There's something uniquely American about Donald Trump — whether we like it or not. As an immigrant from Europe, I hear this a lot when visiting the continent. Nowhere else in the Western world could somebody so inexperienced in global affairs have an actual shot at the highest political office.
One way or the other, Trump's rise on the national stage will have long-term implications even beyond Election Day. The man has a lot of ardent believers, and he gives form to a deeply human desire to live in a world that is fundamentally simple.
Except that it's not.
Therein lies the fallacy of Trump's national security agenda, though the term certainly is a stretch for the loose stream of wishful thinking that invariably involves America whipping the world into submission. Simply proclaiming that ISIS will be defeated and NATO countries forced to pay up for defense doesn't make it so.
Defense News reporters Chris Cavas and Joe Gould recently had a chance to speak with two key national security advisers for the Republican candidate, Sen. Jeff Sessions from Alabama and Rep. Randy Forbes from Virginia. Both could be expected to hold high offices in a Trump administration.
The interview, posted on our website, elicited a resounding "Meh" response in the newsroom and the Twitterverse. There was rhetoric, not much else. In fact, Sessions suggested the lack of specifics so close to the presidential election is something of a policy unto itself.
After ticking off the world's current crises and blaming Obama for them, he said: "I think it would be a mistake for Donald Trump to start laying out details about how he intends to respond to any of these right now. A lot of milk is spilt and we are going to have to figure out a way to restore our credibility and world stability."
Achieving world stability is a tall order when you have trouble with the details.
Amid the platitudes, a commentary on Trump's stance toward war stands out. Said Sessions, "I have got to tell you, Donald Trump does not believe in war. He sees war as bad, destructive, death and a wealth destruction."
World leaders around the world are watching this election closely. Trump being an opponent to war on the basis of "wealth destruction" doesn't give them much to go on as they chart their policy toward Washington with a new leader in charge. Meanwhile, a sense of reliability and predictability from United States may be precisely what they need.
So averse is Trump's camp to the finer details of policymaking that they tout as a "game changer" their plan to shift responsibility for defense strategy from the National Security Council to the Pentagon.
According to Forbes, that is because the National Security Council is too "political," whatever that may mean.
The idea follows the same pattern of seeking easy solutions to complex problems. Of course a four-star general in uniform is in a better position to keep America safe than a seasoned diplomat in a suit.
Right?
The phenomenon of Trumpism is not going away anytime soon, no matter what happens in the election. And America can handle seeing its protagonists all over TV.
Just not in the White House.
Sebastian Sprenger is associate editor for Europe at Defense News, reporting on the state of the defense market in the region, and on U.S.-Europe cooperation and multi-national investments in defense and global security. Previously he served as managing editor for Defense News. He is based in Cologne, Germany.
