President Trump and the Conduct of Foreign Policy

A large of volume of opinion has been expressed about President Trump’s conduct of foreign policy.  I have often been asked for my views.  Therefore, this short post adds to that volume; but aims to provide clarity by non-partisan simplicity. 

President Trump’s experience in business has guided his conduct of foreign policy.  The “playbook” accepts that competition and cooperation are not mutually-exclusive states in interactions with an actor.  And, if required, threats can be part of the equation.

While promoting American interests first, he accepts that his interlocutors have their own interests, so the probability of success is increased through reciprocity.  This is a transactional approach to moving issues from competition to cooperation (or challenges to opportunities).  Therefore, the strategy is to achieve American interests through disruption, reciprocity and influence using the instruments of national power to achieve the influence.  This has to be rooted in the competitor’s belief that: President Trump is willing to execute any threat he makes during the negotiation, and that he would rather walk-away rather than make, what he considers to be, a bad deal.

The first step is to achieve disruption to the status quo through, considered by some, an extreme, asymmetric act.  This: introduces complexity, creates a dilemma for the competitor, challenges previous assumptions, and removes any linear thought caused by previous thinking and biases.

Disruption, depending on the response, can be followed by the transactional offer of reciprocity (accompanied by some sort of flattery), or a threat.  Both are designed to achieve a negotiation.

An integrated use of the instruments of national power are used as the tools of influence.  The military tool can range from a security guarantee or cooperation (including arms sales) to a military deployment with a threat of employment.  The economic tool can range from the threat of tariffs or sanctions, to the promise of lifting existing tariffs or sanctions.

This form of hard diplomacy is different.   It can be used to negotiate with partners, as well as competitors, and could also be exploited as a counter to “Gray Zone” tactics where a competitor is acting to achieve objectives thought to be below the threshold of traditional deterrence.