When, during a presidential debate in 2007, Barack Obama said he would agree to meet the world's worst dictators "without precondition," he was rightly chastised for it.
His error was not in believing that negotiation and diplomacy have a role to play, or that it is sometimes necessary for America's president to grip the hand of an odious head of state to improve relations and make the world a better place.
It was, rather, Obama's profligacy with the prestige of the office he sought and his naive overconfidence in the power of his personality and good intentions to persuade the world's worst rulers to reform. His suggestion that he meet with the tyrants of Tehran suggested he thought it acceptable to use the leverage and prestige of the presidency cavalierly rather than with care and proper preparation.
Like Obama, President Trump is overconfident of his ability to persuade and cut a deal. In consequence, he seems not to think carefully before suggesting he will meet with the world's tyrants and rogue leaders, presumably taking the attitude that there is much to gain and nothing to lose.
But this is not true. There is much to lose. It is not for nothing that American presidents are traditionally referred to as the leader of the free world. What the free world is these days is not as clear as it was a generation ago, but it is still just as obvious who has the top job in it.
Get the Exclusive
04.27.2024