There has been substantial discussion about President Donald Trump's foreign policy efforts. He has worked to ensure that the government shifts away from unilateral measures and traditional friends and toward adversaries. The purpose is to withdraw America's commitment to accords such as NATO and military treaties signed between the US and South Korea and Japan (Fisher, 2016). Furthermore, he is committed to repealing the World Trade Organization and the North American Free Trade Agreement, which he views as poor deals inked by the previous government. At the same time, Trump desires that the country obtain additional nuclear weapons in order to secure national security (Fisher, 2016). The opponents contend that Trump is exceptionally reckless commander in chief while the proponents assert that critics fail to give credit where it is due. Therefore, the discussion focuses on two articles: What is dangerous about Donald Trump's Foreign Policy Uri Friedman The Case for Trump's Foreign Policy by Matthew Kroenig to compare and contrast divergent perspectives on the topic.
According to Uri Friedman, Trump administration lacks structure and experience to conduct effective foreign policy. The current foreign policy measures taken by President Trump undermine the efforts put forward by previous presidents to maintain diplomacy with other nations. Additionally, even with lack of experience, the government does not seem to create a process to compensate for the inefficiency. In particular, the foreign initiatives by Trump have not been checked for implementation since the administration is relying on his success in business and the result has been adhocracy (Friedman, 2017). More importantly, Uri shows Trump's administration lack people with interagency experience as some of them have never been in the government before including the secretary of state. As such, the administration is unable to carry out the proposed foreign policy strategies since the government is loosely structured. The combination of lack of experienced personnel and coherent structure makes it difficult for Trump to shift American foreign policy permanently. Further, the president has not been exercising discretion and has only been talking about domestic institutions, international community and establishment of norms which implies that what the government will do remain significantly consequential (Friedman, 2017). The administration has been aggressive in remarking the country's foreign policy around interest rather than principles. More specifically, the author looks at other elements that reveal what is wrong with Trump's foreign policy. Uri Friedman indicates that the President is heightening conflict between the United States and other nations across the world. For example, the country recently became offensive to the Islamic State by bombing Iraqi city of Mosul and threatened to unleash fury on North Korea. August 2017 saw Trump announcing a plan to transfer more troops to Afghanistan as George Bush and Obama had done during their administration (Friedman, 2017). More importantly, the articles note that the countries where the United States was bombing before have seen a sharp increase in a number of bombs being dropped since Trump's inauguration. According to the author, although Trump has been in the office for less than a year, he is taking bigger risks with his subversive strategies to the foreign affairs. The approaches the president has taken are making war between nuclear-weapon states significant. However, Uri Friedman states that it is worth remembering that more the current international relations between the United States and other countries emerged as a result of actions taken by Trump's precedents. For example, Bush supported invasion of Iraq an act that sparked a war that leads to the killing of more than 200,000 people (Friedman, 2017). The Obama administration in criticism for lack of international follow-up and Trump's unpredictable tactics are keeping some of the countries such as North Korea in Check.
According to Matthew Kroenig assert that critique of Donald Trump's foreign policy has failed to give credit where it is due. Like Uri Friedman, Matthew illustrates that Trump has adopted a foreign policy that is appropriate to meet the current challenges the country is facing that emerged as a result of actions taken by the previous presidents. The source supports that idea that President Obama left a crumbling international order and Trump has been assembling capable national security team to revitalize the country foreign affairs. In particular, the article notes that Obama left more dangerous world than one he inherited from Bush which has rendered the country inability to keep its security commitment in regions such as Asian-Pacific (Kroenig, 2017). At the same time, Obama's ideas of being patient led to the development of terrorists in Libya, Iraq, and Yemen. Further, Mather agrees with Uri Friedman by holding that Trump cannot foresee all the foreign policy implementation successfully. More specifically, the author indicates that the issue arose from lack of experienced personnel which has taken the Trump considerable time to fill the subcabinet positions.
However, Matthew demonstrates that Trump administration has taken bold actions and presented an extraordinary opportunity for the United States foreign policy. Trump has gotten the big picture right by realizing that the world is rapidly transforming and the United States has to adapt to the change for success and his strategies are well placed to ensure reinvigoration of the country's foreign policy. In particular, while Uri holds that moving U.S troops to countries such as Afghanistan is disruptive change that could propagate more conflict, Mathew contends that the United States would need a strong military to maintain its international position (Kroenig, 2017). With the present change across the world, the nation requires formation of a military base to modernize the new nuclear age. More importantly, Trump's administration has shown strong support for allies overseas for example commitment to Asia. At the same time, unlike during Obama's reign, United States is partnering with the Gulf States and other nations such as Israel. Trump is even willing to negotiate the Iran nuclear deal and has signaled that he will enforce stringent accord for such weapons. Additionally, Mather illustrates that the government is committed to strengthening the alliance with China and countering Chinese aggression. Such efforts have been benefiting the country in terms of free trade (Kroenig, 2017). Particularly, the article cites the development of North American Free Trade Agreement that could increase protection of millions of US workers. Similarly, Trump has already begun correcting failure that occurred in the last eight years and positioning the country strategically for the future challenges. For instance, according to the source, Obama administration did not pay attention to the U.S business in an attempt to achieve political influence in Asia-Pacific. Trump promises to renegotiate old trade deals with China and establish new ones that could advance the country's economic and political interest simultaneously (Kroenig, 2017).With all these measures in place, the nations could start experiencing high productivity, increases growth, and low inflation.
Observation Arrived at
From the above information, it can be regarded that Trump has not coherence strategy for the America foreign policy. Trump policy focuses on preserving the American power and invested in ensuring achievement of capabilities that will enable the United to retain strategic impact across the world. Also, while the administration focuses on the American national security and seeks to attain peace with allies across the country, it is a poor express strategy that fails to put in places fundamental process and rank priorities as well as reconcile values (Mann, 2017). It is unclear how the policy is likely to enhance America's prestige and statute around the world. Additionally, Trump's foreign policy approach is characterized by contradiction. The president seeks to foster United States' position across the glove while cutting hundred of the positions. At the same time, Trump proposes reducing billions of dollars from the state department with hope of containing China Trans-Pacific Partnership (Mann, 2017). Further, he demonstrates the importance of achieving military hegemony but shows no sign of propagating measures of reconciling the adopted international affairs with budgetary priorities. More specifically, there is a need for Trump to create a relationship with legislators. The administration has supported a budget that significantly constrains the defense expenditure. Also, Trump's foreign policy has resulted in a considerable shift in attitude among the Gulf state. His administration impact in the Middle East represents unpredictability that threatens to destabilize the region further (Mann, 2017). As Matthew notes, Trump has been focusing on improving the relationship with some allies while at the same time worsening relations with others nations. The contradiction has been jeopardizing the American interest for national security. For example, the international affair initiatives have made Iran number one enemy of the United States. The situation with China is complicated because while the White House shows commitment to the denuclearization of Korea, Trump sets few strategies to return North Korea to negotiation (Mann, 2017). More importantly, Trump's foreign policy upheaval can be seen to be intentional since he has promised to destroy ISIS rather than downplaying the group's capability as Obama did.
At the same time, Trump appears to focus on various issues at once, for instance, tax cuts, healthcare, immigration, infrastructure and turn his attention to foreign policy episodically particularly when faced with situations that require portentous actions, for example, nuclear weapon testing in North Korea. As such, there is a need for Trump to understand that national security needs systematic attention because decisions made as result of momentary crisis can have detrimental problems (Fisher, 2016). Specifically, the challenge Trump is currently facing stems from lack of strategic thinking which implies ranking and delineating priorities and decides which are more worrisome and require his attention. The approach also entails reconciling values and interests as well as integrating foreign policy with sensible domestic agenda.
Conclusion
Trump is focusing on establishing a foreign policy that entails increasing America's national security, values, and interest. However, there has been considerable controversy regarding the impact of his initiatives. According to Uri's article, the president cannot achieve the goal due to poor government structure and inexperienced personnel. On the other hand, Matthew demonstrates that Trump has taken important steps that could benefit Americans, particular, in the rapidly changing world. Overall, the analysis reveals that Trump's foreign policy lacks coherence and characterized by contradictions preventing the administration from achieving the intended objectives. The administration is unable to carry out the proposed foreign policy strategies.
References
Fisher, M. (2016). What is Donald Trump's foreign policy? The New York Times. Retrieved December 9th, 2017 from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/12/world/what-is-Donald-trumps-foreign-policy.html
Friedman, U. (2017). What's dangerous about Donald Trump's foreign policy? The Atlantic. Retrieved December 9th, 2017 from
Kroening, M. (2017). Cases of Trump's foreign policy. Foreign Affairs. Retrieved December 9th, 2017 from https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/world/2017-04-17/case-trump-s-foreign-policy
Mann, H. (2017). Why Trump's foreign policy is dangerous. Retrieved December 9th, 2017 from http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2017/07/trump-foreign-policy-dangerous-170708093805747.html
