Trending
Donald Trump's foreign policy has been one of restraint and resolve. Although the bombing of the Iranian nuclear facilities has been depicted as an escalation, it actually is consistent with Trump's approach from the beginning. It demonstrates what the United States can do without being a bridge burner. In essence, it is enough without doing too much.
Unlike George W Bush's policy, it is limited--no boots on the ground and performative. As well, it is a mandate to de-escalate Israel's assault on Iran. Trump clearly wants to limit the damage. He understandably does not want an oil shock with its price increase during the summer. He also has other fish to fry, most importantly, his "big beautiful bill." Trump has done this before, after ordering the assassination of General Qassem Suleimani, the Iranians responded with token attacks, and a war was averted.
Proof that Trump has taken a diplomatic path is his reliance on Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who has shown competency, clarity, and caution. Unlike Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of Defense, he has been measured in his language and disciplined in his political posture. Hegseth declared total victory even before assessments of the damage were complete. Rubio has done none of that, and he has won the respect of the international community.
Rubio's approach was clearly successful in influencing Trump. Although the action was tough, it was limited and not tied to regime change. The message was strongly delivered without being open-ended. The ball is clearly in Tehran's court, and now they can decide to proceed further. This reflects Rubio's thinking and not the neoconservatives.
Certainly, it is preferable to Tony Blinken's highly ideological approach, whose comments were larded in moral language. In Gaza, he urged Israel to cease bombing while still giving Bibi Netanyahu plenty of ordinance. It was all direct and opportunistic with Rubio, minus weasel words and Wilsonian posturing. All in all, Rubio's first crisis showed his competence, and he was outstanding.
Was it a defeat for Stephen Bannon, Tucker Carlson, and Jack Posobiec, who urged caution? No, they obviously influenced Trump's essentially middle position. It was not a complete success, but certainly did not represent a complete victory for the Lindsey Graham or Tom Cotton hardline approach.
On the whole, Trump stayed true to his stance that Iran should not be allowed to possess a nuclear device. Besides that, the President, unlike Bush, was not that ambitious.
Trump's foreign policy proved that he stood for peace through strength. He did not allow himself to get carried away, and his policies demonstrated both resolve and prudence. Rubio gave that message to the world with great aplomb.