario that Russia, in particular, will not tolerate. I think it is irresponsible to leave Ukraine with the possibility of joining NATO.
Who were the leaders of US foreign policy who thought it wise to provoke Russia in this way? Many of the same people who bequeathed the Iraq debacle to the world? Rubio agreed with them. Rubio has previously declared that he is open to Ukraine joining NATO.
Meanwhile, China, America’s most important adversary in the 21st century, is the biggest test of whether staff will carry out President Trump’s vision in his second term.
President Trump’s harsh statements and actions toward China in the trade and economic fields are well known. In his first term, he waged a vocal trade war against China, and in his second term he threatened to impose 60% tariffs on Chinese imports. His confrontational approach is fueled by the brazen theft of U.S. intellectual property and U.S. technology, engaging in unfair trade practices, and contributing to the massive loss of manufacturing jobs. The belief is that China is robbing or “raping” the United States economically, including by spying on American citizens and by spying on American citizens. And companies.
Mr. Trump’s approach has confused many, and he may want to confront China in an all-out manner. He isn’t. Indeed, he is reluctant to unnecessarily escalate security tensions or provoke an armed conflict with China. This doesn’t mean he won’t be effective in deterring Chinese aggression — after all, a violent war with China is far more likely in his first term than under the Biden administration. seemed low on — but he’s just as uninterested in starting endless wars with China. with the rest of the world.
Many of President Trump’s first term national security advisers promoted a very different approach. For example, his last Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, advocated recognizing Taiwan as an independent country, a provocation that is sure to spark an armed conflict with China.
Trump himself has shown no interest in supporting Taiwan’s independence. But Mr. Rubio has supported it for years.
Certainly, it is impossible for a president’s staff to agree with the president 100 percent. But as secretary of state, Mr. Pompeo not only opposed this, he systematically hired and promoted staffers who secretly or openly hated Trump. Prominent allies of Mr. Trump have openly accused Mr. Pompeo of being “dirty,” accusing him of being co-opted by the president while undermining his policies and administration from within during his first term.
There is no indication that Mr. Rubio would engage in similar despicable behavior or despicable behavior. In fact, he repeatedly defended Trump on political issues during the 2024 presidential campaign.
A broader concern is that Trump supporters are already experiencing chaos from within, with cabinet members and staff members who sharply disagree with the president on the basic foundations of his policy outlook. It’s about being there. What would Trump’s second term look like if his senior advisers were working on foreign policy issues and priorities that were not the president’s policies?
Let’s hope we don’t get caught. Appointing national security officials who actually share Trump’s foreign policy views would help.
(Source: National Interest)