The Artlessness of the Trumpian Deal
In the beginning...
Towards the end of the Reaganomics era, The Art of the Deal revealed many details of Donald Trump, including an 11-step formula for business success. While the release party took place at Trump Tower, he started dabbling in national politics 2 months beforehand. A full-page advertisement in major newspapers in September 1987 laid into Washington for helping fund allies' defence spending. "There's nothing wrong with America's Foreign Defense Policy that a little backbone can't cure." The "Draft Trump" movement was meant to be promotion for the book along with its political overtone/undertone.
Publishers Weekly called it a "boastful, boyishly disarming, thoroughly engaging personal history." Journalist John Tierney observed that Trump "appears to have ignored some of his own advice due to well-publicized problems with his banks." Some have seen him as having been a "poster child for the 'greed is good' 1980s." As recently as 2015 in the National Review, Jim Geraghty wrote that the book showed a "much softer, warmer, and probably happier figure than the man dominating the airwaves today." In The Atlantic in 2016, the ethicist John Paul Rollert wrote that then and now, Trump sees capitalism not as an economic system but a morality play - which is effectively a synonym for ideology.
Besides the personality traits and personal beliefs evident therein, The Art of the Deal has raised some question marks about his character. Biographer Gwenda Blair wrote in 2000 that for a long time she failed to understand "how fabricated it was...how that founding myth was so riddled with at best exaggeration." His "first big deal" in Cincinnati was almost entirely that of his father, Fred Trump, with Donald at college and only visiting once. Without his first actual big deal, Grand Hyatt, "I'd probably be back in Brooklyn today, collecting rents." Another biographer, Wayne Barrett, took issue with how many key players were omitted: "It was as if Donald walked out onstage alone."
The first development named after himself, Trump Tower, was completed differently from his claim, according to his former lawyer, George Ross. Zoning laws were a key aspect of gaining approval for the project's go-ahead. Ross wrote, "I enlightened Donald about the zoning laws that permitted one owner to sell and transfer unused building rights, commonly called air rights." One key factor was the adjacent Tiffany's store. Trump's claim is that the cold-called Tiffany's owner Walter Hoving, and tricked him into a one-sided deal. According to Ross, the transaction was due to Fred Trump's business connections: "Donald's father and Walter Hoving had done some business together and Donald's father suggested to him that he could work out a fair deal with Hoving in a short period of time."
The Art of the Deal is officially credited to Donald J. Trump and journalist Tony Schwartz. In fact, it was entirely written by Schwartz, with both him and the publisher, Howard Kaminsky, alleging that Trump played no part in writing it. While being one of Trump's proudest accomplishments and second-favourite book after the Bible, according to Schwartz, ghost-writing it is his "greatest regret in life, without question." Originally hired to write it for $250,000 upfront, Trump went on to claim in 2016 that Schwartz didn't write it at all. Schwartz's article in The New Yorker declaring his regret and suggesting that if written today it should be called The Sociopath, and that he "put lipstick on a pig" resulted in Trumps' attorneys demanding that Schwartz cede his royalties to him. Regardless, 3 years later Schwartz suggested that the book should "recategorized as fiction."
Aside from legal toing-and-froing, certain turns of phrase were coined of which the official coauthor is still fond: "truthful hyperbole" and "an innocent form of exaggeration - and a very effective form of promotion." Trump's fickle relationship with the truth goes back to his pre-presidential era, as described by Tony Schwartz himself: "Lying is second nature to him. More than anyone else I have ever met, Trump has the ability to convince himself that whatever he is saying at any given moment is true, or sort of true, or at least ought to be true."
Matryoshka doll - American addition(s)
Is the 45th and 47th President of the United States still the former real estate tycoon in different clothing? In 2021, former KGB agent Yuri Shvets claimed that the KGB had started cultivating Trump in the 1980s, just as rapprochement was beginning between the USA and the USSR. In The Art of the Deal, potential business opportunities were mentioned, including "a large luxury hotel across the street from the Kremlin in partnership with the Soviet government."
Yuri Shvets also alleges to having discussed Trump going into politics and being "stunned" when the full-page advertisement about America's foreign defense policy seemed to parrot some anti-Western Russian talking points. This behaviour reappeared in an exasperated fashion when negotiating decades later, when he attempted to paint President Zelensky of Ukraine into a corner. The nation of the supposed "dictator" would have been destroyed if Russia had wanted to. Resultantly, President Volodymyr Zelensky claimed that Trump "lives in this disinformation space."
It could even be a reflection of admiration for President Putin that entails his artful dealing to be on the Kremlin's behalf. "I knew Putin very well. I got along with him great. He's a tough cookie, got a lot of charm and a lot of pride." Trump's preference for a weaker Canada came true recently by managing to be the northern neighbour's bogeyman, so the Liberal government was reelected. As such, he is somewhat Putinesque when navigating a deal indirectly. Even when it does not involve an American neighbour such as with Russia and Ukraine, there is much that has a distinctly fishy smell.
The war "that never would have happened had I been President" has seen Trump produce no progress whatsoever. The 2 hour phone call between Trump and Putin did not produce the unconditional ceasefire, and according to Russian state media did not contain a dressing down to which President Zelensky was subjected in the Oval Office 2 weeks beforehand. Putin's playing for time has duped Trump into perceiving a form of progress. US Envoy Steve Witkoff was made to wait for 8 hours before being presented with 'nuances' which were effectively a list of demands. The false sense of progress enabled by Putin's stalling, misdirecting and unreasonable demands in the face of applying no pressure was confirmed by the red carpet treatment granted to Putin in August 2025.
That welcome in Alaska, sold by Russia to the US in 1867, significantly contradicted Zelensky's frigid reception in the Oval Office. Trump's effort to treat Putin as a strategic partner as opposed to what he really is, a pariah, ended without a substantial peace deal ending the Ukraine conflict. The appearances were slightly closer to reality after the talks - generalities about an "understanding" and "progress" while praising one another and answering no questions in front of a "pursuing peace" placard.
Briefly after that, F-22s and a B-2 bomber overflew. Both were designed during the Cold War, but didn't enter service until after it had ended. While they might have been intended to remind the Russian leader of US military might, it hadn't been considered that it would make the former KGB major even more determined in his pipe-dream of reconstructing the Soviet Union. Whereas Trump may have had a vague semblance of a deal, the meeting with Zelensky ended without signing a planned deal on rare earth minerals. Zelensky's attempts to warn Trump that Putin could not be trusted were greeted with a scolding lecture.
Expansionist frontiersman delivering feisty diplomacy
Donald Trump's image of the United States is as unique to him as the image of Donald Trump is to himself. Flying in the face of its global image, he has described Canada as "one of the nastiest countries to deal with." The trade deficit of around $63 billion in 2024 was classified as an annual $200 billion "subsidy" which is his justification for Canada becoming "our 51st state." as the border is "an artificially drawn line." It was settled and confirmed by treaties in 1783, 1814 and 1818 along with the War of 1812. It does not fit the semantics of the 8,891Km / 5,525 mile border being "artificially drawn."
In addition to trade motivating condescension towards Canada, there is another neighbour in the far north which is part of a desired shopping spree. Greenland is officially a self-governing autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. Being 90% Inuit, it has more in common with Canada than the US, despite occasional USAF use for Cold War operations. While Trump was beginning as a real estate developer in the 1970s, Vice President Nelson Rockefeller who was also born into an industrial and business family suggested buying Greenland for mining. It got out that President Trump had mentioned securing such a real-estate deal would secure his place in history.
The Danish prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, called the entire concept "an absurd discussion," in that "Greenland is not for sale." Probably in a slight bad mood, Trump canceled a planned state visit to Greenland. One motivation may have been to thwart Russia and China in terms of geopolitics while strengthening that of the US. It succeeded for the wrong reasons for Trump in particular, as Nils Wang, former head of the Danish Royal Navy explained. "Trump's approach may be wacky but it does send a serious message to Russia and China - don't mess with us in Greenland. This is a complete game-changer." While a Truth Social post of Trump that US "ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity", the frosty response from both the Greenlandic premier and Danish prime minister ended up with Trump Jr being dispatched on a diplomatic mission which was a tacky flop with the homeless given free meals in exchange for wearing MAGA hats in a staged video shoot. 
Another more recent symptom of the fetish for territorial expansion in which the US has more direct historical involvement is the Panama Canal. Originally a French concession and constructed during the presidencies of Theodore Roosevelt, Taft and Wilson, the Canal Zone was administered by the US, to which the Panamanians had long been hostile. The decades of civil unrest ended with the signing of a treaty between Panamanian military leader Omar Efraín Torrijos Herrera and President Jimmy Carter in 1977. The resulting phased transition culminated in complete US withdrawal on December 31, 1999, after which administration has been by the Panama Canal authority. Contrary to President Trump's implication that US warships were exempt from fees being rejected by the Panama Canal Authority, he insisted that the US should "take back" the canal as it was being "run by China", his interpretation of the MOU that Panama could join China's Belt and Road initiative.
Bringing a new twist to the definition of hostile takeover, Secretary of State Marco Rubio used a quasi-get-out clause in the Torrijos-Carter treaty as a means to regain a form of control as the US had to "take measures necessary to protect its rights" This partially-true fact enabled the US to partially-outmaneuver a geopolitical rival, although only indirectly benefiting the US: The Panama Maritime Authority (AMP) gave Danish firm Maersk temporary operatorship of 2 ports at either end of the canal, Balboa and Cristobal. This followed a Panamanian Supreme Court invalidating prior contracts with Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison as unconstitutional.
In addition to Panama, there was a concurrent effort to redesign atlases regarding a neighbouring oceanic basin. The executive order in January 2025, "Restoring Names That Honor American Greatness" was an official attempt to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the "Gulf of America." As most cargo shipments in that basin are American, the change is justified. This ended up being technically applied to the US portion of the gulf, 12 nautical miles from the coast which is under US federal jurisdiction according to the Territorial Sea clause of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The new name was implemented on Google Maps, which is only visible to users in the United States, amounting to something of a hollow victory.
While speaking softly has never been his forté, President Trump has also carried a Rooseveltian big stick. In particular, this was Delta Force conducting Operation Absolute Resolve, following months of planning and surveillance. It was for the capture - essentially an abduction - of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores from their compound in Caracas on January 3. The operation involved airstrikes at the same time as the capture, being moved to the USS Iwo Jima, then flown to New York. The extraterritorial abduction, described by many as a violation of international law ended with Maduro facing federal charges in a New York court of narco-terrorism and drug trafficking.
While Venezuela and neighbouring Columbia had long been petro-states and narco-states, arranging Maduro's replacement is a shady one-sided affair. Of the possible replacements, the most prominent are both ladies. The best known for 3 years beforehand is María Corina Machado. In 2023, she won the opposition primary to become the Unity Platform candidate for the 2024 presidential election. She was barred from running because she had been disqualified from holding public office for 15 years regarding highly questionable administrative and fiscal violations from her time as a legislator. Her replacement candidate was Edmundo González, who according to documented voting tallies won the election, while the Maduro government claimed victory instead. Shortly afterwards, Machado went into hiding, expressing fears for her life and freedom under the Maduro government.
Maria Corina Machado, a Nobel Peace Price laureate, had several US lawmakers calling for her party to take power. Shortly after Nicolás Maduro's capture, Vice President Delcy Rodriguez became interim President. Mixed messages from the White House included President Trump being dismissive of Machado while Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke favourably of her although it was too early for this transition with the majority of Venezuela's opposition leaders being outside the country.
At a private meeting between Machado and Trump followed by multiple US senators on January 15, she stated that she was planning to go back to Venezuela as soon as possible. "This has nothing to do with tension or relations between Delcy Rodriguez and myself," then describing how the "criminal structure" that has dominated Venezuela for years would eventually dismantle itself. A week later, Trump said that he was considering involving Machado in his plans for Venezuela in some way, however he did not specify which role she would end up in.
This form of quiet-ish backsliding means that Delcy Rodriguez, daughter of a former Marxist guerilla and deputy to captured former President Maduro continues in the Venezuelan presidency. "Stability over democracy" is one interpretation of former US ambassador to Venezuela, Charles Shapiro. He believes that keeping the dictatorial regime in place without the dictator is "risky as hell." According to Trump, Rodriguez is "gracious", while Marina Corina Machado is "not respected" inside Venezuela. It is unclear how exactly he arrived at this interpretation, but it is clear enough that it is on his own authority. Former deputy chief of mission at the US embassy in Caracas, Kevin Whitaker, said that when Trump disqualified Machado, this decision, "in effect, disqualified that whole movement."
Portraying himself as a tough man is only where the Venezuela revamping/ refurbishment saga began. According to Henry Ziemer, an associate fellow with the Americas program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, "the capture of Maduro was the easy part. The broader rebuilding of Venezuela, the oil, drugs and democracy goals...are going to take much more time to come to fruition." Whereas Rodriguez could enable US oil companies to have improved business leverage and scale down Venezuela's relations with Cuba, Russia and China especially if part of the deal includes lifting US sanctions, "if the US is asking for genuine progress towards a democratic transition, that becomes much harder."
This has been proven by Secretary of State Marco Rubio's three-stage plan, starting with stabilization and marketing of 30-50 million barrels of oil under US supervision. This would lead to "a process of reconciliation" including releasing political prisoners and rebuilding civil society. "The third phase, of course, will be one of transition." He hasn't elaborated on this at all. Trump has been more plain-spoken in saying, "we have to fix the country first, you can't have an election."
Analysis and interpretation by Phil Gunson, International Crisis Group analyst based in Caracas, is most telling of all, not only about the situation on the ground, but also about Trump's deal making in creating it. "Trump may be getting something out of this, but Venezuelans aren't. Ordinary Venezuelans are getting screwed as usual. Nobody's going to come here with the tens of billions of dollars that are required to start the recovery process if the government is illegitimate and there's no rule of law." Furthermore, former Ambassador Shapiro sees Trump's enablement of the rise to power of Delcy Rodriguez as parallel to how Maduro was designated as successor to Hugo Chávez by Chávez himself.
In addition to encouraging Venezuela to either scale down or recalibrate Caraca's relations with Cuba, it appears that President Trump has some designs on a form of control over Havana. Once Venezuelan President Maduro had been abducted, fuel exports to Cuba were halted, thus creating an energy crisis. Within a month of Maduro's disappearance and rapid reappearance in a New York courtroom, President Trump described the economic reality of the Caribbean island along with the choices Havana may or may not have. "It may be a friendly takeover, it may not be a friendly takeover. It wouldn't really matter because they're really down to, as they say, fumes. They have no energy, they have no money. They are going to make either a deal or we'll do it just as easy anyway."
Desired Persian shellacking
"Speak softly and carry a big stick." - Theodore Roosevelt, 26th President of the United States.
Cuba was mentioned only 2 weeks into the Israeli-US war on Iran. While the Trumpian big stick has been obvious in the Middle East, speaking softly has been the sole factor regarding Cuba. However, a year before the war, speaking softly was somewhat bizarre in the proposal to transform the Gaza Strip into the "Riviera of the Middle East." After a conflict, the US would "take over" and "own" the Gaza Strip, levelling all of its rubble to create a high-end "world-class" development with hotels and housing. While the Palestinian population would have to be relocated, it would create jobs and bring stability, with Gaza then becoming "magnificent."
There is business at hand before attempting to start the redevelopment that "everybody loves" - namely dealing with the Middle East's primary trouble-maker, Iran. Much of the roots of Iran lie within a centerpiece of foreign policy of the Obama administration. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the Iran nuclear deal was intended to prevent development of a nuclear weapon in exchange for significant relief from economic sanctions. Iran had agreed to limit its uranium enrichment program, redesign facilities to prevent production of weapons-grade plutonium, and provide the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) full access to Iran's nuclear facilities and supply chain.
In exchange, the US, EU and the UN lifted sanctions related to Iran's nuclear program. It gave Iran access to over $100 billion in frozen overseas assets and resume exporting oil. The JCPOA was effective in January 2016, with President Trump withdrawing the US from it in 2018, calling it a "defective" deal that failed to address Iran's missile program and behaviour in the Middle East. Accompanying US withdrawal was the reinstatement of sanctions, known as the "maximum pressure" campaign. Iran's responded by no longer complying with the restrictions on it nuclear activities. Despite European powers attempting to keep the deal active, Iran officially announced its termination in October 2025. It is likely that President Trump provoked Iran into resuming its previous misbehavior.
However, in addition to President Trump, JCPOA has many critics. One of which is even Saudi Arabia, also believing the deal to be too lenient. The "sunset" provisions would have eventually allowed Iran to revive its nuclear program. One firm opponent of course is Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The "historic mistake" left too much infrastructure in place and the sanctions relief would end up funding terrorism. In particular, the sunset clause would allow restrictions on Iran's nuclear program to be lifted after approximately 10 years, which Netanyahu named an "invitation for Iran to cheat." Iran did cheat, so at the time they successfully hoodwinked President Obama.
Netanyahu's warning that lifting sanctions would grant Iran hundreds of billions of dollars, fueling its "tentacles of terror" and aggression throughout the Middle East. This has been proven to be unfortunately accurate, with Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Israel's northern neighbour Lebanon, as well as the Houthis in Yemen. He warned that the deal would not change Iran for the better, but would make the Middle East more dangerous. In this case, hard-liner Netanyahu was accurate, whereas peace at any price Obama ended up being sorely mistaken, especially with their claim that the deal was the best verifiable method of preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
President Trump's claims about Obama's deal are similar to Netanyahu's in them being largely true. While impossible to predict what would have happened had the JCPOA remained in place, Iran was highly likely to have misbehaved anyway given its long-standing and ongoing encouragement of Islamic fundamentalism. After the first airstrikes which started the Iran war on February 28, Trump took it as an opportunity to make himself appear a master dealmaker through castigating Obama's poor judgement regarding Iran in particular. "Obama made maybe the worst deal I've ever seen, because he gave all power in the Middle East to Iran, he went the exact opposite way, and I terminated that." A week later, he extended his reasoning: "The Iran nuclear deal gave them the right to have a nuclear weapon as of three years ago."
Several experts have disputed President Trumps' claim that Iran advanced its nuclear program after the decision to withdraw from the JCPOA during his first term. The Iran situation is effectively a bad deal by President Obama which was aggravated by President Trump, despite him believing otherwise.
The war itself was begun what both Israel and the US have termed to be a "pre-emptive strike." Both arch-foes of Iran since the Islamic revolution in 1979 because of Iran's leadership calling for Israel's elimination and denouncing the US as the "Great Satan". Apparent progress of US-Iran negotiations stalled when President Trump said he was "not happy" with them on February 27. Air strikes began hours after he had declared his discontent. Just a week and a half later, President Trump said the war was "very complete pretty much. We're very far ahead of schedule," later suggesting that the US would "go further." Prime minister Netanyahu as a partial echo-chamber said that the campaign would "continue as long as it is needed."
In the meantime, Iran is taking advantage of its geopolitical location. The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world's busiest oil shipping channels, effectively blocked by Iran since the initial attack on February 28. 33 to 50km wide, approximately 20% of the world's liquified natural gas (LNG) passes through the straight with 20 barrels of oil and oil products passing through on a daily basis in 2025, making a total of roughly $600 billion. It is a key transit route for most OPEC member states. It is also a crucial route for exporting fertilizer - 1/3 of the global total. Many merchant ships have been hit by missiles, drone boats and mines.
Aside from wanting the war to finish asap, the desired/demanded terms for ending it vary among each of the participants.
The ideal of the ayatollahs' rule collapsing is not even close, with the next best being them modifying their and their republic's behaviour. Indeed, the replacement for the recently assassinated Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is his son, Mojtaba Khamenei. With oil prices rising and their accompanying general inflationary effect, domestic unease in the US is effected by President Trump declaring that the Strait of Hormuz should be reopened and other nations are not doing enough to assist in this venture, it would be hard to present his anti-Iran venture as a success if the regime in Tehran survives. According to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Iran's regime is "intact" but "highly downgraded."
Presenting success or near-success accompanied by his own brand of ranting are his current means of attempting to achieve a deal with both opponents and nominal allies. He is considering "winding down" the Iran war due to the US "getting very close" to meeting its military objectives. This optimistic phrasing was accompanied by implied threats towards Iran of its future status: "I don't want to do a ceasefire. You don't do a ceasefire when you're literally obliterating the other side." Reopening of the Strait of Hormuz by other NATO allies is "so easy for them to do, with so little risk", going on to pillory them for their reluctance as "cowards."
The quasi-unofficial partner of the US is in less of a hurry to end this war. While Iran's weapon storage locations, command and control centres, radar sites and IRGC bases could be rebuilt and reconfigured when any shooting stops, Israel is especially serious about Iran becoming well-aware that doing so would see the Israeli Air Force return to bomb them again and 're-destroy' them. Iran's highly developed homegrown missile a drone industry are threats that prime minister Netanyahu cannot live with, hence additional air strikes which may or may not have been pre-approved, but not opposed thereafter by President Trump.
On the other hand, the enemy at Israel's metaphoric gates wants the war to stop as quickly as possible, but not at any price. Iran could well be using their own version of Putin-esque "strategic patience" to outlast Trump in this war, along with the geographic advantage of being able to threaten a large proportion of global shipping through the narrow chokepoint of the Strait of Hormuz. President Trump's call on countries to help deal with these consequences of the Netanyahu-Trump War have been met with reluctance, hence them being "cowards" who are making a "foolish mistake."
Since the Iranian Revolution in 1979 which overthrew the Pahlavi dynasty in 1979, the supreme leader has been a senior cleric - an Ayatollah - of the Khamenei family. Ruhollah Khamenei was succeeded by his son Ali, who was then succeeded by Mojtaba after his elimination. Effectively, Iran is a theological monarchy. The "Ayatocracy" demands that the war end with a guarantee that it won't be attacked again along with war reparations for the damage done by US and Israeli airstrikes, worth several billion.
The neighbouring Gulf States are as aware as Iran is that neither of those demands will ever be fulfilled. Having mildly tolerated Iran for decades and despite not supporting the war, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait and Oman have been subjected daily bombardment from Iran's drones and missiles. There is now widespread mistrust of Tehran among the Gulf States which has become even more isolated, despite help from a certain notorious antagonist that even President Trump recognizes.
Vladimir Putin and Russia are helping Iran "a little bit" amid the conflict with the US and Israel. Despite the previous red carpet treatment, Putin continues to be a geopolitical chess master, with Russia having shared the location of US military forces with Iran which helped guide missile and drone attacks across the Middle East. According to US Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff, the Russian government had assured the Trump administration that it was not providing intelligence to Tehran. Asked about this in particular in an interview with Fox, President Trump said that "I think he [Putin] may be helping them a bit, yeah. He probably thinks we're helping Ukraine. They do it, and we do it." The tacit admission of the nature of such war games being engaged in by both is also accompanied by posturing in an effort to portray a slightly better level of success. If Russia has indeed been doing so, "they're not doing a very good job. Iran is not doing too well."
The Strait of Hormuz situation has led to the US temporarily lifting sanctions on Russian oil to ease the impact of soaring oil prices. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent claimed this to be a "narrowly tailored, short-term measure which would not provide a significant financial benefit to Moscow." Later on, he admitted that it was "an inevitability which is unfortunate." The Kremlin welcomed the measure as an "acknowledgement of the obvious. Without Russian oil, the global energy market cannot remain stable." Furthermore, US intelligence aiding Ukraine has reportedly been temporarily paused after tense meetings between US and Ukrainian officials. Therefore, Ukraine's war effort is short of information while Russia has been able to partially replenish its war funding, widely criticised as such in Europe and Canada:
Germany's support for Ukraine "would not be deterred or distracted by the war in Iran."
According President Emmanuel Macron of France, the Strait of Hormuz shutdown "in no way justifies lifting sanctions on Russia."
Canadian prime minister Mark Carney has said that sanctions on Russia and its shadow fleet should be maintained.
During a visit to Saudi Arabia, UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper accused Russia and Iran of trying to "hijack the global economy."
Therefore, a question poses itself: what is the art of this deal which has enabled antagonists to further their own causes?
It is the actions and identity of chief antagonist of the current war that President Trump wishes to influence, as in who exactly is he negotiating with and his room to maneuver. Following the death of supreme leader Ali Khamenei in a joint US-Israeli airstrike on February 28, President Trump publicly demanded a role in selecting a successor while rejecting the appointment of his son, Mojtaba Khamenei. Without his approval, the new Khamenei "will not last long" as he is "unacceptable" and a "lightweight." Despite being appointed anyway how exactly would Trump deal with the new Iranian leader, as the New York Post asked him. "Not going to tell you. I'm not happy with him."
However, in an interview with Al-Jazeera, Ryan Costello who is policy director at the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) described how President Trump's rejection of Mojtaba Khamenei may have inadvertently boosted the newly elected supreme leader's candidacy. "Trump's disapproval made it very hard for the system to go in any other direction. Although he set a high ceiling for the war, the President has lost control of the conflict. He had very different expectations coming in, that Iran was weak and that they would fold like a deck of cards in a matter of hours."
The opposite has been and still is true in that there have been no major defections or significant protests against the ruling system since the war began. As Democratic Congressman Jake Auchincloss pointed out, "Trump replaced an 86-year-old terrorist dictator with a 56-year-old terrorist dictator." It could even be a matter of once an Ayatocracy, always an Ayatocracy. As Auchincloss wrote in a social media post, "Mr. President, wtf is your plan?"
Sole voice of internal discontent?
There has been maybe just one notable resignation so far regarding the Iran War. However, it could even be symptomatic of Trump's leadership style as a whole. National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent's resignation was about his handling of the intelligence regarding Iran. Joe Kent, a long-time Trump supporter who ran unsuccessfully for Congress twice was narrowly confirmed in his post. During his confirmation hearings, he refused to admit that Trump had been defeated in the 2020 election or that federal agents had fomented the January 2021 at the US Capitol. Therefore, he had previously been a hardcore Trump supporter.
His resignation letter addressed to President Trump, also posted on X, alleged that high-ranking Israeli officials had sown misinformation that led the President to undermine his America First platform. The White House dismissed the letter in that the President had "compelling evidence" that Iran was going to attack the US first. This contradicts a point made in the letter: "This echo chamber was used to deceive you into believing that Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States was a lie." According to Kent, the war was started "due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby."
The resignation letter also tried to persuade President Trump to view the situation more objectively. "Reflect upon what we are doing to Iran, and who we are doing it for," then advising him to "reverse course and chart a new path for our nation, or you can allow us to slip further toward decline and chaos. You hold the cards."
President Trump's response in the Oval Office was somewhat demonstrable. Kent was "a nice guy, but weak on security." The resignation letter made him realize that "it was a good thing that he's out." Sensing that further attempts at character assassination would be forthcoming, erstwhile Trump backer and former Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green posted on X: "They are going to lie about Joe Kent and try to discredit him. Don't believe the lies!"
Further to Joe Kent's high-profile resignation, there have been several senior official resignations which includes SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) enforcement director Margaret Ryan, and Kennedy Center head Richard Grenell. In addition, Michelle King stepped down from her role as Acting Commissioner at the Social Security Administration after officials from recently created DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) sought access to sensitive records containing private information of Americans. She refused and resigned. According to President Trump at a news conference, she did not resign but was fired.
The Justice Department has had a moderate turnover of officials through protest resignations linked to a perceived lack of ethics their employer has demanded of them in a shake up of the department President Trump believes was used against him. 7 federal prosecutors resigned after acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove ordered them to drop criminal corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, including bribery and campaign finance violations. In Washington DC, head of the criminal division Denise Cheung resigned after being ordered by the Justice Department to open a grand jury investigation into Biden-era climate funds, because she viewed it as premature and unsupported by evidence.
What's the Trumpster Deal?
Dan Partland's documentary film, Unfit: The Psychology of Donald Trump was released in 2020. Prominent mental health experts, psychiatrists, psychologists and political analysts gave insights into Trump's public behaviour using DMS-5 methodology, a professional mental health reference guide. Its main argument is that President Trump shows symptoms of "malignant narcissism" which is a mixture of narcissism, paranoia, antisocial personality disorder, and sadism. The concluding suggestion is that he is psychologically unfit for office.
Given his record and behaviour during his second term as the 47th President of the United States, does the film have any grounds to its assertion, or do the experts and analysts have their own advanced form Trump derangement syndrome? Originating in approximately 2021, TDS is a pejorative term describing negative reactions to President Trump which could be irrational and disconnected from Trump's actual policies. Therefore, how has he operated in the White House and what is the nature of former real estate tycoon and 45th/47th President of the United States?
The MAGA movement and assertions to bring peace and order have been applied forcefully and slightly unevenly. Telling the electorate what they want to hear has had the same effect as under his former guise as real estate tycoon: The stakeholder lowers its figurative drawbridge allowing Donald Trump to enter. In terms of metaphors, he may have been something of a Trojan Horse in order to begin getting his way.
Another characteristic is his temper, frequently expressed by his administration implementing tariffs, often without any warning. European NATO members increased their funding towards the Ukraine self-defence funding weaponry shipments partly because of the implication of increased tariffs in addition to his administration short-funding armament shipments, which also served as a form of coerced purchase of American arms which several European nations forward-shipped to Ukraine.
President Trump's own desire for territorial expansion and more geopolitical influence were mainly expressed through tariff threats after his administration's hearts and minds play for Greenlanders ended up being a flop. In January 2026 came the threat to impose 10% tariffs on Denmark, the UK, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Finland in February. They were to increase to 25% by June until a deal for the "complete and total purchase of Greenland" was reached. It may have concentrated a few European minds, as they were cancelled the week before they were due to be implemented after reaching a deal on an Arctic security framework. Therefore, President Trump achieved his aim of gaining an improved degree of control or influence over Greenland to counter Russian and Chinese influence in the Arctic by bullying nations which are now only nominal allies.
The "51st state" gibe was a negotiating tactic aimed at unsettling Canada even further, having already imposed a 25% duty on most goods exported to the US in February 2025. It rose to 35% in July 2025, mostly as a means of pressuring Ottawa about border security, specifically halting the flow of fentanyl and illegal immigration into the US. They remain in place, including 50% on steel, semi-finished copper products and aluminum, 35.6% on softwood lumber, and even 25% on upholstered furniture and cabinets. This has led to Canadian retaliatory tariffs of 25% to which President Trump may or may not be somewhat indifferent, given other current events.
One nation whose trading malpractice predates the Trump presidencies by decades and frequently incurs his wrath is China. Chinese export restrictions on crucial rare-earth minerals, protection of US hi-tech industries and reducing US trade deficit are just some of the motives for tariff imposition. While dealing with the PRC can be excruciating for anyone, aggravating a trade war through tariffs and engaging in a shouting match with Beijing is the only means of reaching any form of deal.
While his tariff temper is a negotiating ploy, when it comes to imposing a policy as a means of "shoot first, ask questions later", there have long been a number of other means at his disposal. Saying one thing and doing another may be occurring in more contexts than are publicly known or apparent. Having engaged in extraterritorial justice when Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was abducted, President Trump was merely "considering" involving the righteous future President Marina Corina Machado in some way, before bypassing her to pick Maduro's "gracious" vice-president Delcy Rodriguez instead. Such a form of backsliding could be on the cards for Cuba as well, even with its murkier situation in terms of an alternate political system or head of government. It is anybody's guess in that despite his speeches expressing certain desires, President Trump's relationship with the plain truth has always been somewhat fickle.
What psychologists call the "illusion of truth effect" have long been and still are President Trump's modus operandi. There is an intellectual explanation that explains that it is more than just lying: "It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise." This is Joseph Göbbels own eloquent and longer version of his famous quote.
Promises to bring peace have either not happened, or he used the military for reasons repeated constantly, then giving ranted responses when pressed for an answer. Use of actual weapons as opposed to his political/administrative weapons of tariffs took place with Iran, partly as a means to undo one of Obama's policies which had amounted to peace at any price. Thankfully, it was because of Obama being badly mistaken rather than just because Obama did it.
Furthermore, the above has brought the side effect of alienating internal stakeholders through many protest resignations. External stakeholders have also been alienated through nitpicking when he wants something in particular, talking positively in exaggerated terms about the US and sometimes about himself in particular.
How has The Art of the Deal, which he barely even wrote, transmogrified into its artless form today? President Trump's multifaceted matrix concerning foreign policy has seen him disengage from foreign alliances and dismiss liberal democratic foreign leaders while praising autocrats. Both internationally and domestically, his rhetoric and priorities have shifted the Republican Party decidedly. In addition to laws and the US constitution governing the behaviour of those elected to office, there are many practices which aren't specifically codified in law, but in tradition. These are known as and classified by social scientists as norms. Ever since his first election campaign, President Trump has prided himself on his independent mindset and unique approach to politics. In routinely violating political norms, he has created new norms mainly applied to himself and himself only.
Impeding an investigation into the 2016 election was brought about by firing FBI Director James Comey, and routinely castigating erstwhile rival Hillary Clinton was compounded by asking law enforcement to investigate her. The effect of voiding the long-established norm of winning graciously and affirming the patriotism and good will of one's political opponents has preserved and even aggravated the country's partisan polarization.
Appointing, as he already openly stated, loyal advisors who would not impede his objectives, a plethora of experts predicted that President Trump would more successful in implementing his agenda in his second term. Thus, he has reshaped the presidency in his own image. This has been particularly prominent with the Iran war as well as other elements of foreign policy. According to an American scholar and author of "How To Hide An Empire" Daniel Immerwahr, whereas prior presidents may have hesitated about attempting regime change through being concerned how things could go wrong for allies or in a region, President Trump has a "shrugging indifference to that kind of thing."
With diplomacy and international relations, the businessman is hiding in plain sight. Trump asked a rhetorical question during his first presidential campaign: "Why are we policing the world? If we're going to continue to be the policeman of the world, we ought to be paid for it." While prior presidents and foreign heads of state have seen the world policeman role as beneficial, Trump views this as a trap and an unnecessary expense. Control in the old fashioned sense is less important than using his own instinct which is more about menacing foreign countries as he described as having a tremendous capacity for risk in foreign affairs.
Territorial expansion and the desire to appoint members of his personal global politburo are conducted through implied grand phrases rather than previous American diplomatic subtlety. It is delivered through being candid accompanied by a selective version of the plain truth. This has the consequence of most being thrown by what President Trump says. While political leaders are expected to choose their words carefully and only say things for a reason, if there is someone behind the scenes advising him or pointing out any mistake, that individual is invisible. That was abundantly clear before, during, and after the visit of Japan's prime minister Sanae Takaichi to the Oval Office. He extended his commentary in reference to his visitor when it came to the Iran and Strait of Hormuz shutdown: "We went in very hard and we didn't tell anybody about it because we wanted surprise. Who knows better about surprise than Japan? Ok, why didn't you tell me about Pearl Harbor? You believe in surprise, I think, much more than us."
While her eyes widened and her smile disappeared, she wisely chose the most suitable response of diplomatic silence. When an interlocutor replies that he would need seek further expert opinion on something, he can be very scathing. For President Trump, consulting other people is no way for a real leader to behave. At the midterm Congress elections in November, if the Republicans lose their slim majority in the House and the Democrats maintain or grow their majority in the Senate, it could make President Trump a lame duck.
While he would maintain full authority to issue executive orders and pardons, with diminished legislative power officially, he would be the noisiest lame duck president in US history. The diminished political influence that has usually been part of a lame duck presidency would not apply to President Trump. From his powerful pulpit, he could be potentially even more unpredictable. Donald Trump's characteristics would aggravate the artlessness of any deal he would attempt to make.
Comments
Post a Comment