The Opera Isn’t Over, But Trump’s Foreign Policy Is Mostly Background Music
By Patrick N. Theros - May 30, 2025
Like
a bored emperor watching fires in distant provinces, Trump gestures at
diplomacy while dismantling the empire at home. His first 100 days
abroad are noisy, erratic – an d mostly beside the point.
In
foreign policy, as in opera, it ain’t over till the Fat Lady sings. But
in Donald Trump’s first 100 days back in office, the performance has
been anything but harmonious.
Compared to the wrecking ball he is
swinging through America’s domestic economy and institutions, Trump’s
foreign policy appears – at least on the surface – more restrained and
rational. Some realists even argue he’s pursuing a pragmatic approach,
particularly on Ukraine. His lack of rigid commitment to NATO expansion
or permanent U.S. global policing reflects, they say, a long-overdue
correction.
But appearances deceive. The post-Cold War consensus –
that the U.S. must lead a liberal, rules-based world order – was
already eroding. Trump didn’t start that trend toward multipolarity. He
just strapped it to a rocket and fired it into a tailspin. America’s
allies understand the shift, even if they don’t much like the pilot.
Trump’s
record so far is a masterclass in mixed signals and contradictions. His
initial handling of Ukraine revealed the playbook: announce a deal,
declare victory, and hope nobody notices the mess behind the curtain.
Despite
lofty talk of peace, Trump’s overtures to Putin – including pressuring
Ukraine to concede Crimea and control of major industries – have gone
nowhere. Putin, unimpressed, continues raining missiles on Ukrainian
cities. Trump’s reply? A Truth Social post scolding Putin in all caps.
That’ll show him.
The deeper problem is that Trump treats foreign
wars as distractions – irritating side plots stealing attention from
the main show: tax cuts, tariffs, immigration raids, and dismembering
the federal judiciary. Gaza, Ukraine, Iran? Sideshow noise.
Take
Gaza. Trump initially leaned on Netanyahu to accept a ceasefire, not for
moral reasons, but because the war was interrupting his main act. When
Netanyahu resumed the war, Trump tolerated it – until Netanyahu floated
dragging the U.S. into a strike on Iran. At that point, Trump summoned
him for a photo-op, then publicly announced talks with Tehran – the
diplomatic equivalent of telling a misbehaving underling to sit down and
shut up.
The same formula showed up in Ukraine. Trump all but
told Zelensky: “Here’s the best deal you’re going to get, take it or
don’t – just don’t waste my time.” He misjudged Zelensky’s domestic
constraints, the EU’s resolve, and Putin’s imperial ambitions. In trying
to end the war with a quick handshake and a press release, Trump boxed
himself in.
If Zelensky accepts, Trump claims victory. If both
Zelensky and Putin refuse – a likely scenario – Trump either walks away
humiliated or stays engaged in a war he barely cares about.
The
underlying flaw? Trump’s failure to understand “the other guy’s
assumptions.” His team seems oblivious to the historical and existential
stakes: Putin sees Ukraine as a core part of Russian identity and
power. Zelensky’s survival depends on not surrendering it. Neither man
can accept Trump’s terms without collapsing politically – or worse.
Meanwhile,
Europe, once hesitant, is growing a spine. JD Vance’s declarations that
America may bail on Ukraine have jolted EU leaders into real action.
Ironically, Trump’s effort to dump responsibility on Europe may finally
convince it to act like a power bloc.
Not all of Trump’s foreign
escapades are serious. Some are just surreal. Retaking the Panama Canal?
Buying Greenland “no matter what the method”? Annexing Canada? These
aren’t policies – they’re punchlines. Luckily, Trump’s aversion to using
military force means they’re more laughable than lethal. For now.
Even
when Trump stumbles into a sensible proposal – like reviving the Iran
nuclear deal – it’s dressed in hypocrisy. After years of bashing the
JCPOA, he now seems ready to sign a minor revision and call it a
triumph. Just like rebranding NAFTA as USMCA, the performance matters
more than the substance.
And if the rumored provision – that
Iran’s nuclear program would be partially operated by a U.S. or European
firm – turns out to be true, it might even be a masterstroke. Such a
deal would provide transparency and accountability, shield Iran from
Israeli attack, and complicate any future attempt to rip up the
agreement again. The Gulf states would be quietly pleased. Trump’s base
probably wouldn’t notice – or care.
In the end, foreign policy
isn’t where Trump will make or break his presidency. It’s noisy, yes,
but incidental. His real goals lie in reshaping domestic governance,
weaponizing the courts, and rewriting the American identity to suit his
image. Peace deals and missile strikes may dominate headlines, but
they’re background music to the real drama.
And in this opera, Trump isn’t waiting for the Fat Lady. He’s already rewritten the libretto.