Why Stephen Walt is my favorite foreign policy commentator
Because he writes things like this:
If you’re a regular reader of this column, you know that I often criticize what the United States is doing on the global stage. I thought George W. Bush’s presidency was a foreign-policy train wreck; Barack Obama’s eight years in office were a disappointment, Donald Trump’s first term a hot mess, and Joe Biden’s four years were tarnished by damaging strategic and moral lapses. Alas, it has taken Trump and his appointees less than three months to outdo them all for incompetent foreign-policy wingnuttery. And this would be true even if Signalgate had never occurred.1 [my emphasis]
I would use even stronger language than “damaging strategic and moral lapses” to describe Biden’s all-but-unconditional support for Israel’s genocidal actions in Gaza.
But Walt is right to avoid fake sentimentality about the cold-bloodedness and blundering that have plagued US foreign policy for decades.
And on this evaluation, he splits the apple nicely: “To be clear: I don’t think Trump is acting on behalf of a foreign power or that he consciously wants to make the United States less secure and less prosperous; he is just acting as if he were.” Although Craig Unger in his books and Substack column has also been reminding us of all the ways that first the USSR and later Russia have worked to cultivate Trump over the decades.2 That doesn’t mean he’s a so-called “Manchurian candidate, or a “Manchurian” President. But Russian governments have been playing him successfully for a while.
Relying on toadies and sycophants for advice is one of the Trumpian practices Walt describes. (Hi there, Special Envoy to Everywhere Steve Witkoff!) 3 Trigger warning! This video report may produce sudden gagging. Credit to the producers for including this observation: “Steve Witkoff is no career diplomat.” In case anyone has been mistaken on that point.
Another problem is not remembering that it’s a good idea to cultivate allies and try to minimize the number of your enemies. Walt also thinks that Trump 2.0 comes up somewhat lacking in this regard:
What is Trump doing instead? In less than three months, the Trump administration has repeatedly insulted our European allies; threatened to seize territory belonging to one of them (Denmark); and picked needless fights with Colombia, Mexico, Canada, and several other countries. Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance have publicly bullied Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office and, like Mafia bosses, keep trying to coerce Ukraine into signing over mineral rights in exchange for continued U.S. assistance. With great fanfare, the administration has dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development, withdrawn from the World Health Organization, and made it abundantly clear that the government of the world’s largest economy is no longer interested in helping less fortunate societies. Can you think of a better way to make China look good by comparison? [my emphasis]
Well, no, now that your mention it!
Also, this reminds me that during the Cheney-Bush Administration, there was a lot of high-level fretting about China taking the place of the US as the leading world power. Which made me tend to think that, based on the US experience, could we wish any worse fate on China than that?
He also mentions the tariff fiasco. That one is also obviously on the mark. “[E]ven countries that don’t hit back will try to reduce their reliance on the American market and begin pursuing mutual beneficial trade arrangements without the United States.”
Also, to compound the ineptness: “It takes a remarkable level of diplomatic ineptitude to turn a friendly neighbor like Canada against us, but Trump has been up to the task.” So Trump has at least managed to achieve that!
Using alliances to enhance your own country’s influence and national interests, and showing that your country is a reliable negotiating partner, also have powerful advantages:
Trump and his minions don’t understand any of this. They think international institutions and norms are just annoying constraints on U.S. power, and they believe that being unpredictable keeps other states off-balance and maximizes U.S. leverage. They don’t realize that the institutions that shape relations between states were mostly devised with U.S. interests in mind, and that these arrangements usually enhance Washington’s ability to manage others. Tearing up the rules or withdrawing from key international organizations just makes it easier for other states to rewrite the rules in ways that favor them. [my emphasis]
Well, uh, yeah, that’s right, too! Walt expands on the point: “Why would any sensible state adjust its behavior because Trump promised to do something for them in exchange, when the president has demonstrated repeatedly that his promises mean little?“
He’s probably too generous there. It would probably be more descriptive to say that Trump’s promises don’t mean squat.
It worth recalling that the supposed isolationist tendency of Peace President Trump shares a lot of the basic perspective of the most bellicose neocons, i.e., thinking that “international institutions and norms are just annoying constraints on U.S. power.”
At least the liberal internationalists pretend to care about those considerations, and in practice often act as though they do. (But not always!)
Then there’s the Trumpistas’ militant ignorance, or enthusiastic support for ignorance, exhibited in their hostility to science and medical research and to learning in general. Militant ignorance in action, combined with astonishing level of corruption. “Trump is feeding a key ingredient of U.S. power, prestige, and influence into the woodchipper.” Because all this here fancy learnin’ stuff is WOKE and we all need to stay ASLEEP!! As Walt reminds us, “autocrats always go after universities and other independent sources of knowledge when trying to consolidate power, even if doing so inevitably leaves the country dumber and poorer.”
And Walt sums it all up this way:
In short, the Trump regime is violating most of what we know about how decisions should be made and much of what we know about world politics. It welcomes groupthink and privileges blind obedience to The Leader over honest policy debate. It ignores the natural tendency for states to balance against threats and risks alienating current allies or even turning some of them into opponents. It overlooks the enduring power of nationalism and rejects what history and Economics 101 teach about the damaging impact of protectionism. Instead of making America great again, these errors will make America poorer, less powerful, less respected, and less influential around the world. [my emphasis]
But Amurca will be great again! At least in terms of what Know Nothings, Birchers, and idiot-savant TechBro billionaires take to be great.
A final observation: Walt’s “defensive realist” theory of great power politics does not assume that some kind of irresistible unconscious forces are dictating the details of foreign policy. Actual humans make foreign policy. Sometimes they do it better than others. And sometimes they are really terrible at it!
Walt, Stephen (2025): How to Ruin a Country. Foreign Policy 04/07/2025. <https://foreignpolicy.com/2025/04/07/trump-ruin-us-foreign-policy-country/> (Accessed: 20025-19-04).
Who is Steve Witkoff, Trump’s man behind Israel-Gaza negotiations? Middle East Eye 04/17/2025. (Accessed: 2025-19-04).