Transcript 0:00 [upbeat music] Hi, everybody, and welcome to Trendlines, a podcast on global affairs brought to you by World Politics Review. I'm Freddy Deakenatel, WPR's senior editor. 0:14 Our usual host, Judah Grunstein, is away this week. And I'm here with WPR's two associate editors, Rabih Khoury-Boulay and our newest member, Omar Rahman. Hey, guys. How's it going? Hey, Freddy. Doing well. How are you? 0:28 It's, it's going very well. Uh, it's been a great few weeks at WPR, and just really happy to be part of the team. Yeah, it's good to get you on the podcast. 0:34 This is the first, first episode, so I'm sure there'll be many more to come. Yeah, absolutely. So I thought it makes the most sense this week to talk about, um, what at least for now is the story, uh, of the week. 0:46 We never know how things will change with Trump in office, but the new announcement, such as it, as it is new, of an Afghanistan, uh, policy for the US and Trump's big speech, um, earlier this week. 1:00 Uh, Rabih, what did you make of Trump's speech? 1:03 Well, uh, you know, on the one hand, obviously sending more troops anywhere would appear to be in conflict with, uh, America first and some of the rhetoric that Trump spouted while on the cam- campaign trail. 1:17 Um, on the other hand, given that, uh, from the very early stages of this process, uh, the generals that Trump tends to defer to when making these decisions, um, made pretty clear what their hopes were in terms of a policy outcome, um, and the fact that what has ultimately been settled on is in line with that shouldn't be too surprising. 1:39 Um, I think that in all of the theaters in which the US is engaged that Trump has had to grapple with, um, he's been very direct in deferring to the generals and what they have to say, and, uh, that's what we saw here. 1:53 And Omar, were you, were you surprised by the tone Trump took in, in the fact that either it was more scripted than, than the Trump people are used to or, uh, for actually the substance of the speech? Uh, no, not really. 2:07 I think Trump set a, a very low bar when it comes to public speaking, especially when he's reading off a teleprompter, and I think this speech was right there at this level. 2:15 Uh, you know, I found it contradictory at times. It was full of Trumpian platitudes, usually about himself. 2:20 Uh, he went on to insult Pakistan, which I'm not sure is a great idea, uh, when you're trying to solve the problem in Afghanistan. 2:27 And I don't presume to know, you know, what the audience of soldiers he was addressing were thinking, but, you know, to me, he didn't inspire much confidence. 2:35 Uh, and if I were a soldier, I'd feel pretty uncomfortable about that. Um, I, I think it did demonstrate and reveal a few things about Trump. 2:42 Um, I think his campaign promises were popular to his base but, you know, weren't really grounded in any kind of critical thinking of complex issues like Afghanistan. 2:51 You know, he mentioned that he was following his instincts or he loves to follow his instincts. Uh, and I think he's not an ideologue. 2:58 You know, he's, he's flexible and he heeds the advice, as, as Rabih said, of his generals, except of course when he's, you know, uh, being impulsive and he's tweeting. 3:05 Uh, but I think at the end of the day, uh, like his whole f- whole form, foreign policy, there's, there's not much new in it. 3:11 Uh, and, and to a s- some extent that's emblematic of, of these type of problems that Afghanistan represents. There's nothing easy in Afghanistan. There's no magic fix there. 3:22 You know, you want to raise the troop levels, but to what end? Ultimately you're gonna be leaving. Uh, you want to kill terrorists and not nation build, but you're never gonna eradicate the terrorists in, in Afghanistan. 3:33 And, you know, the Taliban are locals and Americans n- are not, uh, and so killing Talibans is ultimately killing locals, and I don't think that's necessarily g- good strategy. 3:43 Yeah, I mean, we're talking about obviously the, the longest war in US history, which, um, y- you know, you always see that mentioned and, and it's, it's those forgotten war in a lot of ways. 3:54 Um, but, you know, 16 years there and the strategy, 3:58 uh, it wasn't, doesn't seem like that long ago that there was another new US president, um, you know, having, uh, another moment to review Afghan policy and, you know, trying to balance what his generals wanted with what, um, you know, either the, the State Department or, or diplomats wanted. 4:16 Um, I thought the interesting thing, and I wondered if w- what you guys made of this, that, you know, on the one hand a lot of people have pointed out how Trump's, um, you know, ramped up US efforts in Afghanistan are really not that different from anything Obama p- um, 4:31 pursued and, and, and, uh, suggested, which also isn't that different from Trump, uh, elsewhere in, in, in, in, uh, in the Middle East in particular if we're talking about, you know, the, the war on ISIS. 4:42 Trump likes to talk a big game, but his policy has really been just continuing what Obama was doing. 4:48 Um, there was something weird I thought in Trump's speech where obviously he was trying to appeal to, to sort of, to the military he was speaking to but also to his base about, you know, we're going around and, and we're not nation building, we're killing terrorists. 5:00 But then there were statements later on by the Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, and even in Trump's, I think in parts of Trump's speech that didn't get as much attention where they're still gonna try to pursue, uh, a negotiation with the Taliban, at least in some form. 5:12 So it's this balancing it seems a little bit between, you know, this really aggressive military posture and still, like you said, the recognition that, uh, this isn't a war you're gonna fully win 5:23 just through military force because these are locals. The, the, the Taliban is an Afghan issue. I think that's absolutely correct, you know? 5:30 I think, I mean, I, I think there is a continuation between Trump and Obama, although the style is very different. 5:36 Um, but when it comes to Afghanistan, uh, uh, he tried to differentiate himself by saying that, uh, you know, I don't think he pointed at Obama in particular, but he said, you know, there was a timetable before, and that's the wrong way, and I'm gonna set out these three conditions. 5:49 Uh, but I th- when, when I listen to those conditions, I don't think he can meet all of those. Uh, you know, he talked about an honorable and enduring, uh, departure for, for America and not leaving a political vacuum. 6:01 But, you know, what, what do you do if the Afghan government doesn't respond the way you want them to? Do you leave? I mean, that seems to be leaving a political vacuum. 6:11 What do you do if Pakistan doesn't, uh, step up to the plate in the way you want? I mean, he seemed to insinuate a threat against them by saying, "I'm gonna, I'm s- I'm gonna support India." 6:20 Uh, but I, you know, I, I don't think that's going to ensure the outcome you ultimately want, this honorable and enduring outcome in Afghanistan. 6:27 So I don't think there's any either easy answers here, but, uh, I don't think Trump, uh, did anything that left me i- impressed with any kind of strategy going forward. 6:38 Yeah, Robbie, I know last week we mentioned, um, or in, in a previous podcast, some of Trump's, um, policy in Africa in particular and, and how, you know, the State Department and, and, and US diplomatic outreach to Africa in particular has, has been one of the casualties already of the Trump administration. 6:56 Do you think that you could still see 6:59 the presence of, of some diplomatic force in Afghanistan just because the problem there is, um, you know, higher on the priority list of the US government, or do you, do, do you think that this is more of a, the military getting what it, what it, what it wanted all along? 7:13 Right. Well, I think that the military itself is aware of the need for, uh, interventions that aren't strictly involving troops. 7:23 I mean, Mattis himself has said that when you cut State Department funding, I have to buy more ammunition. So I mean, I think they understand the interchange. 7:32 And in this strategy too, there was at least some reference made to, uh, anti-corruption efforts, um, and an understanding that, uh, if we don't address some of these problems that are so central to the Afghan state, it's gonna be very hard to get it to a point where it can, can consolidate the security gains that the US is going for. 7:54 Um, on the other hand, obviously, if you don't allocate resources to the government agencies that are supposed to carry out those policies or that are supposed to implement those programs, the risk is that the intervention overall becomes very heavily skewed toward the military and toward the Defense Department at the expense of basically everything else. 8:15 And this is this, this challenge I think we're seeing where you, you actually have more, um, more nuance and more, you know, open, open eyes about the reality of the situation from the military, which has been given more, um, it seems like more of a stake in, in directing some of the foreign policy under Trump. 8:34 Obviously, Trump will like, likes to frame it like his, his generals are advising him to, to talk tough and to, to take some of the restrictions off of the, um, you know, terms of engagement in term, in, in, in a place like Afghanistan as well as in Syria and Iraq. 8:51 Um, there's been some reporting that civilian casualties in, in all those places have gone up since Trump, uh, came into office, um, because they've sort of taken at least, uh, arguably, um, some of the chain of command, uh, for airstrikes, for example, loosened those a little bit. 9:07 Um, but it also seems like the generals are also, uh, maybe the ones who, who also want the diplomats, like you're saying, there all along. Um, I wonder if Trump... I mean, this is the problem with him a lot of the time. 9:22 D- d- we don't, uh, we don't know what he, how much interest he really has in a problem like this. 9:27 Um, do you think that, you know, we could get a couple of months down the road and, and if, if there's, you know, either an escalation in, in Taliban attacks or, um, other military developments that, that aren't in the US' favor that Trump could turn around again, or do you think he's pretty locked into this for the moment? 9:45 You know, I don't think that we can necessarily guarantee policy consistency from the Trump administration. 9:50 You know, if the strategy goes awry, you know, he's erratic enough that, yeah, perhaps he would take it in a different direction. 9:57 I was surprised, uh, by some of the reporting I saw, um, documenting the extent to which he engaged on this. 10:04 Not that it was, um, you know, overly impressive, but he did take meetings with soldiers, um, who have experience on the ground in Afghanistan, and that informed at least his initial responses to the proposals that were brought to him. 10:17 Um, but d- to your question, Freddy, you know, is this policy going to shift dramatically? 10:23 Uh, Trump may want it to, and he may push it, he may push for that, um, in his interactions, but ultimately, as you say, while he might try, he might try to frame this as, you know, him shaping the generals, it is more likely a situation in which the generals are shaping his thinking, and they will ultimately, uh, win out in these debates. 10:44 Um, I agr- I agree with Robbie in that sense. Um, you know, I don't think you can... A- as I said before, I don't think, uh, Trump is stubborn in terms of, uh, his policies. 10:55 He seems to shift, um, depending on what he's hearing, uh, at any given moment. Um, so I, I, I don't think if we get further down the road and things aren't working out that he wouldn't necessarily shift. 11:07 But again, he's not gonna be the one generating these ideas based on, you know, a thorough, uh, look over the, the analysis and the information and the data, in my opinion. 11:17 Um, it'll be somebody, uh, like the generals, um, giving him advice on maybe a new strategy and, and he wants to move in that direction. 11:25 Yeah, I was reminded of, of a lot of the coverage of when Obama did his Afghan policy review when it went on for several months. 11:33 But it, the impression at the time wasn't that this is just being needlessly delayed or they're, they're dragging their feet. 11:39 It was that Obama, and this is sort of the, the im- the image of him in office was, you know, dealing with it like a constitutional law professor. Uh, he was debating people. 11:49 He was, you know, hearing every side of an argument. Um, some would say that might be too, uh, deliberative. 11:55 Um, but, but very clearly, we knew the President of the United States was, you know, taking the time to, to form his, his opinion and his policy based on, uh, the input of lots of people and lots of experts. 12:07 Um, some of the reporting I've read about Uh, the announcement leading up to Trump's speech on Monday was that the new, uh, chief of staff, John Kelly, was basically trying to keep certain people away from Trump because Trump has the reputation for basically repeating, uh, whatever the last person told him. 12:22 So it seems like, uh, Kelly is having his way a little bit in terms of being able to control at least a little bit of the, uh, White House operation. Um, we'll see how long that lasts. 12:34 Obviously, the last week or so in Charlottesville and elsewhere, and Trump's various speeches and rallies, um, kind of go against the view of John Kelly, uh, having some control over a pretty bombastic president. 12:49 Do you guys think that, um, you'll see in other areas of u- of foreign policy, whether, um, the, the fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, do you think you're... 13:00 that we're gonna see a continuation of, of a military, um, sort of increased military input in, in terms of strategy, or do you think that some of the, some of the country situations and, and, and, and some of the problems are gonna be more sort of on a case-by-case basis? 13:16 Well, I don't think there's much else going on. I mean, the, the State Department has been gutted and, and not been filled. 13:25 Um, and the kind of domestic political, uh, nationalists that were once in Trump's, uh, administration are now out. So you have Flynn and, and Bannon and all these guys out. 13:36 And so the people that are ascendant in that White House and who are speaking to Trump on a daily basis and, and kind of controlling the policy are, uh, that group of generals, uh, that he does feel comfortable and he trusts. 13:48 Um, and so I think they're, they're... You know, that's, that's really [chuckles] the, the, the whole full scope of the information starts and stops there. 13:57 I wouldn't be surprised if, if, uh, you know, the, the kind of the, the military point of view is the one that triumphs in, in, in a, in a number of different decisions. 14:06 And I would just add to that, I think it will be very interesting in the weeks and potentially months to come, depending how long it takes, uh, to see what happens with the budget. 14:17 Um, I know that obviously the Trump administration has proposed these massive cuts to the State Department, but there does seem to be considerable resistance in Congress. 14:27 And if those people in Congress who do want to see the State Department funded ultimately are able to influence the final numbers, you could end up seeing less of a change in how US diplomacy operates abroad. 14:41 I mean, a lot of that machinery is in place already and, uh, just needs to be funded. 14:47 So if the money is provided, there may be little that Trump can do to undermine, you know, how the State Department operates and how, uh, other agencies that implement non-military programs operate. 14:59 Uh, so it's gonna be interesting, that debate, what the outcome is. 15:02 Yeah, that's a great point, and, and, and it's a good reminder of, for all of the fear of, of someone like Trump being able to unilaterally change a whole swath of US foreign policy, there's certain areas definitely where he does have influence, uh, undoubtedly. 15:16 But there's other areas where, um, there are other players. There's lots of entrenched interests, not in a bad way entrenched, but just in terms of the, the f- you know, full scope of the US government. 15:26 You can't just, uh... You might be able to try to, like you said, you know, slash the budget or, uh, for something. But, uh, budget fights in Congress are not that clean and straightforward. 15:37 And also, um, I think the, the, part of that debate, hopefully we'll see that, uh, the people who do have Trump's ear, at least for the moment, um, you know, the, the generals Mattis or the, uh, retired General Mattis and, and then McMaster, the National Security Advisor, and Kelly, uh, as you said, they're just, you know, f- they are military men, but they also recognize the importance of diplomacy. 15:59 And, um, 16:01 sort of you hope that, uh, one of the things that Trump is learning in office, if he is learning anything, is that, uh, on the campaign trail, it's one thing to, to praise the military and, and rile up your base, uh, with a lot of sort of militaristic talk. 16:15 But when you actually are sitting in a room talking to, talking to officers, um, they'll actually be the ones who want the very things that you think are, are a projection of, of, of weakness, uh, whether that's d- you know, diplomats, soft power, uh, the kinds of things that, um, make 16:32 something like an intervention a lot less likely. Um, I guess we've sort of gone around Afghanistan a bit. I wondered also, um, you know, we're sort of in this lull period at the end of August, 16:46 and we're, you know, seeing some, uh... Obviously, there's always a constant, um, drip of Trump news. You mentioned the budget fight, Robbie. 16:55 Do you think that once September hits, um, and just by the pace of Washington but also various developments around the world, whether it's North Korea or, um, 17:07 something with ISIS or elsewhere, that Trump is sort of en- en- enjoying a lull right now and that things are gonna pick up? 17:14 I mean, I know that the, the investigation by, uh, Robert Mueller, the special counsel, is, is, you know, waiting to, to release whatever its findings are, and maybe those won't come in the fall. 17:24 Maybe those will come later. But it sort of seems like there's this late summer dip right now, and we're kind of maybe on the verge of, of a lot of activity. Or, or maybe I'm, I'm wrong. What do you think? 17:34 Yeah, I think on foreign policy, you're right. It's... There... 17:40 None of these issues have hard and fast deadlines, and so it is possible to create a lull or to create, um, a period in which you don't necessarily need to take immediate decisions. 17:50 Trump has done a pretty good job of creating situations in which it appears like action needs to be taken, for example, with respect to, to North Korea. 17:58 But in general, on some of these issues, um, you know, you can let them slide for a little bit, and nothing too terrible will happen. 18:05 What is going to be a real issue for the administration is, uh, the budget fight and, uh, specifically whether, uh, Trump is going to stay hard and fast in his commitment to money for the border wall, uh, and other things that are non-starters in Congress. 18:20 'Cause that, the budget actually does have a deadline. And, uh, if they don't meet it, then the government shuts down, and the Republicans obviously will bear the blame for that. 18:29 So yeah, I think now compared to what's about to happen, it is a lull, although it doesn't, hasn't really felt, to me at least, like it's been especially calm just because the leadership has been so erratic. 18:41 Yeah, I guess it's, it's, it's hard. It, it- everything's relative now. Um, and of course, given the last, you know, if we were talking a week ago, we wouldn't necessarily be thinking that things had gotten quiet at all. 18:51 Um, I guess the, uh... That sort of probably does it for discussing Afghanistan for now. Um, we've been having a quieter publishing week this week as part of our annual, uh, reduced publishing schedule. 19:06 We still have one to two articles new on the site every day, and, uh, we'll have the podcast of course as well. Um, were there articles you guys wanted to highlight for, for listeners? 19:18 Uh, yeah, Freddy, I wanted to highlight a briefing that we published today by Jamie Hitchen looking at the mudslides in Sierra Leone. Um, the death toll, which now exceeds 500, has been getting a lot of attention. 19:33 What I think Jamie's piece does a good job of is looking at the policy errors that lead to these kinds of disasters, specifically, uh, with urbanization and the lack of regulations around deforestation and other factors. 19:47 Yeah, I thought that was a sharp piece, and it, and it is the kind of story that, uh, you look at a natural disaster, and obviously there's usually much more going on than just the disaster itself. 19:57 And, uh, as someone who spent a lot of time in Cairo in particular, the story of unplanned urbanization and informal settlements, um, is something that's certainly not confined just to Sierra Leone. 20:09 And Omar, what did you want to highlight? Um, yeah, I'd like to flag, uh, Ellen Laipson's piece, um, that was about the US and its allies being on the same page vis-a-vis North Korea, Russia, Iran. 20:21 I, I found the piece very interesting because it points out a, you know, a, a phenomenon of international re- relations that's, uh, happening all the time, and that's when there's a divergence on how to deal with threats even among allies. 20:34 Um, and that, that there's usually a correlation there between the proximity to the, to the problem. Uh, so South Korea with North Korea, um, and then the countries around Iran and, and Russia. 20:44 You know, they might have a different opinion than the US on how to deal with the situation because they're right there. Yeah. 20:50 And that's a good segue into the, the briefing I was going to mention, uh, which is a piece by, by Sam Roggeveen looking at Australia-US ties, you know, so far in the, in the Trump era and why Trump has really hastened 21:04 a really profound shift in Australia's view of, of the state of its alliance with the US, which Obama not too long ago described as Australia's great alliance. 21:14 So it's another example of how Trump is already having a quick impact abroad. 21:19 Well, before we sign off, I was going to remind listeners that if you like what you hear on Trendlines, and you're familiar with the site or you've come across an article or two, please consider subscribing to WPR. 21:32 It's the best way that you can support what we do here. Uh, we're subscription-based, no advertising, uh, so everything we write and edit and record here on the podcast is really for our readers and our listeners. 21:46 And we have a special promotion now for podcast listeners. You can get a 25% discount on the first year of an annual subscription to World Politics Review. 21:55 You can find out more information on our website, and if you look under the Podcast heading on the homepage, you'll find, uh, a link to the subscription registration form, and you can enter in the special code PODCAST, 22:11 and you'll get your discount. Well, it was great to talk, guys. Uh, have a great weekend, and, uh, we'll talk next week for another episode of Trendlines. Great. Thanks a lot, Freddy. Absolutely. That was fun. 22:23 Have a good weekend. Trendlines is produced and edited by Peter Dory. 22:28 You can follow Peter and World Politics Review on Twitter, and you can find links to the articles we discussed today, as well as more information about our subscription offer, in the show notes on worldpoliticsreview.com. 22:40 Thanks for listening, and see you next week for a new episode of Trendlines. [outro music]
