Democratic governance is fully reliant on process. Without established workflows for both reaching and implementing decisions the alternative is simply edicts by whim of individuals, and that’s neither effective or democratic. Modern American executive branch decision making processes have been consistent, time tested and passed down through the decades enough that full college curriculums are designed to explore their component parts and educate new generations of public servants on how best to serve them. Indeed, it is not hyperbole to contend global economic and geopolitical stability rests on the assurance US policy originates and is impelled by process. Three years into the Trump Presidency the cogs of America’s best decision making practices are under relentless attack, dismissed by nihilists as, worse than unnecessary, actually part of the problem, part of the ‘swamp”. The President avers he trusts his gut, as he employs his remote to access Fox’s prime time line up for insights he can use.
The only best practices this Administration appears interested in are what it claims Trump’s properties offer guests who stay for official government functions the President insists on hosting, for a modest fee…. say $546 per night at Mar A Lago. Our tax dollars at work. As for national security matters, well that seems to be a bit more of a sliding scale, and a function of the always vague “executive time.”
From the start of Trump’s term the question was always how much of him would we get. Would he bow to the awesome responsibilities of the office and humble himself enough to recognize the compelling utility of accepting guidance from those with credentials he and everyone of his inner circle did not possess? Surely he will comprehend his standing will depend on at least a modicum of competency and some respect for established processes and traditions. This desperate hope was all that permitted many sleep between election night and Inauguration.
My own feeling was the President’s inauguration speech would tell the tale. If it rose in any way to the occasion, even if stilted and insincere, it would signal Trump was prepared to at least try and reach higher than his station. It wasn’t and he didn’t… not even a bit. The visit to the CIA later in the week, with its then shocking ad-libbed riffing about looting Iraqi oil and Mike Pompeo’s servility, reinforced beyond any doubt campaign-stump Trump would bedevil us throughout his term in office and we were in for a slog. There would be no pleasant surprises, Michelle Obama’s words all the more prescient… the Presidency “reveals who you are.” Not 72 hours in it was already doing just that. Going on three years later nothing is being left to the imagination, and policy formulation has suffered most.
Of course one could argue that any decision making construct is doomed to failure if it views facts as malleable, or worse, the enemy. From the Bay of Pigs to Iraq, the principle lessons of every US folly have reinforced this point. It is now a fully established truth that from the beginning this destructive bent has been, forget a tendency, the guiding practice in this White House. The President is no fan of presentations period, let alone those that offer scenarios not consistent with the images he wants to entertain. Coddling delusions as standard operating procedure to garner Trump’s approval appears how West Wingers approach pursuing policy, when they aren’t at war with each other. Trump likes his staff in a state of nature, at each other’s throats and ready to apply knife to back in the boardroom.
In Team of Vipers, Clifford Sims, who spent about 500 days in the Trump West Wing, describes camps at war with each other, with influencing Trump’s varying whims the object of conquest. On trade, Chief Economic advisor Gary Cohn and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin repeatedly talked Trump off the tariff war ledge, even as protectionists Peter Navarro and Wilbur Ross sought to anger him into going to the mats against, not just China, but Western allies as well. Cohn and Navarro detested one another, exactly the way Trump prefers his staff’s relationships, with constructive debate and consensus nonexistent. Cohn lost that war, and now he is gone as “tariff man” boasts daily of winning against all those who played us for suckers – read everybody.
Original Chief-of-Staff Reince Priebus was almost immediately neutered and lost all ability to referee the chaos, so John Kelly was brought in to instill some military discipline…. another abject failure. Now? Who knows? What is certain is there is no team in this Presidency, merely supplicants fighting each other to gain the jefe’s ear until he grows bored and distracted. That’s not a process, that’s Lord Of The Flies meets The Apprentice.
Back in the Cold War late 80s, Kuwait suckered the Reagan Administration into protecting its tankers against attack by flirting with the Soviets. When Iran went after a US frigate escorting a Kuwaiti tanker and killed 10 crewmen, Reagan had to respond, and he did. Two staging areas used by Revolutionary guards were wiped out, and several other violent encounters left more Iranians dead. It seemed to do the job, as Iran became less aggressive. Reagan enjoyed praise for the measured action, which did not escalate as critics warned.
Now the Lindsey Grahams and Tom Cottons are looking for any mic available to hold out the Gipper as a model for action. The situations couldn’t be more different. Back then Iran was slogging through a disastrous war with Iraq, and reeling from inner turmoil. The last thing it needed was a battle of attrition with a wholly unencumbered US. Now, it is us who is leashed by constant war, which has benefitted Iran’s position in the region immeasurably. Sanctions have hurt their economy and they still suffer internal strife, but Trump has so damaged the US brand, standing up to us can only gain the Mullahs fans at home and abroad.
Speculation runs the gamut as to why Trump pulled back at the last minute from bombing Iran. Everything from credible reports the leadership never sanctioned Iran’s attack on the drone, to Tucker Carlson convincing the President the risks were too high has received attention. With Trump anything is possible. It’s clear those responsible for carrying out an attack were against it, as Pentagon leaders opposed rabid John Bolton’s frothing for conflict.
In the end, perhaps the most sobering observation was made by a former defense official, who called the final product “a good decision from a bad process.” This official, who requested anonymity, stated Pentagon officials involved in the meetings left alarmed by a chaotic setting “ where it’s not really clear how decisions are made.” He went on to observe that “I don’t know if anyone could go from the Pentagon to Congress to brief them on what the White House’s strategy is.” That should alarm most. Of course, Trump apologists will shrug and contend that’s just how he rolls. Rolls where?….. off a cliff? BC