Trump’s mega-problem with his approach to diplomacy

Short version: international diplomacy isn’t a commercial real estate deal. Nor a Mob protection racket – although it may have some resemblance to the latter.

This interview from Britain’s Channel 4 includes Lindsey Hilsum, the channel’s international editor, and Nina Khrushcheva of the New School (a great-granddaughter of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev). (1)

The segment includes some analysis of what Putin’s view likely is of the situation with Ukraine in relation to Trump’s Presidency. But it mainly looks at the signals that Trump is sending about his own muddled approach to foreign policy. Hilsum says she thinks that:

[H]e has a concept of America. It's like this sort of buccaneering, 19th century imperial power. And it's a very masculine thing. It's like, here we are, and you look at [China’s] Xi Jinping over there and you look at Vladimir Putin over there. Well, you've got Donald Trump here and [he’s thinking,] “I also can increase the territory over which I rule.”

And so I think if you look at the map you [can see what he’s] talked about grabbing. He's talked about Canada. Well, the Canadians aren't too happy about that. He's talked about the Panama Canal. The Panamanians aren't too happy about that. He's talked about Greenland. Well, the Greenlanders and the Danes who actually control [it] - you know Greenland is part of Denmark now - aren't too happy about that.

But then if you color in the map it's a sphere of influence. And it's a sphere of influence, really, which America had until really the last century. Remember in the 20th century, the Americans were always fermenting coups all over Latin America. And now China is increasingly important in Latin America. It doesn't control the Panama Canal as [Trump said it does]. But it does have a port at either end. And it has built a deep-sea port off the coast of Peru, as well. And it does buy most of the soybeans from Brazil and Argentina. So it is important. You see a lot more Chinese people than you used to in Latin America.

So, I think that [Trump is] carving out this sphere of influence. But the issue is: If he says that it's okay to grab Panama, for example, then why is it not okay for Vladimir Putin to grab Ukraine? Or after Ukraine, maybe the Baltic States? And for Xi Jinping to grab Taiwan ? …

I think that [Trump is] comparing himself to them and trying to say, “Anything you can do, I can do bigger and better.”

Khrushcheva adds at this point:

Remember when Putin was talking about spheres of influence at the beginning of the Ukraine invasion, the American President - then Joe Biden – said, well, you know, we don't deal in spheres of influence. Which is of course ridiculous because America is the sphere of influence around the world. [She apparently means here that the US has a worldwide “sphere of influence.”] So Putin actually considered it very hypocritical. But now, … in fact a Russian spokesperson, spokeswoman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said, well, finally America changed its set of values … so that's all wonderful because we're all going to be strongmen together.

Khrushcheva also comments:

Yesterday's declarations [by Trump] that otherwise if [the Russians] don't agree, otherwise we are going to sanction and tariff and whatnot. And so the Russians - I was actually on the phone this morning with colleagues there who have access to the high-ups. And they, like, well, they're scratching their heads like, “What does he mean? Because we got no offers [from Trump]. So we haven't even ]been] presented [with] or rejected anything. So what the hell are we we're discussing here?”

And so they understand it's a rhetorical flourish. We also know that when on Monday … when Putin congratulated Trump – remember, which was very rare, because the US is an] “unfriendly country”, [as] it's called in Russia.

So [the Russians] actually moved the [Russian] Security Council [meeting] from Wednesday … to Monday [Trump Inauguration Day] so there would be a formula that the Security Council agreed [upon. Which was that] Putin is going to congratulate. So Russia makes certain steps.

But Trump goes with the PR formula that works for him today. So there will be some sort of negotiations. But I think the Russians hope that will work out.

But I also know that it's a hope against their experience. Because they hope, and it doesn't work. So I think for Putin, … it would be great if it works out. But if not, they're going to continue [the war]. And it would be more opportunity for [Putin], if it doesn't work, to turn [the war metaphorically] into World War II. [In which] every Russian, like [it] was every Soviet in 1941, a war with Nazis [would be told]: go to the front and fight until death. Because Putin is not going to be defeated. Whatever it is, he may not win. But he's not going to be defeated. And so that's the mindset in Russia. [my emphasis]

This reminds me of the description that the late, great Molly Ivins gave back in the 1990s about the “Waco” standoff with cult leader David Koresh and his followers. She said when Koresh’s cult member started fired at the federal officers from their compound, from that moment on for the feds it became a testosterone contest. Meanwhile, Koresh was there in the compound listening to the voices in his head, and he had no idea he was even in a testosterone contest.

There’s also the fact that’s not seriously disputed - outside of those repeating the Ukrainian government’s public diplomacy of the moment – that the Russians are winning the war, at least in the sense that Ukraine has no immediate prospect of pushing the Russians back from the territory they have captured.

Trump’s bluster may terrify Republican politicians and billionaires like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos who do massive, profitable business with the federal government. But Putin is a different story.

There are also some interesting observations in the Channel 4 segment about how authoritarian regimes work. And references to cultural and media concepts which Trump utilizes in his political narrative, garbled as it is.

Lindsey Hilsum also argues that what Trump is “interested in is a lack of fighting.”

He's not interested in peace, which is a different thing. So, with this, and similarly in Gaza, what he wants to see is people not fighting anymore so he can say, “Look, I brought peace!” But we all know that that is not how it works.

The way you get lasting peace is by treaties, by agreements, by trust being built up. And none of that is the kind of thing that he is interested in or any good at. And so that I think is the great difficulty of him declaring victory. “Look, I've stopped all that fighting!” [is that] everybody else [is] knowing that the moment he turns his back, they're going to go back for more [fighting]. [my emphasis]

Russia and Ukraine are fighting a war that both of them consider to be in their national interest. While Trump is trying to stage an episode of The Apprentice.

Notes:

(1) Ukraine war: can Trump really make a deal with Putin? Channel 4 News YouTube channel 01/23/2025. <https://youtu.be/YJjtjVDd88I?si=ObyzRto1n7FhGDRO> (Accessed: 2025-26-01).