Playing Trump

Playing Trump

by Mel Gurtov

1098 words 

One cannot examine the wars in Ukraine and Gaza without noticing certain parallels. First and foremost are the human and economic costs of aggression. Those costs are staggering, and how they might be made up is anybody’s guess, since the aggressors—Russia and Israel—are not going to pay. And the aggressors happen to be led by people judged war criminals—Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu, and their inner circles—another parallel.

Here, I want to focus on Donald Trump’s role in these conflicts—specifically, how he has been played by Putin and Netanyahu, again and again, with consequent damage to any chances of a peace agreement in either conflict.

Trump’s “Disappointment” with Putin

Poland’s foreign minister said in a PBS interview: 

“I think it’s high time that President Trump should see that Putin is mocking him. Instead of a cease-fire that was supposed to happen before the Alaska summit and serious peace talks, Putin is sending more and more drones, first at Ukraine and now at NATO.” 

Indeed, Putin has been mocking Trump from the moment Trump took office. As the CNN contributor Fareed Zakaria points out, Trump made “preemptive concessions” to Putin long before they met in Alaska: “Russia would probably get to keep what it had conquered, Ukraine would ever become a member of NATO, the US would not send in troops to guarantee Ukraine’s sovereignty, and Trump would reengage economically with Russia after the war.”

How many times has Trump said he is disappointed with Putin, is concerned about the losses of Ukrainian lives as the result of Russia’s bombing of civilian targets, and is ready “in about two weeks” to do something about Russia? Never happens. Worse yet, Trump has enabled Putin’s war by leaving it to the Europeans to come up with weapons and plans for defending Ukraine, and by dismantling a whole range of US government programs designed to track and upend Russian disinformation efforts. In short, Trump refuses to consider Russia an adversary despite its maximalist demands, giving Putin every reason to push the envelope.

Nineteen Russian drones crossing 300 miles into Poland is a particularly aggressive push. It tested NATO’s response, which proved excellent, and tested Trump’s response, which was so weak—the attack “could have been a mistake” and he’s “not happy about it”—that even some Republicans in Congress were exasperated. Trump will try every way possible to avoid confronting Russia. When a journalist prodded him at a recent news conference to talk about sanctioning Russia, Trump angrily replied that he was—by sanctioning India, with high tariffs, for buying Russian oil. “I haven’t done phase two yet or phase three,” he added. Trump said he also wanted sanctions by the Europeans on China. Well, there is no phase two or three, and NATO members aren’t going to impose high tariffs on China. You can bet Putin, reading Trump’s comment, had a good laugh.

Giving Netanyahu Whatever He Wants

Then there’s Trump and Netanyahu, a parallel case of defiance of Trump and a weak-kneed Trump response. Trump has outsourced Gaza policy to Israel. Netanyahu is free to do whatever he chooses in Gaza, knowing that the US will not stand in his way. The Israeli leader now reportedly faces opposition to his war policies from senior military and intelligence officials. But with the US out of the way, and international criticism of no consequence, this internal dissent is not going to sway Netanyahu to change course.    

For leaders like Netanyahu, having an enemy (as Chairman Mao once said) is a good thing. That applies to Hamas and to Iran: It’s to his political advantage to have enemies that require a permanent state of war. War with Iran a few months ago led to a surge in Netanyahu’s popularity and the public’s confidence in the Israeli Defense Forces. “National security” for Israelis is foremost, and Netanyahu says only he can deliver it. On the other hand, ending the war with Hamas might mean an end to Netanyahu’s longtime reign. Hence, his support for a “comprehensive” agreement with Hamas: a temporary cease-fire in exchange for the release of all remaining hostages. He knows that such an agreement has been off the table for many months. Hamas has already agreed to a plan put forward by Egypt and Qatar for a phased cease-fire and hostage release that will lead to a permanent settlement. Netanyahu once backed that plan—until Hamas embraced it.

The Israeli attack on Hamas headquarters in Doha, Qatar is a telling indication, much like the Russian drone strike in Poland is. Both were met with Trump’s equivocations. Here is Qatar, home to a major US air base and over a billion dollars in US investments, and a co-sponsor of Israel-Hamas peace talks, coming under attack by Israeli jets. And here’s Trump, who says it is his peace plan that awaits Hamas’ approval, doing nothing to obstruct Netanyahu’s path. Qatar condemned the attack; Trump said he was “very unhappy” about it. Netanyahu could care less. His plan is to sink Trump’s plan, lay siege to Gaza City, force the Palestinian population to flee, and expand Israel’s occupation. When Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited a week ago, he essentially told Netanyahu that his war plans—and for that matter, Israel’s genocide, which a UN commission’s report has just documented anew—are none of the US’s business.

Playing Trump

Why is Trump so easily played? First, he sees more disadvantages than advantages to confronting either the Russians or the Israelis. If it’s the Russians, that means investing far more than Trump wants in Ukraine’s defense, with the outside possibility of being dragged directly into the war. With the Israelis, confronting them might seem to put Trump on Hamas’ side. Second, Trump admires authoritarian leaders. On the rare occasion when Trump says he doesn’t “like” what they’re doing, he can barely hide his admiration for their audacity. Third, there’s the Nobel Peace Prize thing: Trump desperately wants to be acknowledged as a leader for world peace. He seethes over the fact that Obama was awarded the prize.

Fourth, Trump has no moral foundation. The human costs of war are beyond his capacity to fathom. As he has said of both these conflicts, he just wants them to end so that he can tend to nurturing his dictatorship. He has no interest in the responsibility of the aggressors for the destruction they’ve caused. And fifth, Trump is not very smart: He probably won’t admit to being played, because that would mean he’s been outsmarted, which is inconceivable for a “stable genius.”

–end–

Mel Gurtov, syndicated by PeaceVoice, is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Portland State University.