Iran policy: Trying to give advice to a leader who has no idea what he's doing

Robert Hunter writes about Trump and Iran in a piece titled Will Trump Learn Enough from the Iran Crisis? (Responsible Statecraft 01/11/2020).

The safest answer to the headline question is, of course, no. But Hunter's article observes the convention of serious foreign policy analysis that it's written as though it provides expert advice to rational and responsible actors. Even though the most important actor, the Orange Clown in the Oval Office, has repeatedly shown himself to be neither. But there's always the hope that he or someone with some momentary influence over him might be nudged in a positive direction.

So he argues hopefully:

... Trump must understand is that he can’t afford to rely solely on his own counsel or to surround himself just with like-minded people, especially if they are war hawks that could tip the United States into a conflict that serves no useful purpose and could severely damage U.S. interests and cost American lives. Worst of all now is Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who has been itching for war and has been telling the Iranians that, in effect, they must surrender unconditionally before the United States will negotiate. There are many smart, able, serious, and thoughtful American Middle East experts - they just aren’t present at senior levels in this administration. The only exceptions are senior U.S. military leaders, who understand the price paid in human life by a commander-in-chief’s arrogance, recklessness, or stupidity. [my emphasis]

And he calls attention to what he calls one of Trump's "other fantasies":

... he has called on NATO to assume a greater role in the Middle East, what he calls NATO-ME. While there is clear merit in the Europeans’ assuming more responsibility for security in the Middle East, Trump hasn’t connected the dots. He has spent three years undercutting NATO and even calling into question whether the United States would in all cases honor the Alliance’s core commitment, that an armed attack on any one ally is considered an attack on all. Now he is coming to NATO like the Prodigal Son, expecting to be welcomed home and provided succor. Sorry, Mr. President, given the way you have undercut NATO, it is unlikely that the allies will do what you want in the Middle East, at least until you fully and unambiguously reaffirm U.S. fealty to the Alliance. Even then, most of the allies will be reluctant to go along. [my emphasis]

There are a lot of elements to the mess that Trump has made with US policy toward Iran.