The Future of U.S. Diplomacy Under President Trump
“Deals are my art form. Other people paint beautifully or write poetry. I like making deals, preferably big deals. That’s how I get my kicks.” Those are the words of Donald J. Trump in a — what else? — tweet in December 2014.
More than 14 months into the administration, the Trump Presidency is better known for breaking deals than making them. Since President Trump entered office, the United States has walked away from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Paris Climate Agreement, threatened to tear up the North American Free Trade Agreement if renegotiations do not progress to the administration’s liking, and now may hold up a trade deal with South Korea in order to use it as a bargaining chip in talks with North Korea.
Of course, such deals and their negotiation require an active, determined diplomatic effort. Yet, for a president who claims to be a dealmaker, he has demonstrated a remarkable distaste for diplomacy, and his latest appointments to key national security posts indicate a further shift away from the art of dealmaking and diplomacy.
Last month, President Trump appointed CIA Director Mike Pompeo — who should face tough questioning at his upcoming confirmation hearing — to replace Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State and John Bolton to replace General H.R. McMaster as National Security Advisor. Both men are known to hold hawkish policy views, including towards North Korea and Iran, and are not likely to recommend constructive diplomatic engagement.
Pompeo maintains hardline positions on foreign policy issues and shares much of President Trump’s worldview. He, like President Trump, has long been a vocal critic of the Iran Deal, defended the use of torture, and supports keeping the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay open. Pompeo has said that he looks forward to “rolling back” the Iran Deal and recently stated the United States will not make any concessions to North Korea in negotiations.
To call Bolton a foreign policy hawk may actually be an understatement. He has advocated for military options against North Korea and Iran, staunchly defends the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and has called for stationing U.S. troops in Taiwan, which China still considers part of its sovereign territory. Furthermore, Bolton appears to disdain diplomacy. He has demonstrated little patience for multilateralism, international institutions, and treaties, evidenced by his statement in his own memoir that, “My happiest moment at [the State Department] was personally ‘unsigning’ the Rome Statute that created the International Criminal Court.”
Given their predispositions, Pompeo and Bolton will not be likely or willing to mitigate the president’s more aggressive and decidedly undiplomatic tendencies. Measured and robust diplomacy will take a backseat to saber rattling and bluster. For example, we can expect the Trump Administration to effectively tear up the Iran Deal next month, undermining not only regional and U.S. national security, but also ceding diplomatic leadership to Europe, as France, Britain, and Germany are now vigorously working to save the nuclear deal.
During my time serving in the Obama Administration, I saw firsthand what robust American-led diplomatic efforts can achieve. When West Africa faced the largest outbreak of the Ebola virus in 2014–2016, the United States galvanized the international response to support local Liberian, Sierra Leonean, and Guinean efforts that ultimately led to the end of the outbreak. In 2015, President Obama convened more than 50 countries at the Leaders’ Summit on UN Peacekeeping at the United Nations, leading participating nations to pledge approximately 40,000 new troops and police to UN Peacekeeping missions around the world. Additionally, I witnessed colleagues diligently work to negotiate the Iran Deal and Trans-Pacific Partnership.
American global leadership is a history of American diplomatic leadership. The Marshall Plan that rebuilt Western Europe, the Camp David Accords establishing peace between Israel and Egypt, the creation of the United Nations, and the signing of key arms control treaties like the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty are all examples of what can be achieved through American diplomatic leadership. Of course, the United States has and will continue to deploy military force when necessary to protect its national security and that of its allies — as it has in multiple world wars, the fight against ISIS, and other key operations. Nevertheless, while military force may help create the conditions for peace, sustainable peace and prosperity is only possible through robust diplomacy.
Under President Trump, the United States is squandering its position as a diplomatic leader. The remaining 11 countries in the Trans Pacific Partnership have signed a pact without the United States, and China has grown increasingly active in international institutions as the United States has taken a step back. Meanwhile, Washington’s demands for changes to the Iran Deal could create a schism between Europe and the United States and have ramifications for any talks with North Korea, which will be less likely to agree to a deal knowing the United States may upend it.
President Trump claims to be a dealmaker and leads a nation with remarkable diplomatic strength. Nevertheless, Mike Pompeo and John Bolton in key posts likely means he will not be advised to use that strength — to the detriment of America’s ability to pursue its national security interests. Pompeo and Bolton can be expected to advise the president to tear up the Iran Deal, take a militaristic and hawkish line with North Korea, and repudiate the United Nations and other multilateral institutions. As such, the United States will not be using its dealmaking and diplomatic strength, and America’s position as a global leader will be diminished.
Yuvaraj Sivalingam is a Security Fellow at Truman National Security Project. He previously served in the Obama Administration at the Departments of Defense, Commerce, and the Treasury. Views expressed are his own.
