There’s an unwritten rule that wise diplomats and government leaders follow. A leader can be rude about other leaders, politicians and countries but a wise leader never says rude things about the war dead and wounded.
Soldiers who die in combat honourably served their nations. We can blame politicians for wars but never blame those who sacrifice their lives.
US President Donald Trump likes to break accepted norms of behaviour but his careless, inaccurate – and very distracting – comments on America’s Nato allies have hit a nerve. He claimed that other Nato countries sent “some troops” to Afghanistan after the Al Qaeda’s 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington. This was a very dangerous mission to help root out the terrorist group then led by Osama bin Laden.
On Fox News, Mr Trump carelessly and bizarrely disparaged America’s allies by claiming they “stayed a little back, a little off the front lines”. This is untrue. A total of 3,486 allied soldiers died in the Afghanistan conflict. Yes, the majority of the dead were from the biggest Nato nation – the US – but 457 of the dead were British. Other Nato countries and allies also suffered significant losses.
Many surviving soldiers still bear the burden of horrendous injuries. The mother of one British soldier killed in Helmand province wept on the BBC as she explained how her son died. British veterans speak movingly of comrades with life-changing injuries. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer – rarely a Trump critic – called the US President’s remarks “insulting and frankly appalling”. Denmark, a small Nato country, suffered 44 combat deaths, the most per capita of any country except the US itself.
We remember the fallen, the injured, the brave who responded to the despicable attack on the US. Mr Trump, however, appears to have forgotten that this was the first – and only – time in its more than 70 years in existence that Article Five of the Nato charter was invoked. It meant that an attack on one Nato member state is an attack on all.
Nato rallied to America’s cause. We can debate the wisdom of the Afghan mission, of course, but the claim that allied troops stayed away from danger is hugely insulting, and also revealing of how Mr Trump catches media attention in our attention-poor world.
His comments were a distraction from his failed combative rhetoric on Greenland. He seems now to contemplate a more amicable deal with Greenland’s governing country, Denmark, to avoid a deep split in Nato. The US can undoubtedly expand defence resources there and may secure agreed access to Greenland’s rare minerals.
But Mr Trump’s astonishingly rude words opened up a very different sense of disappointment even if he has – sort of – apologised on social media, saying that “the great and very brave soldiers of the United Kingdom” will always be US allies and in Afghanistan “they were among the greatest of all warriors”. True. But as always, it is difficult to explain Mr Trump’s presidency except as a bundle of contradictions.
Perhaps, the apparent contradictions I experienced in a completely different Trump-related event hold a clue.
I once stayed in a Trump hotel to speak at a large US corporate event. Two things surprised me. First, most of the staff spoke Spanish to each other. Some told me their families came from Cuba, Venezuela and other Latin American countries. “President Trump” constantly complains about too many migrants from Latin America in the US, while “Businessman Trump” appeared happy to employ workers – excellent workers, by the way – from those same countries.
Then there was a large gold – fake gold – bath in my hotel room. I was intrigued. I ran the bath but unfortunately the plug did not fit, and the water drained away. I took a shower instead.
These minor events stick in my mind when thinking of the bizarre contradictions of the most powerful person in the world. Mr Trump’s contradictions are now factored in by reporters, news broadcasters, his staff and of course foreign diplomats and leaders. The US President is so unpredictable that being unpredictable is the one predictable constant in his behaviour. And like that gold bath, he brilliantly grabs your attention and mine until you realise that all that glitters is not gold, and the shiny surface is actually of no use whatsoever.
As commentators have noted, with Greenland, tariffs, trade and almost anything else, Mr Trump always asks for the maximum possible advantage in any agreement, then changes tack under pressure. This strategy commands attention but unnerves – and at times insults – allies used to a more predictable engagement with the most powerful leader in the world.
Critics call Mr Trump’s negotiating stance “Taco” – Trump Always Chickens Out. That seems not quite right. Instead, the US President uses contradictions the way other leaders use consistency. Sudden gear changes seem to work for him. Whether they work for most Americans and the rest of the world – where many of us generally admired the US – is still to be seen.
That gold bath looked great. It grabbed my attention. It didn’t work.
