When Donald J. Trump first ran for president in 2016, many critics contended that his bombastic style would create international problems, possibly even wars. This was coupled with accusations that he would upend the post-World War II liberal international order in all kinds of horrific ways, though the modern benefits of said international order were not necessarily specified.
Both in President Trump’s first and second terms, no such disaster has taken place. Instead, Trump started no new wars in his first term, and he has now brokered a peace deal ending the Israel-Hamas war in his second term.
Trump has expressed hope for a broader Israeli-Palestinian peace deal since he first ran for president, stating in a 2016 GOP debate, “there’s nothing I would rather do than bring peace to Israel and its neighbors, generally. I think it serves no purpose to say you have a good guy and a bad guy.” This caused his Republican primary rivals to attack him as insufficiently pro-Israeli. Democrats would later criticize Trump in similar fashion on Russia and Ukraine, accusing him of being insufficiently pro-Ukrainian.
However, the common thread in both conflicts is that Trump correctly views negotiating a peace deal as the goal, not signaling ideological affinity for one side. Trump is reported to have pressured Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu into signing the Israel-Hamas peace plan despite potential misgivings from Netanyahu. He has been critical of Netanyahu in the past, including recently when Israel launched a strike on Hamas in Qatar. He is not interested in deferring to Israeli actions if he believes they are counterproductive. This approach positions the U.S. as an ally to Israel, not a rubberstamp for its decisions, with an emphasis on putting America first rather than subjugation to a foreign power.
Trump’s critics have inaccurately cast him an isolationist, dictator supporter, and warmonger, when the truth is he has a clear-eyed view of global conflicts. He disdains Iraq-style nation-building, supports limited strikes when he believes American interests are at risk, and seeks to wind down existing conflicts to the extent possible. So far, this approach is working wonders.
