Donald Trump does not think strategically. Nor does he think historically, geographically, or even rationally. He does not connect actions he takes on one day to events that occur weeks later. He does not think about how his behavior in one place will change the behavior of other people in other places.

He does not consider the wider implications of his decisions. He does not take responsibility when these decisions go wrong. Instead, he acts on whim and impulse, and when he changes his mind—when he feels new whims and new impulses—he simply lies about whatever he said or did before.

For the past 14 months, few foreign leaders have been able to acknowledge that someone without any strategy can actually be president of the United States. Surely, the foreign-policy analysts murmured, Trump thinks beyond the current moment. Surely, foreign statesmen whispered, he adheres to some ideology, some pattern, some plan. Words were thrown around—isolationism, imperialism—in an attempt to place Trump’s actions into a historical context. Solemn articles were written about the supposed significance of Greenland, for example, as if Trump’s interest in the Arctic island were not entirely derived from the fact that it looks very large on a Mercator projection.

This week, something broke. Maybe Trump does not understand the link between the past and the present, but other people do. They can see that, as a result of decisions that Trump made but cannot explain, the Strait of Hormuz is blocked by Iranian mines and drones. They can see oil prices rising around the world and they understand that it is difficult and dangerous for the U.S. Navy to solve this problem. They can also hear the president lashing out, as he has done so many times before, trying to get other people to take responsibility, threatening them if they don’t.

[From the March 2026 issue: America vs. the world]

NATO faces a “very bad” future if it doesn’t help clear the strait, Trump told the Financial Times, apparently forgetting that the United States founded the organization and has led it since its creation in 1949. He has also said he is not asking but ordering seven countries to help. He did not specify which ones. “I’m demanding that these countries come in and protect their own territory because it is their territory,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on the way from Florida to Washington. “It’s the place from which they get their energy.” Actually it isn’t their territory, and it’s his fault that their energy is blocked.

But in Trump’s mind, these threats are justified: He has a problem right now, so he wants other countries to solve it. He doesn’t seem to remember or care what he said to their leaders last month or last year, nor does he know how his previous decisions shaped public opinion in their countries or harmed their interests. But they remember, they care, and they know.

Specifically, they remember that for 14 months, the American president has tariffed them, mocked their security concerns, and repeatedly insulted them. As long ago as January 2020, Trump told several European officials that “if Europe is under attack, we will never come to help you and to support you.” In February 2025, he told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that he had no right to expect support either, because “you don’t have any cards.” Trump ridiculed Canada as the “51st state” and referred to both the present and previous Canadian prime ministers as “governor.” He claimed, incorrectly, that allied troops in Afghanistan “stayed a little back, a little off the front lines,” causing huge offense to the families of soldiers who died fighting after NATO invoked Article 5 of the organization’s treaty, on behalf of the United States, the only time it has done so. He called the British “our once-great ally,” after they refused to participate in the initial assault on Iran; when they discussed sending some aircraft carriers to the Persian Gulf conflict earlier this month, he ridiculed the idea on social media: “We don’t need people that join Wars after ​we’ve already won!"

At times, the ugly talk changed into something worse. Before his second inauguration, Trump began hinting that he wouldn’t rule out using force to annex Greenland, a territory of Denmark, a close NATO ally. At first this seemed like a troll or a joke; by January 2026, his public and private comments persuaded the Danes to prepare for an American invasion. Danish leaders had to think about whether their military would shoot down American planes, kill American soldiers, and be killed by them, an exercise so wrenching that some still haven’t recovered. In Copenhagen a few weeks ago, I was shown a Danish app that tells users which products are American, so that they know not to buy them. At the time it was the most popular app in the country.

The economic damage is no troll either. Over the course of 2025, Trump placed tariffs on Europe, the United Kingdom, Japan, and South Korea, often randomly—or again, whimsically—and with no thought to the impact. He raised tariffs on Switzerland because he didn’t like the Swiss president, then lowered them after a Swiss business delegation brought him presents, including a gold bar and a Rolex watch. He threatened to place 100 percent tariffs on Canada should Canada dare to make a trading agreement with China. Unbothered by possible conflicts of interest, he conducted trade negotiations with Vietnam, even as his son Eric Trump was breaking ground on a $1.5 billion golf-course deal in that country.

[From the April 2025 issue: The Trump world order]

Europeans might have tolerated the invective and even the trade damage had it not been for the real threat that Trump now poses to their security. Over the course of 14 months, he has, despite talking of peace, encouraged Russian aggression. He stopped sending military and financial aid to Ukraine, thereby giving Putin renewed hope of victory. His envoy, Steve Witkoff, began openly negotiating business deals between the United States and Russia, although the war has not ended and the Russians have never agreed to a cease-fire. Witkoff presents himself to European leaders as a neutral figure, somewhere between NATO and Russia—as if, again, the United States were not the founder and leader of NATO, and as if European security were of no special concern to Americans. Trump himself continues to lash out at Zelensky and to lie about American support for Ukraine, which he repeatedly describes as worth $300 billion or more. The real number is closer to $50 billion, over three years. At current rates, Trump will spend that much in three months in the Middle East, in the course of starting a war rather than trying to stop one.

The result: Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has declared that Canada will not participate in the “offensive operations of Israel and the U.S., and it never will.” German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius says, “This is not our war, and we didn’t start it.” The Spanish prime minister refused to let the United States use bases for the beginning of the war. The U.K. and France might send some ships to protect their own bases or allies in the Gulf, but neither will send their soldiers or sailors into offensive operations started without their assent.

This isn’t cowardice. It’s a calculation: If allied leaders thought that their sacrifice might count for something in Washington, they might choose differently. But most of them have stopped trying to find the hidden logic behind Trump’s actions, and they understand that any contribution they make will count for nothing. A few days or weeks later, Trump will not even remember that it happened.


From The Atlantic via this RSS feed

  • lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    I like the Atlantic and find that their reporting is usually good. This article, however, is just one example of a strange disconnect that affects American thinking about Trump: like many articles critical of the bastard, it is written with the implicit belief that Trump’s interests should align with what is best for the United States. Americans fall into this thinking trap because (rightly or wrongly) they believe that every previous man who served as president gave at least some thought to the good of the country. They can’t shake the notion that someone would become President without even a tiny modicum of patriotism or duty.

    Trump doesn’t care if attacking Iran is a disaster for the USA, Iran, or the entire world - he is trying to stay 1 foot ahead of the law. From Trump’s perspective, invading Iran was the perfect move. It’s not Trump who doesn’t understand this.

    Trump is like a fugitive who stole a city bus. He drove it straight through a barricade, left town, and disappeared over the horizon 14 months ago. Americans are still writing articles complaining about the new bus driver who has missed every pickup for the last year: “when’s he gonna take bus driving more seriously?”

    Bitches, he ain’t gonna pick you up tomorrow, either.

  • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    I mean, let’s just be clear about this: NO. FUCKING. SHIT.

    The media has played coy for years, giving him pass after pass after pass. I give this article the same respect I do as some fucking MAGA twit who, just now, says “Gas prices are high. I think Trump is not doing the best for us!”

    YEAH. NO FUCKING SHIT.

    Jesus christ I hate this fucking timeline passionately.

    • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      the vast majority of US citizens

      I’d say you can roughly divide US citizens into three groups of somewhat equal proportion

      • MAGA, living in an alternate reality
      • Sleepers - not paying more than passing attention to news headlines so believe Trump is just “another politician, whatever dude”
      • Centrist and progressive Democrats

      Unfortunately, even progressives such as myself are relatively centrist compared to the rest of the OECD (“developed”) countries. I’m no radical, but for the US, I almost am. Fewer than half of our Democrat third are probably progressive at all.

      So it’s no fucking wonder we have fascism in control.

      • protist@retrofed.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        As someone who lives in the South, a lot of us agree, too, just not enough of us. In Texas, 40-45% of people regularly vote Democrat, which is like over 5 million voters

      • BassTurd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        In most cases, if you were to ask most of the dissenters about individual beliefs, they would likely have semi liberal views, but at the same time, they’re too dumb and hateful to back it up. Not all things, but lots of things.

    • Major_Tsiom@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      It buys time. Europe and Canada are re arming. New alliances are being made. New trade deals. The US has a big military advantage right now and everyone knows it. World leaders can placate the orange retard for awhile until they are in a better position to defend against us or wipe us out. Even if it doesn’t come to WW3, they can shut us out of global trade like we did to communist countries so that the market would remain more stable.

  • altphoto@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    At least he sort of liberate people there? Like if he stops now, maybe things could possibly get better? Maybe? Did that ship already sail?

    It doesn’t matter I guess, nothing we do or say or think ever actually does anything to stop that guy from committing atrocities. So what’s the plan? Just sit here and watch? If there a legal mechanism we can use to recall our people and chill things down?