Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
A lot of people have been appalled by Donald Trumps behavior during the transition, at his inauguration, and
in his rst week in oce. You can count me among them. But I also nd his actions baing from the
perspective of Trumps own self-interest. People who opposed his administrations policies should take heart,
because his conduct so far will make it harder to proceed as he seems to want.
For starters, Trump made zero eort to exploit the honeymoon period traditionally accorded a new president
by the press, didnt try to drive a wedge or two in the large coalition that opposes him, and declined to appeal
to a broader sense of national unity. Thus far he has played entirely to his base, painting a dark portrait of a
crumbling America where everybody except Trump himself is untrustworthy, corrupt, deceitful, and not to be
heeded at all. The result: a president who lost the popular vote by 2.5 million people is even less popular now,
and he enters oce with the lowest approval ratings of any new president in history.
Never mind the irony of such a deeply corrupt and dishonest person accusing others of corruption; the odd
thing is that he has been doing just about everything he can to unite key institutions against him. This may
not matter if he and his lackeys can disseminate a squid-ink cloud of alternative facts and convince their
many followers that down is up, black is white, 2+2=5, and what the president said on camera last week really
never took place. As Ive warned before, Trump & Co. seems to be operating straight from the Erdogan-
Berlusconi-Putin playbook, and it remains an open question whether this approach will work in a country
with many independent sources of information, some of which are still committed to facts.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/25/americasnewpresidentisnotarationalactor/ 1/10
14/2/2017 AmericasNewPresidentIsNotaRationalActor|ForeignPolicy
The same goes for the agencies of the government that he is now supposedly leading. Government
bureaucrats have been held in low regard for a long time, which makes them an easy target. But you also cant
do anything in public policy without their assistance, and my guess is that Americans will be mighty unhappy
when budget cuts, rings, resignations, and the like reduce government performance even more. Get ready
for a steady drip, drip, drip of leaks and stories emanating from dedicated civil servants who are committed to
advancing the public interest and arent going to like being treated with contempt and disdain by a bunch of
hedge fund managers, wealthy Wall Streeters, or empty suits like Energy Secretary Rick Perry, all led by
President Pinocchio.
Then theres Trumps delicate relationship with the national security establishment. Having picked a ght
with the intelligence community during the campaign and transition, Trump had a golden opportunity to
mend fences during his visit to the CIA last week. No one expected him to oer a lengthy mea culpa; all he had
to do was tell his audience he understood their work was important, he believed them to be patriots, he
recognized that some of them had made sacrices for the country that dwarf any he has ever made, and that
he was counting on them to do outstanding work henceforth. He started o OK, but proceeded to make a
weird and narcissistic detour into the size of his electoral victory, his uncle who taught at MIT, and his
complaints about media coverage of the crowd size at his inauguration and whether or not it rained during his
speech. Read this transcript, and see if you can nd a statesman anywhere in this incoherent and self-
centered performance. An even more relevant question: Did he think this sort of behavior would advance his
cause?
Theres also the broader question of his overall approach to foreign policy. As Ive noted repeatedly, a few
elements of Trumps worldview make sense, such as his aversion to nation-building in the greater Middle
East. But as Jessica Mathews points out in an important essay in the New York Review of Books, Trump and
key advisors like Michael Flynn also believe Islamic extremism is a mortal danger and have promised to get
rid of the Islamic State right away. But how do you do that, and how do you make sure the Islamic State
doesnt come back, if you arent busy invading, occupying, and nation-building in the areas where it and
other extremist movements live and recruit? In fact, Islamic extremism is a problem but not an existential
threat, which is why the United States does not need to try to transform the whole region. But Trump doesnt
READ MORE:
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/25/americasnewpresidentisnotarationalactor/ 2/10
14/2/2017 AmericasNewPresidentIsNotaRationalActor|ForeignPolicy
whos saying so, just doesnt have the jobs, trade balances, currency values, or the other issues on
the 25th Amendment now. and possibly even into the Western hemisphere itself. Its
backyard. With its surroundings secured, China could forge alliances around the world and interfere in
distant regions much as the United States has done since World War II including areas close to U.S. soil.
This development would force Americans to worry a whole lot more about defending our territory, something
Heres a news ash, Mr. President: The United States is not located in the Western Pacic. As a result, its
ability to prevent China from becoming a hegemonic power there requires close cooperation with Asian
partners. The United States should not try to shoulder this burden by ourselves, but we sure aint gonna do it
alone. That is why Trumps hasty decision to scrap the Trans-Pacic Partnership is so short-sighted. It is even
dumber if he plans to pick lots of ghts with Beijing on economic issues and the South China Sea while
launching bare-knuckle bilateral trade talks with the rest of Asia. Forget about Russia: Thus far, Trumps
nonstrategic behavior toward China makes me wonder if there is a Chinese word for kompromat.
But by far the most baing lapse in the post-election period has been Trumps near-silence on his strategy for
dealing with Russia. And the truly weird part is that there is a perfectly sensible geo-strategic case for
mending fences with Moscow, and its not hard to explain or understand at all. Suppose Trump met with a
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/25/americasnewpresidentisnotarationalactor/ 3/10
14/2/2017 AmericasNewPresidentIsNotaRationalActor|ForeignPolicy
There are some losers who think Im too fond of President Putin, and who believe hes got something on me.
Thats dumb, absurd, a crazy conspiracy theory thats being promoted by the dishonest media. What these
people dont understand is that a better relationship with Russia is in our national interest. Russia is a major
European and Asian power. It has thousands of nuclear weapons. Putin is a tough guy who really hates
terrorists, and he doesnt want Iran to get a nuclear weapon. Putin also helped the world get rid of Assads
chemical weapons. As my really good friend Henry Kissinger told me, a bad relationship with Russia makes it
But for the past 25 years, the traditional foreign-policy establishment here in Washington kept ignoring
Russias geopolitical concerns and pushing NATO eastward. How dumb was that? And they kept talking all
the time about spreading democracy and criticizing Moscow for not being just like us. I cant believe how
stupid this was: All it did was alarm the Russians and eventually lead them to seize Crimea. That wasnt good,
but can you blame them? No, you should blame Obama and all those liberals in the EU. Even worse, this dumb
Look, I love this country and why not? The American people chose me to be president! Im no fan of the
Russian political system. But my job is to advance the national interest. Im going to show the American
people that I can get a better deal from Russia working with them than working against them. Trust me, its
gonna be TREMENDOUS.
Reasonable people can still disagree about a statement like that, but explaining the underlying balance-of-
power logic behind Trumps desire for better relations with Russia would help dilute the suspicion that hes
acting this way because he owes the Russian oligarchs billions, or because the Russians have some
embarrassing kompromat on him. It would also diminish concerns that he and Rex Tillerson just want to lift
sanctions so that Exxon can start drilling in Russian oil and gas elds.
Which raises the obvious question: Why hasnt he oered such an obvious explanation? I dont have the
slightest idea. Its possible nobody in his inner circle understands geopolitics in a serious way (and his
scuttling of the TPP supports that point), so maybe it just hasnt occurred to them. Or its possible that some of
the rumors are in fact correct, and there really is some dirty laundry lurking behind the scenes.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/25/americasnewpresidentisnotarationalactor/ 4/10
14/2/2017 AmericasNewPresidentIsNotaRationalActor|ForeignPolicy
But theres a third possibility, one that oers a unied, coherent explanation for some of the apparent
contradictions in Trumps foreign-policy views. Trump and some of his advisors (most notably Stephen
Bannon) may be operating from a broad, Huntingtonian clash of civilizations framework that informs both
their aversion to multiculturalism at home and their identication of friends and foes abroad. In this
essentially cultural, borderline racialist worldview, the (mostly white) Judeo-Christian world is under siege
from various other forces, especially Muslims. From this perspective, the ideal allies are not liberals who
prize tolerance, diversity, and an open society, but rather hard-core blood-and-soil nationalists who like walls,
borders, strong leaders, the suppression or marginalization of anyone whos dierent (including atheists and
gay people, of course) and the promotion of a narrow and fairly traditional set of cultural values.
For people who see the world this way, Putin is a natural ally. He declares Mother Russia to be the main
defender of Christianity and he likes to stress the dangers from Islam. European leaders like Marine Le Pen of
France, Nigel Farage of Great Britain, and Geert Wilders of the Netherlands are Trumps kind of people, too,
and on this dimension so are the right-wingers in the Israeli government. And if Islam is the real source of
danger, and we are in the middle of a decades-long clash of civilizations, who cares about the balance of
power in Asia?
The problem with this way of thinking, as I wrote back when The Clash of Civilizations rst appeared, is that it
rests on a fundamental misreading of world politics. Civilizations are not political entities; they do not have
agency and do not in fact act. For good or ill, states still drive most of world politics, and clashes within
Huntingtons various civilizations are still more frequent and intense than clashes between them. Moreover,
seeing the future as a vast contest between abstract cultural groupings is a self-fullling prophecy: If we
assume the adherents of dierent religions or cultural groups are our sworn enemies, we are likely to act in
So where does this leave us? Way too soon to tell, but Ill hazard two guesses. First, foreign and defense
policies are going to be a train wreck, because they dont have enough good people in place, the people they
have appointed dont agree on some pretty big issues (e.g., NATO), the foreign-policy blob will undercut
them at every turn, and Trump himself lacks the discipline or strategic vision to manage this process and may
not care to try. Even if you agree with his broad approach, his team is going to make a lot more rookie
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/25/americasnewpresidentisnotarationalactor/ 5/10
14/2/2017 AmericasNewPresidentIsNotaRationalActor|ForeignPolicy
Second, get ready for a lot of unexpected developments and unintended consequences. If the United States is
giving up its self-appointed role as the indispensable nation and opting instead for America First, a lot of
other countries will have to rethink their policies, alignments, and commitments. Unraveling a long-standing
order is rarely a pretty process, especially when it happens quickly and is driven not by optimism but by
anger, fear, and resentment. Ive long favored a more restrained U.S. grand strategy, but I also believed that
that process had to be done carefully and above all strategically. That doesnt appear to be President Trumps
approach to anything, which means we are in for a very bumpy ride to an unknown destination.
Like this article? Read an unlimited amount of articles when you Subcribe to FP Premium now 20% off.
WHAT RUSSIA COULD LOOK LIKE IN 2035, IF PUTIN GETS HIS WISH
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/25/americasnewpresidentisnotarationalactor/ 6/10
14/2/2017 AmericasNewPresidentIsNotaRationalActor|ForeignPolicy
You have read 1 of 5 free articles this month. CLICK HERE for unlimited site access.
The set of foreign-policy challenges headed like a freight train at the Trump administration is obvious: the
Islamic State and the associated tragedy of Syria; a bubbling North Korea led by an unpredictable dictator
with a stful of nuclear weapons; an angry China hypersensitive about Taiwan and the South China Sea; and
Russian cyber-activity roiling domestic political waters alongside Moscows ongoing occupation of Crimea
and destruction of Syria. But ying under the radar is a dangerous problem not receiving a great deal of
attention: Pakistan.
As the sixth-most-populous country in the world (ahead of Nigeria, and behind Brazil), Pakistan is home to
more than 200 million people and, by some accounts, the worlds second-largest city, Karachi. When Prime
Minister Nawaz Sharif was elected in May 2013, the country marked its rst democratic transition between
political parties since partition in 1947. Recently, the strength of the countrys nascent democracy has been
questioned as Sharif confronts protests in response to the Panama Papers, which revealed that his family hid
wealth in overseas accounts to avoid paying taxes. This highlights the ongoing challenge of corruption
(Transparency International rates the country 117 out of 168 on its Corruption Perception Index) that
threatens Pakistans democratic stability and long-term growth potential. The nation also faces a virulent
terrorism problem from the Pakistani Taliban, which has killed tens of thousands of civilians and troops over
the past ve years. Since 2006, more than 60,000 Pakistanis have been killed in terrorist events essentially
two 9/11 tragedies per year in a country with a population much smaller than the United States.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/25/americasnewpresidentisnotarationalactor/ 7/10
14/2/2017 AmericasNewPresidentIsNotaRationalActor|ForeignPolicy
Looming over all of this are the issues associated with Pakistans long, unsettled relationship with India.
Tensions between India and Pakistan have been especially high since September, when Pakistani terrorists
attacked an Indian army base in Kashmir, leaving 19 soldiers dead; the two countries have since exchanged
daily cross-border re, leading to the deaths of soldiers and civilians on both sides. Pakistans nuclear arsenal
probably contains over 100 warheads, existing as a hedge against a similar Indian arsenal. While under a
reasonable level of military security at the moment, the nuclear weapons represent the worlds least-stable
Given this tableau of political instability, terrorism, and nuclear weapons, the United States should be
thinking hard about how to help create a more stable situation in Pakistan, a nation that is a friend and
partner, but with whom we have had signicant dierences over the past decades.
First, the Trump administration should recognize that our levers to inuence Pakistan are limited but not
entirely impotent. While we can and should be working to strengthen national ties with India, this must be
done in a way that is not threatening to Pakistan. Thus, the rst best option to help achieve stability in South
Asia is to do all we can to encourage India to try to resolve dierences with its neighbor. Washingtons role
could include top-level ocial visits to both capitals; oering unocial Track 2 negotiating programs; and
explicitly making peace and stability in South Asia a U.S. strategic interest, identied in our national strategic
planning documents.
Second, the Trump administration should increase military assistance to Pakistan in the counterterrorism
ght on the Afghan-Pakistani border. A long source of frustration for U.S. military planners including
during my time as NATOs supreme allied commander responsible for combat operations in Afghanistan
has been Pakistani support for the Afghan Taliban. Developing a package of counterterrorism incentives for
Pakistan that requires a quid pro quo of their reducing and eventually dropping support for insurgents within
Afghanistan is key. Such incentives could include more robust intelligence sharing; better surveillance and
strike technology; and joint operations. Washingtons eorts to sell weapons, surveillance, and intelligence
systems to Islamabad have been uneven to say the least. Setting out a coherent, reliable pipeline of military
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/25/americasnewpresidentisnotarationalactor/ 8/10
14/2/2017 AmericasNewPresidentIsNotaRationalActor|ForeignPolicy
A third idea would be to increase soft-power support in Pakistan. When the United States and NATO led relief
eorts following the massive earthquake in Pakistan in 2005, it had a signicant and positive impact on
Americas image in the country. Providing more nancial aid tied to education, medicine, and humanitarian
projects could help. This is an area where much suspicion lingers following medical programs that are
perceived to have been tied to intelligence gathering. We need eective strategic communications alongside
A question that arises in the context of soft power is whether to impose conditions on Pakistan in return for
the aid it receives. While Republicans in Congress have pushed a more conservative approach to use aid as a
tactic to pressure Pakistan, it is unclear how the new administration will approach this. In general, it would be
wise to consider both our short- and long-term priorities in the region: Too often, a focus on eradicating
terrorism today fails to address the circumstances that drive people to extremism in the rst place. Using aid
to strengthen democratic stability, create opportunities for citizens, and increase investments to grow the
economy will translate into long-term benets that help minimize incentives to turn to extremism.
Fourth and nally, it would make sense to internationalize our eorts. Working with other nations Britain
or Germany, for example could leverage the impact of our eorts. There are also international
organizations, such as the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, that exercise considerable inuence in
For the Trump administration, the rst set of challenges will come fast and furious, and responses will tend to
be tactical. Spending some strategic time analyzing the possibility of a classic Black Swan event (low
probability, high impact) like the destabilization of Pakistan would make sense. Investing time and eort
early with this huge and important nation, while working closely with India, could pay signicant dividends
Like this article? Read an unlimited amount of articles when you Subcribe to FP Premium now 20% off.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/25/americasnewpresidentisnotarationalactor/ 9/10
14/2/2017 AmericasNewPresidentIsNotaRationalActor|ForeignPolicy
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/25/americasnewpresidentisnotarationalactor/ 10/10