The Observer view on Donald Trump’s foreign policy
A GBU-43/B bomb, or Massive Ordnance
Air Blast (MOAB) bomb – as used in Afghanistan last week against an alleged
Isis stronghold Photograph: Handout
Sunday 16 April 2017 00.03 BSTLast
modified on Sunday 16 April 2017 10.34 BST
In the run-up to last November’s election, American voters
were repeatedly warned that the inexperienced, volatile and impulsive Donald
Trump would be a dangerous choice as next US president. Less than three months
into his term, that prediction is coming true. Trump’s reckless behaviour is
rapidly sucking the world into an alarming new era of extreme strategic
instability, most evidently in the case
of North Korea.
Suddenly abandoning his pledge to pursue non-interventionist
policies and eschew the role of global policeman, Trump has performed an
astonishing volte-face. It began with a casually insouciant decision, taken
over dinner in Palm Beach in January, to order a special forces ground
operation in Yemen that Barack Obama had previously blocked as too risky. The
operation went badly awry.
Trump tried shoddily to distance himself from this failure
and turned his attention to Syria and Iraq. Word went out from the White House
that US field commanders would henceforth enjoy greater
latitude in fighting Islamic State (Isis). There would be no
more of Obama’s frustrating micro-management. Trump’s message: the gloves are
off – not that they were ever really on.
Since then, civilian casualties in both countries have been
rising, the result of US or US-led bombing. The Iraqi army’s slow and painful
effort to retake Mosul from Isis has not been noticeably advanced by stepped-up
American engagement. But the lethal impact of the siege on Mosul’s citizens has
measurably grown, as in last month’s horrific
American bombing of a basement shelter that killed up to 150
people.
Trump has significantly increased the number of US troops in
Syria, ahead of an anticipated assault on the Isis stronghold of Raqqa. Then he
upped the ante again, firing off 59 cruise missiles at a Syrian army base in an
emotional retaliation for a chemical weapons attack in Idlib province. This
self-indulgent escapade has done little or nothing to further peace in Syria.
But it did trigger a
destabilising confrontation with Russia, Syria’s ally, with
possible implications for security in eastern Europe, Nato and the Asian power
balance.
Having greatly impressed himself by this grandiose show of
might, Trump, now self-styled global enforcer-in-chief, swivelled his sights on
to Afghanistan, setting off the biggest explosion he could manage without
actually going nuclear. Last week’s detonation of a Moab monster bomb was gimmick
warfare. It may have killed some Isis fighters. It may not. That was
not the point. The aim, again, was to showcase US firepower and Trump’s
supposed martial prowess. The target audience was not Isis or the Taliban but
North Korea, where, to China’s justified alarm, Trump has deployed a
nuclear-armed naval armada in a bid to bully Pyongyang into submission.
And so, in the space or 100 days or so, Trump’s crudely
intimidatory, violent, know-nothing approach to sensitive international issues
has encircled the globe from Moscow to the Middle East to Beijing, plunging
foes and allies alike into a dark vortex of expanding strategic instability.
In switching sides and policies from one day to the next,
Trump resembles a punter in a betting shop, rashly gambling on a hunch. In the
North Korean case, if Trump guesses wrong, the results could be utterly
calamitous.
There is a place for deterrence in international affairs
and, to work, deterrence must be backed by the possible use of force. That is
how we survived the Cold War. It is possible that Syria’s regime will stop
using chemical weapons because of Trump’s punitive response. It is arguable
that China needed a jolt to get it more involved in containing North Korea and that
Pyongyang may cease, for a time, its provocative behaviour. The defeat of Isis,
wherever it lurks, is undoubtedly desirable.
But as every military strategist and experienced statesman
knows, the uncertain means to these desirable ends are fenced about with deep
complexities, subtleties and countless shades of political and military grey.
Bombs and more bombs do not solve anything. Violence can and usually does make
matters worse. The world beyond Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago is not a shooting
gallery. War and diplomacy are not zero-sum games.
The US president is not hosting a television reality show –
not any more, at least. This is all only too real. And if Bomber Trump has
proved anything in the past three months, it is that he lacks the judgment, the
common sense and the common humanity to be anybody’s commander in chief.
Tasks of the reading:
1. Read the article between the lines, and comment your opinion regarding the standing of writer. Show your agreements, disagreements with the writer.
2. How do you feel, in what direction the world affairs are moving, in the post Trump American policies?
3. Use a language suited to academic purposes. The objective of this activity is strictly academic, it does not intend to hurt any feelings, political, racial, or sectarian, at all.
