Newly named National Security Adviser Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster listens as U.S. President Donald Trump makes the announcement at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida U.S. February 20, 2017.  REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
© Reuters

Is it possible that — beneath the fury and the farce — the Trump administration might settle down and turn into a conventional US government? The appointment of HR McMaster as the president’s national security adviser, has raised the hopes of those hoping for the “normalisation” of the Trump White House.

Lieutenant General McMaster is widely respected in Washington and his appointment has been greeted warmly by Republicans and Democrats. In this respect, he makes a striking contrast to Michael Flynn, the man he will replace at the head of the National Security Council. Mr Flynn is a conspiracy theorist who had also been pushed out of his previous job as head of the Defence Intelligence Agency. He was manifestly unsuited to run the NSC. Even senior Republicans had speculated to me that Mr Flynn would not last a year in his job. In the event, it took three weeks for him to be forced out.

The ousting of Mr Flynn and his replacement by Lt Gen McMaster could be a turning point in the making of Mr Trump’s foreign policy. The three key foreign policy positions are now held by rational professionals, with James Mattis at the Pentagon, Lt Gen McMaster at the NSC and Rex Tillerson at the State Department. Working together, these three might be able to reduce the influence and impact of some of the more marginal characters who attached themselves to Mr Trump during the course of the campaign.

In time, it is even possible that the most radical advisers to the president, such as Stephen Bannon and Kellyanne Conway, might be pushed to the sidelines, or even forced out of the White House. At that point, the “normalisation” of the Trump administration could take hold, with the president reduced to a titular figure, ranting and raving, but not making the important decisions.

Even in the chaotic first weeks of Mr Trump’s presidency — before the appointment of Lt Gen McMaster — there have been some encouraging signs that normalisation of Mr Trump’s approach to the world is possible. Early suggestions that the US might recognise Taiwan or impose a naval blockade in the South China Sea — both policies that could have led to a war with China — have been quietly jettisoned.

The idea that the Trump administration will swiftly move the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem is also fading away. Sanctions on Russia have not been lifted unconditionally, nor has the US dropped its objections to Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Vice-President Mike Pence has just made a strong reaffirmation of US support for Nato at the Munich Security Conference. The great wall with Mexico may be turning into a fence. So far, there has been much more talk of tariffs and border-taxes than actual action.

Like many critics of the US president, I am torn by the idea of the “normalisation” of the Trump administration. A political career based on lies and bullying does not deserve to be sanctified by success. Indeed, if Trump-style politics takes hold in the US, then American democracy will have been permanently debased.

There are also practical reasons for doubting whether the Trump administration can ever be truly normalised. The most telling objection is that, whoever fills the main staff positions, the administration will continue to be headed by Mr Trump. The president is erratic, irascible, ill-informed, dishonest, addicted to Twitter — and commander-in-chief. That will always mean that his administration is flirting with disaster.

But if normalisation of the Trump administration is dismissed as morally flawed and politically unconvincing, the president’s foes are thrown back on the hope that his presidency will implode. The trouble is that the implosion scenario is simultaneously unlikely and dangerous.

For all the talk of impeachment of the president, it remains the fact that both Houses of Congress are under the control of the Republicans. As things stand, it still seems highly unlikely that the Republicans will turn on Mr Trump, who remains very popular with the party’s base. The US and the world can ill-afford the two years of political turmoil that it might take to remove Mr Trump from office. And the chances that Mr Trump and his most radical acolytes would do something truly dangerous would surely mount if he was cornered and fighting for his political survival.

The case in favour of hoping for normalisation is that when an erratic president is advised by inexperienced ideologues — like Mr Bannon and Ms Conway — it becomes even more urgent to surround him with moderate and experienced voices. It is immensely dangerous to have an unshackled Mr Trump in charge of the world’s most powerful military. It is very damaging to America’s status as a model for the democratic world.

Intellectually, therefore, I have reluctantly come around to the view that “normalisation” is the best hope we have with the Trump administration. Emotionally, however, I am still hoping for implosion. In reality, I fear the Trump administration may neither normalise nor implode. Even with Lt Gen McMaster in the White House, we face a long and dangerous four years.

gideon.rachman@ft.com

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2024. All rights reserved.
Reuse this content (opens in new window) CommentsJump to comments section

Follow the topics in this article

Comments