The war against Iran, led by the US and Israel, has exposed the total vacuity in Trump’s understanding of diplomacy. The typical insult to someone who plays a benighted foreign policy is to suggest that someone is playing checkers against someone playing chess. The essence of the insult is that some do not think beyond the first step in a dispute while others think about a second, third, or even fourth move. The Israelis do not need to think about future moves since their objective is to destroy Iran in much the same way that they destroyed the Gaza Strip.
But the US has a tangle of objectives, and it seems clear that no one in his Administration did much thinking beyond dropping the first bomb. Incomprehensibly, the US does not appear to have prepared for the Iranian blockage of the Strait of Hormoz, even though that possibility aways loomed large in previous US interventions in the Middle East. According to CNN:
“The Pentagon and National Security Council significantly underestimated Iran’s willingness to close the Strait of Hormuz in response to US military strikes while planning the ongoing operation, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.
“President Donald Trump’s national security team failed to fully account for the potential consequences of what some officials have described as a worst-case scenario now facing the administration, the sources said….
“‘Planning around preventing this exact scenario — impossible as it has long seemed — has been a bedrock principle of US national security policy for decades,’ a former US official who served in Republican and Democratic administrations said. ‘I’m dumbfounded.’”
Moreover, Trump refused the help of Great Britain in the initial stage of the attack, and his dismissal of the US’s most reliable ally was noxious:
“Trump’s plea to the UK contrasts with comments made on the same social media site last week, when he accused prime minister Keir Starmer of attempting to join the conflict after he had already claimed victory.
“’The United Kingdom, our once Great Ally, maybe the Greatest of them all, is finally giving serious thought to sending two aircraft carriers to the Middle East,’ Trump wrote. ‘That’s OK, Prime Minister Starmer, we don’t need them any longer – But we will remember. We don’t need people that join Wars after we’ve already won!’”
Today, however, Trump has changed his tune. He has called for a coalition of states to open the Strait of Hormuz: “Hopefully China, France, Japan, South Korea, the UK, and others, that are affected by this artificial constraint, will send Ships to the area so that the Hormuz Strait will no longer be a threat by a Nation that has been totally decapitated.”
The decision to first ignore its allies, but then to ask them to join the fight mirrors the decision that the US made when it invaded Afghanistan in 2001. NATO offered to join the US because of its commitment to Article 5 of the NATO Treaty: “Collective defence is NATO’s most fundamental principle. Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty states that an armed attack against one NATO member shall be considered an attack against them all. Since 1949, this unwavering pledge has bound together a group of like-minded countries from Europe and North America, which have committed themselves to protecting each other in a spirit of solidarity.” However, President George W. Bush believed that the US did not need assistance: “The United States began Operation Enduring Freedom in October 2001 without taking up NATO’s offer of collective defense involvement.” Bush’s reasons were as follows:
- Skepticism about NATO’s military effectiveness: The U.S. believed NATO’s command structures were too slow and politically cumbersome for the rapid, flexible operations planned in Afghanistan.
- Preference for a U.S.-led coalition: Washington preferred to assemble a “coalition of the willing” tailored to its operational needs rather than operate under NATO’s consensus-based command.
- Desire for operational freedom: The Pentagon wanted maximum autonomy in planning and executing the invasion.
Yet as the US effort faltered in its campaign, it reversed course and NATO joined the effort in 2003 under the aegis of the UN Security Council. And NATO remained a steadfast ally throughout the conflict until NATO and US forces withdrew in 2021.
In both cases, the hubris of the US betrayed a stunning lack of foresight, and, in both cases, it had to admit that it was not able to secure the victory on its own. It would have been better if the US had coordinated its effort with its allies before the fighting began.
Similarly, the US did not anticipate the Iranian closure of the Strait and what it would do to the global energy system. After it became clear that oil and natural gas prices were rising rapidly, Trump has made the decision that keeping energy prices low was in the interests of the Republican Party and the mid-term elections. So, he lifted the sanctions against the sale of Russian oil which will replenish the almost empty cash reserves of Russia, allowing it to continue its war against Ukraine. Because he does not know how to play chess, Trump failed to anticipate that his actions in Iran would vitiate the efforts to allow Ukraine to defend its territory. To abandon an ally and to favor an adversary is a high crime in diplomacy.
During the Vietnam War, Senator Fulbright (D-Ark) wrote a book entitled The Arrogance of Power which raised a perennial problem in diplomacy–the reckless assumption that military power is decisive and that diplomacy can take a back seat as long as the bombs are falling. It appears as if the US is going to double down on its failed strategy. The New York Times has reported that US troops are being sent to the region as a potential ground invasion of Iran is being contemplated:
“About 2,500 Marines aboard as many as three warships are heading to the Middle East, as Iran blocks the world’s most important choke point for oil. The deployment, after two weeks of war, comes as Iran’s response has proved more resilient than U.S. officials had anticipated. The Marines will join more than 50,000 American troops in the region.”
Iran has about 100,000 soldiers in the Revolutionary Guard and even more troops in the regular army. I’m not sure how Trump thinks that a ground invasion could be successful. But it is difficult to account for his ignorance and delusions.
R.I.P Country Joe McDonald. Thanks for showing us how hubris manifests itself on the battlefield. The US never thought it would (or could) lose the war in Vietnam.
World Politics News 
Leave a comment