Neither isolationism nor inhibition. This second Trump presidency refutes the clichés about the withdrawal of the United States to concentrate on competition with China, and all the more so if the massive bombing of Caracas this morning is confirmed. In one year, it has bombed seven countries, including Venezuela, with objectives as varied as a show of force, aid to friendly regimes, revenge or greed for the resources of others, always under the noble guise of the fight against terrorism, the persecution of drug trafficking or the defense of civilization, but never until now the change of regime and the establishment of a democracy.
Until now, Iran was at the peak of its exploits. In June, it destroyed its nuclear facilities in a major air operation with seven undetectable B2 bombers and 125 relief planes. Until this week, Trump had not been concerned about the suffering of citizens under dictatorships, but Iranians’ massive protests against the rising cost of living have piqued his attention to the point of showing himself “prepared and ready” to “come to the rescue” if the regime continues to repress protesters.
The ongoing naval operation in the Caribbean, off the coast of Venezuela, was already unusual, where it deployed the greatest force these seas have seen since the last century, but it is even more so today after the air attack that began this morning on Caracas. More than 30 boats were attacked and destroyed and around 100 crew members died, two oil tankers were seized and some port facilities were bombed, in the first land attack since the invasion of Panama in 1989, just the appetizer of the uncertain course of an intimidation operation like the current one.
More than an escalation, which requires a response from the attacked party, it is a clamp that is closing on Maduro, without the objective or the strategy to achieve it being clear. The fight against drug traffickers is just a pretext to put pressure on the regime. Their bombing of Caracas could also be a message to Ayatollah Khamenei.
But in Iran as in Venezuela, an intervention like the one that toppled Saddam Hussein more than 20 years ago is unimaginable, initiated by a bombing, but followed by a ground invasion and the overthrow of the regime.
The intervention in Nigeria is different, where Trump is waving the moral flag of a threat of genocide against Christians. Islamist violence, endemic in the north of the country, does not distinguish the religion of its victims, but it has served to pressure the government in Abuja to support the bombing of a terrorist camp on Christmas Day. Washington thus replaces the democratic cause which guided its international missionary action in the past with the protection of Western civilization.
Trump also intervened militarily in Iraq, Syria, Somalia and Yemen, again by air. He responds to the expectations of his electorate, saddened by the failures of Iraq and Afghanistan, hostile to permanent alliances like NATO and wary of involuntary involvement in long and costly wars, but satisfied with the show of force. Having the largest and most powerful army in the world, he showed that he could use it whenever and wherever he wanted, but only under the cover of a national interest, often identifiable with his personal and family interests. And not to provide services to humanity, in defense of values such as democracy or human rights, or common goods that do not directly affect their country, such as international security.
Trump claims or invents peace agreements by the handful, but he has not achieved a single, credible and complete one. While no one can dispute his intimidating efficiency, the ineptitude of his diplomacy is spectacular. The pause achieved in the war and destruction of Gaza is precarious, deficient and partial, aggravated by the intensification of the occupation of the West Bank and the expulsion of humanitarian organizations, even the most prestigious, such as Doctors Without Borders. This ceasefire is very costly in terms of lives and suffering. And the prospect of peace with some justice is more than distant, while the looming shadow of slow and calculated dispossession and expulsion from their country remains over the Palestinians.
Worse still is the diplomatic disaster of his action in Ukraine, as shown by an exhaustive investigation carried out by the Times of New York where the lack of professionalism of its negotiators, the erratic course of presidential decisions, the struggles and divergences in the presidential environment and the intersection of orders and counter-orders on the supply of arms to Ukraine are manifested. With a diminished State Department, marginalized professional diplomats, and family businesses at the center of international relations, the uncertain drift from the Trumpist peace the world should admire is understandable.
In Gaza, as in Ukraine or Venezuela, everything is in his hands, his mood swings and his jealous control of decisions and successes. A peace process that has gone badly since its beginning, when he gave all the negotiating assets to Putin, confident in his prodigious skills, cannot end well. Even more uncertain are the route and outcome of an air attack on a Latin American capital the size of Caracas. It will be difficult for peace or democracy to escape from the brutal formula which combines easy triggering and painful diplomacy.
About The Author
