OPINION:
The historic ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas conflict and widespread international support for a 20-point Gaza Strip peace plan are major diplomatic achievements for President Trump. Although many uncertainties and challenges remain, Mr. Trump’s accomplishments have laid the groundwork for a regional geopolitical realignment and the emergence of a new Middle East.
In this regard, Mr. Trump’s policies have significantly weakened the forces of regional extremism. For example, Iran’s nuclear ambitions were thwarted by the U.S. bombing attack; with strong U.S. support, Lebanon’s central government is pursuing the disarmament of Hezbollah forces and the blocking of Iranian weapons transshipments. Syria’s new leadership is rejecting Iranian influence and is negotiating for peaceful relations with Israel.
Further, with U.S. diplomacy actively engaged, realistic prospects exist for an expanded Abraham Accords between Israel and majority-Muslim nations. Finally, U.S. influence predominates, and Russia and China have been marginalized in the region. These major geopolitical successes are direct results of the president’s leadership and his effective national security strategy, which are products of U.S. international leadership.
Once in office, Mr. Trump immediately established strong relations with key Arab nations and made it clear that the U.S. would actively oppose the current Iranian regime. He also developed personal relationships with the leaders of Qatar and Turkey, whose support for the Gaza peace plan has proved important. As for Israel, Mr. Trump never suspended weapons deliveries or otherwise pressured the Jewish state, but instead supported its military actions in Gaza.
Mr. Trump’s national security strategy has not been an academic construct but rather a reflection of sound political instincts combined with outstanding negotiating skills. His approach has been to convey clear strategic objectives and present clear demands to U.S. adversaries. He first insisted that Iran could not have a nuclear weapon. When Iran would not change course, Mr. Trump took decisive military action.
Mr. Trump has also wisely ignored the U.S. foreign policy establishment’s common wisdom. For example, while foreign policy “experts” asserted that Middle East progress was not possible before resolving Palestinian issues during his first term, Mr. Trump proceeded to orchestrate the historic Abraham Accords.
In contrast with President Biden, Mr. Trump appointed people with extensive private sector accomplishments to key Middle East policy positions. Mr. Biden relied on former members of his Capitol Hill staff, bureaucrats and academics.
Mr. Trump understands the need to use force when necessary to achieve a preferred diplomatic outcome. His demonstrated willingness to use force against Iran and his unwavering support for Israel’s use of force against Hamas were crucial to getting the current Gaza ceasefire. With Israeli troops ready to attack Hamas’ last stronghold with Mr. Trump’s full support, a politically and militarily isolated Hamas concluded that it had no real choice but to return the hostages.
Mr. Trump understands how to use military force effectively. He eschewed the “gradualism” and “signaling” tactics employed by President Johnson during the Vietnam conflict. He also rejected the Biden approach of either not responding to attacks on U.S. forces and interests or ordering pinprick retaliations on vacant facilities. Mr. Trump’s attack on Iran’s nuclear capabilities deployed an overwhelming U.S. military force, as did the U.S. attack on Houthi facilities in Yemen, and both uses of force involved quick and clear exits.
Yet Mr. Trump’s approach to the use of force has been measured. For example, as former CENTCOM Commander Frank McKenzie recounts in his memoir, “The Melting Point,” regarding his first-term briefings to Mr. Trump on military options against Iran: “It had always been clear to me that the President did not wish war with Iran; it was equally clear that he would not allow Iran to pursue a nuclear weapon. … I found the president to be rational and very reasonable” on military options.
In the broadest sense, Mr. Trump’s national security strategy, tactics and policies reflect an underlying assumption and belief that the U.S. should not retreat into isolationism, but rather be an international leader. As historian Walter Russell Mead observed in The Wall Street Journal recently: “One thing is clear. Donald Trump is no shrinking violet, and as long as he sits in the Oval Office, the U.S. is unlikely to retreat from the world.”
• Bruce Weinrod is a Washington lawyer and an adjunct professor at the American University School of International Service. He is also a former senior Department of Defense official.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.