Nesrine Malik puts forward an interesting idea in the Guardian this morning when suggesting that the whole basis of Trump's policy agenda is to ask 'what's in it for me / the USA'.
The evidence for this idea comes from a number of sources, but perhaps, most especially from his approach to Gaza, where the aim is real estate development, and Ukraine, where the desire is for mineral rights worth several times the value of total US aid to the country to date. In summary, the foreign policy goal is old-fashioned imperial exploitation, whilst domestically Musk pursues the management of the philosophy of crashing the organisation until it breaks and then relax a little, maybe.
Of course, we find this hard to comprehend. Most people alive have hoped to move on from the era of blatant exploitation. Clearly, Trump has not.
And whilst the era of ultra-paternalist management might also belong to history, and rightly so in a great many ways, the idea that we would now wish to replace management based on some degree of care with an approach that is indifferent to outcomes for anyone at all but the manager is alien to almost everyone, not least because there is not the slightest evidence that it can work in almost anything but a financial trading entity, and even then that is doubtful.
The deal is at the heart of Trump's thinking. He believes his own propaganda that his supposed ability to make such an arrangement is key to his own success. Again, there is no evidence that is true. He is, after all, a man with experience of multiple bankruptcies, although he would probably characterise those as just another form of a deal as a result of which he did not have to pay his liabilities in full.
That last point is important. Trump does not want to pay if he can force someone else to do so. Hence his approach to defence. This is the logic of the arch-marketeer, the true disciple of Milton Friedman, the believer in the maximisation of personal worth without consideration for others. You might call them the profit maximiser of neoclassical and neoliberal economics, the sociopathic homo economicus who has taken literally the instruction that we are the sole epicentre and purpose of our being and that no one else matters as a result. Trump might even characterise himself as the archetypal American as a consequence, or as Ayn Rand's character Howard Roark in The Fountainhead.
What would everyone else categorise such a person as? A psychopath would, I think, be a fair description. Maybe the term misanthrope is appropriate: someone who dislikes or distrusts humankind in general. In the vernacular, I think we could find other terms that would do just as well.
The point is, we have someone in the White House who hates everyone, from his own supporters onwards (their only role, alongside that of his supposed advisers, few of whom will survive in post for long, and most of whom will eventually and very obviously come out as being deeply scarred by the experience of working with him, being to glorify him), to the rest of US society, and way beyond.
We have two choices with such a person. They are to accommodate them or call them out. There is no in-between because they will not recognise anything else. Or rather, they will put everything else into the category of calling them out, whether that was the intention or not.
Keir Starmer goes to meet Trump this week. I suspect he will be eaten alive. He and his team appear, on the basis of leaks from briefings that have reached the media so far, to be wholly unprepared for the reality of what Trump is. They are still playing by different rules, but whilst Trump is in the White House, the rules for dealing with him are different. Starmer will be required by Trump to accommodate his demands. However, Trump will know only too well that Starmer has made promises to Ukraine that make it impossible for him to accommodate Trump as Trump will see things. Trump will treat him with contempt as a result. Starmer is, in that case, wasting his time and is courting failure. Unless he says that this is now a bad relationship, there is nothing he can retrieve from this visit, internationally or domestically. It really is time he learned the new rules and played by them, and that requires calling Trump out.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
That claim about mineral rights: “the desire is for mineral rights worth several times the value of total US aid to the country to date” does rather undermine what Nesrine Malik has written. There’s been a small number of serious calculations of their worth and they come out at close to zero. If you can’t see through the claim on minerals it’s likely the writer has been duped on something else.
I said that
However much they might be worth, to demand access to Ukraine’s mineral resources in exchange for military support is wrong on a number of levels. I understand for instance that the European contribution to Ukraine’s war against Russia is greater than that of the USA, so shouldn’t Europe also have access to these minerals? More important however is that it smacks of reparations, the kind of actions which in the case of post WW1 Germany, where reparations plunged it into economic crisis and led to the emergence of the Nazi Party. A similar destabilisation could very likely occur in Ukraine if it is stripped of some of its wealth while, as reported on BBC Business this morning, facing a post-war repair bill of $1 trillion. It would seem that as well as being fixated on what meets his own short term interests, Donald Trump lacks awareness of the grim recent history of Europe.
Much to agree with
The value of Ukraine’s reserves of rare earth mineral ores is well-established. It’s zero. Whether moral or not Philip, exchanging that for let’s say $4bn of military aid per year is a good deal for the Ukrainian speaking part of Ukraine.
It would have to be time bound and the agreement would need to be checked carefully but it’s something to consider strongly.
Michael Landau (I loved your version of The Star Spangled Banner, by the way)
If Ukraine’s mineral rights are worth close to zero, why is Trump stipid enough to want them? Or is Trump just stupid?
The Polish President and Prime Minister travelled to the US to see Trump the other day. Their visit was scheduled to last for an hour. King Don was late and gave them 10 minutes. Starmer shouldn’t allow the UK to be insulted in a similar manner. It makes us look weak.
Don’t pander to that mob of gangsters, the US is lost to the world either temporarily or permanently; it’s too soon to know. We need to let what’s happening there play out and strengthen our other alliances with countries that don’t have demented madmen running them. There’s little anyone can do to help; it’s all up to the American people and their useless Congress to sort out if their Reps and Senators ever find their backbones.
It’s rumoured the PM will invite the felon for a visit to the UK – to Scotland – to be hosted at Balmoral. Eugh! No thanks.
Balmoral?!
I wouldn’t if I were Starmer.
I bet Trump will put an offer on it.
If I was Stamer, I would hope to be snubbed by the tangerine Tyrant.
That means the UK can walk away from the “special” relationship, which isn’t special and get on with re-forming European and commonwealth alliances which are actually useful to the UK.
It’s rumoured the PM will invite the felon for a visit to the UK – to Scotland – to be hosted at Balmoral. Eugh! No thanks.
It’s a very pleasant drive to Balmoral. Perhaps we could provide a “warm welcome” for The Donald.
Do it in honour of Janey Godley.
And if you believe some pretty credible sources Trump’s been a Russia asset since 1987 – the FSB (or KGB as was) even gave him a Russian name – Krasnov. And when he came back from one of his pageants in Moscow that year he promptly spent $150,000 on advertisements against NATO and US participation in it.
One of the OSINT people I follow had a piece yesterday hypothesising that one of the reasons Trump’s in such a rush to rip off Ukraine and get a peace settlement which favours Russia is that the Russians think it inevitable that details of his FSB file will leak sooner rather than later (and that of others in his government). And so they’re pushing him and Musk to cause as much destruction of the federal government as they can as soon as they can.
But also worth noting that as of yesterday, both the Trump acting director at the State Department and of the FBI (the dreaded Kash Patel) issued orders to their (remaining) staff to ignore the instruction from Musk, sent Friday, that they must send an email by today outlining five things they did at work last week, and if they didn’t they’d be fired today. So, the battles for power in Trumpworld have begun. I suspect they’ll get messier by the week.
And now, and ex BlackRock executive, and lover of the US – having studied their (Merz) is going to be the next Chancellor or Germany – and starts by celebrating his election victory by talking about uniting Europe and that its relationship with ‘these Americans’ is over.
It seems all’s not lost – just yet.
Ps. Richard. Not sure if you picked this up, but in his rambling, nut job of a pyschopathic, egotists, speech as CPAC last week Trump specifically went after Rachel Maddow, as well as MSNBC in general. Apparently they are ‘dangerous to democracy’.
I missed that last point
Pure Goebellian claims.
”the Russians think it inevitable that details of his FSB file will leak sooner rather than later”
If a KGB/FSB connection with Trump has been in existence for nearly 40 years, Western intelligence agencies would surely have known about it. In which case, surely incriminating material would have found its way to Trump’s political opponents by now? If it has why hasn’t it come to light already? If it hasn’t, why not? Why would those in the know have sat on it, allowing someone so compromised as to be a KGB/FSB asset access to the reins of power in the US, not once but twice?
And if this is going to come to light in a way that might make some difference in the near future, why wait so long, when so much damage has already been done?
I admit I am with Ivan on this one.
Here is an industry analysis of Ukrainian mineral wealth (tl;dr: not impressive, and hard to extract)
https://www.mining.com/web/trump-wants-ukraines-minerals-but-what-exactly-is-up-for-grabs/
The Economist claims that Zelenskyy made an offer for mineral rights in exchange for future support, which Trump then turned on its head. Is it possible that Zelenskyy was trolling Trump, and knows full well his offer is almost worthless?
Trump is running the US like a corporation whereby he is Chairman of the Board and Musk is his CEO.
More like a mafia mobster with a bunch of convenient thugs as henchmen for extortion.
You’ve given them far too much respectability.
“A psychopath…”
“”If you took functional MRI scans of a healthy ‘normal’ person, a person with a personality disorder, and a business tycoon with a track record of exploitation, chances are you would find that the MRI scan of the tycoon was more closely matched with the MRI scan of the personality disorder…” – Neoroscientist Dr. Dan Goyal – https://dangoyal.substack.com/p/the-neuroscience-of-greed
Fair enough
And I like Dan
Speaking of personality disorder (& thanks to the link – 1st class) – this should sound oh so familiar (& note the source):
https://www.cia.gov/resources/csi/static/psychology-of-espionage.pdf
“Narcissistic personalities are characterized by exaggerated self-love and self-centeredness. Alongside an all-encompassing grandiosity runs a subtle but equally pervasive insecuri
ty, into which narcissists have limited insight. Their internal world typically is built around fantasies about their remarkable personal abilities, charisma, beauty, and prospects. They are compelled to exhibit their presumed stellar attributes and constantly seek affirmation from others. Though their imaginings distort common sense or everyday reality, narcissists nevertheless believe in the accuracy of their daydreams and act accordingly. Others, therefore, often experience them as lacking common sense and twisting reality. When facts or other people contradict or interfere with their fantasies, narcissists become combative and vengeful. Their defensive hostility to criticism— even mild feedback—is often well out of
proportion to whatever provocation sparked it”
Very assuming
All I would draw attention to is that I just see that Trump has put aside the pretence of U.S. diplomacy and is just more naked in his ambitions than any other president I have seen. It sort of always has been America First – from banana’s to rare minerals, to the fact that the World Bank gives loans in dollars, that the U.S. has trade debts settled in dollars (making other nations – even poor ones) hold dollar reserves.
Property development ambitions in Gaza predated Trump – my view is that he just wants in on it, probably for himself.
In a way, I like that Trump is an aspect of the American spirit in the raw – ‘fuck you buddy’, because the more aggressive and less subtle he is, the more anti-American sentiment around the world will grow – just watch. No one likes to be bullied.
BTW, there are lots of other positive and admirable aspects to the American spirit as well, and some of those too will be motivated by Trumps abrasiveness. I hope. A country that has people like Rachel Maddow, Chris Hedges and Lawrence O’Donnell (and others) is worth not giving up on.
The analysis is as if Trump has agency (as Pres of the USA). That is true, but, ……..his long relationship with Russia (actively since 1987) suggests that other influences are at play. True to form, the Guardian & its columnists chose not to consider this as an important factor in what Trump thinks and does. Failing to consider the Russia angle & the hold that Putin has over Trump, means one is only looking at part of the picture. This is not idle speculation on my part, Here is a former Trump insider:
“Anthony Scaramucci who briefly served as Trump’s White House communications director in 2017, said during an episode of “The Rest Is Politics: US” podcast with co-host Katty Kay on Friday that he thinks there is a mysterious “hold” on the president. Scaramucci did not elaborate on what he believes that “hold” might be, adding only: “I don’t know why it’s like this. [H.R.] McMaster couldn’t figure it out, [James] Mattis couldn’t figure it out, [John] Kelly couldn’t figure it out.”
In support of Mike, Trump’s links to Russia are very well worth bearing in mind and have indeed been in ‘plain sight’ (read Burgis, Belton, Kendzior, Bright etc.,).
We have been warned.
The reason why this will not revealed is because the City is deeply involved in it all, because a lot has been done through moving Russian money around as well as blackmail (kompromat).
Ukraine minerals – why are people in this blog saying they’re worth nothing when the BBC is reporting this:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c20le8jn282o
Why don’t you tell us? Are you an expert?
Spiky. No I’m not, that’s why I ask. Who do I believe? How can there be £100s of billions in different opinion on this? And if we believe the ‘they’re not worth anything’ line, why would Trump make such an error? Alternatively what if its not true and he does end up with huge amounts of resource?
It seems you don’t know.
The question is open.
But politically, the demand is unacceptable whatever the value.
You raise an important glimpse into the role Trump’s psychopathy plays in his approach to leadership. I also offer narcissism and paranoia, as detailed in the thought-provoking book ‘Disordered Minds: How Dangerous Personalities are Destroying Democracy’ by Ian Hughes. Hughes looks historically at Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot and Hitler but the relevance to today is inescapable.
https://disorderedworld.com/book/