The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
Frederic B. Hill, a former correspondent for The Baltimore Sun, and later head of a State Department office that conducted wargames on national security challenges, is a resident of midcoast Maine and a graduate of Bowdoin College.
Donald Trump’s new National Security Strategy, condemning European democracies and siding with Russia, goes a long way to confirming the view of 50 of the nation’s leading national security officials who warned in 2016 that Trump would be “the most reckless president in American history.”
In a complete 180-degree change from previous national security statements, the Trump doctrine does not describe Russia as a threat — despite its brutal invasion of Ukraine, the worst aggression in Europe since World War II.
Instead, the 33-page document focuses on and criticizes the democratic nations of Europe for undermining “political liberty and sovereignty” by allowing immigration and blocking far-right political parties.
Release of the security strategy, an annual exercise of most administrations, comes as the Trump administration continues to favor Russia’s hardline position in negotiations to find a diplomatic end to the war in Ukraine. In Trump’s obsessive pursuit of a Nobel Peace Prize, the Trump team has sided with Russian President Vladimir Putin and urged Ukraine to accept a Russia takeover of land it has not even captured, plus weak security guarantees against a future Russian attack.
The strategy document, in distancing the United States from relationships and alliances that kept the peace in Europe for 75 years, provides strong validation to the 2016 letter signed by national security officials — many of them leaders in the George W. Bush administration. The officials, all Republicans, included Michael V. Hayden, director of both the CIA and the National Security Agency, John Negroponte, the first director of national intelligence, and Robert G. Zoellick, a deputy secretary of state.
In their statement, they wrote that Trump “lacks the character, values and experience to be president” and “would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.” It continued: “Trump has demonstrated repeatedly that he has little understanding of America’s vital national interests, its complex diplomatic challenges, its indispensable alliances, and the democratic values on which American foreign policy must be based.”
During his first term in office, Trump did prove to be an erratic commander in chief in international affairs. He accomplished very little in foreign policy, pursuing an off-the cuff, transactional way of doing business that led dozens of highly respected cabinet members to quit in opposition to his policies. He had a merry-go-round of national security chairmen, secretaries of state, and secretaries of defense, many of whom could not accept his policies and his disdain for advice or serious planning.
His diplomatic “love affair” with a North Korean dictator ended badly; he repeatedly ridiculed European leaders and threatened to withdraw from NATO; he derided African nations as “shithole” countries. His Abraham Accords in the Middle East were a step in the right direction but did not go far.
One of the most embarrassing incidents came at Helsinki in 2018 when Trump accepted Putin’s denial that Russia interfered in the 2016 election over the unanimous opinion of all American intelligence agencies that Russia did interfere. The Senate Intelligence Committee, controlled by Republicans, voted unanimously to find that Russia did undertake “an aggressive, multifaceted effort to influence … the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.” And while saying it found no evidence of Trump’s collusion, there were “grave” vulnerabilities due to extensive contacts between Russian actors and Trump campaign leaders.
The late Republican Sen. John McCain, who was then the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Trump’s 2018 statement was “one of the most disgraceful performance by an American president in memory.” “No prior president has ever abased himself more abjectly before a tyrant,” he added.
Now with this new national security strategy, Trump would pursue a radical break with all past administrations, Republican and Democrat. If followed, its most immediate effect would likely be to reward a Russian dictator and seek to welcome Russia as a strategic partner in redeveloping an independent, democratic country, Ukraine, destroyed by Russian bombing for four years.
Even Republican leaders are up in arms about Trump’s stance on Ukraine. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said “Putin has spent an entire year trying to play President Trump for a fool.” Sen. Angus King compared Trump’s positions to British premier Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement of Adolf Hitler in 1938, which led to World War II.
European leaders, who back much harsher measures against Russia, are genuinely alarmed at Trump’s apparent surrender to Russian aggression. Their leaders are pressing to use more than $150 billion in seized Russian assets to assist Ukraine in its defense.
Trump’s constant shifts — from condemning Putin’s actions to threats to further curtail U.S. support for Ukraine — are not the kind of strong and consistent foreign policy that has been the bedrock of American strategy since World War II.
Today, rather than bend to Putin’s war aims, Trump needs to set aside this reckless new strategy, prove that he can be a real leader with vision and integrity, end his back-and-forth wavering on Ukraine and work with European leaders to set forth a clear, tough-minded policy to defeat Russia’s blatant threat to seize Ukraine, weaken NATO and destabilize Europe.