Nikki Haley says 'regime change' in Syria. Rex Tillerson doesn't. What gives?
Story highlights
- Two of President Donald Trump's top foreign policy voices battle it out on the Sunday shows
- Trump likes public disagreements. He swoops in as the last-minute decider
(CNN)Depending on which Sunday talk show you watched, you came away with a very different sense of what the Trump Administration's next steps will be in Syria.
If you watched UN Ambassador Nikki Haley on CNN, you heard her tell "State of the Union" host Jake Tapper
that "regime change is something that we think is going to happen
because all of the parties are going to see that (Syrian president
Bashar al-)Assad is not the leader that needs to be taking place for
Syria."
If you caught Secretary of
State Rex Tillerson on CBS's "Face the Nation" you heard something very
different. Asked by "Face" host John Dickerson whether removing Assad
was a priority for the United States, Tillerson offered this:
"Our priority in Syria, John, really hasn't changed. I think the
President has -- been quite clear. First and foremost, we must defeat
ISIS."
Uh, what? Haley seemed to be quite clearly announcing that regime change was
a priority in Syria. Tillerson pointedly said it was not and that
nothing at all had changed in terms of America's policy and priorities
in Syria.
Why the confusion? My
guess is that it's not confusion at all. It's two factions within the
foreign policy wing of the Trump White House trying to convince the
president of the rightness of their positions on Syria via public
channels.
At
first blush that might seem odd. Wouldn't these sorts of debates be
better hashed out in private so as to show a united front to the
political world and the American people once a decision is reached?
In
a traditional White House with a president who plays by the political
rules, sure. But this not a traditional White House. And Trump loves
breaking the rules much more than he likes adhering to them.
What
we learned in the campaign is that Trump aides -- counselor Kellyanne
Conway was the master -- would purposely go on TV if they wanted to make
sure Trump got a particular message. They knew -- and know -- how much
cable TV he watches and quickly grasped that the best way to reach him
oftentimes was to go on TV.
This passage from the New Yorker's excellent Conway profile is telling in regards the importance Trump places on TV:
She
said that she was trying to spend more time on campaign management, but
for Trump a measure of her success was her presence on television.
"I've cut my TV time in half," she told me. "And he's, like, 'I didn't
see you on TV in the last hour. Where are you?' I'm, like, 'Mr. Trump,
managing the campaign means talking to the state directors and the mail
house and the R.N.C.' "
Trump
himself has even acknowledged how much information he gains from
watching TV. Asked who he consulted with on military matters during the
campaign, Trump said this
to NBC's Chuck Todd: "Well, I watch the shows. I mean, I really see a
lot of great -- you know, when you watch your show, and all of the other
shows, and you have the generals, and you have certain people."
The
simple fact is that Trump doesn't have a long-held belief about what we
should do in Syria. That's evidenced by the fact that he long insisted
the United States needed to stay out of Syria's business but then
reversed course entirely in the wake of a chemical attack against
civilians in the northwestern part of the country last week.
Trump
touted that reversal as a sign of his "flexibility," his willingness to
let events and other peoples' views change his own. That's an open
invitation for his advisers to try to shape what's next in Syria because
it's not entirely clear that Trump favors one view over another.
His
habit is to let his advisers duke it out in public -- sort of like an
"Apprentice"-boardroom scene -- and then come in at the last minute and
make the call. It's how he thinks the best decisions get made.
That,
it seems to me, is what Haley and Tillerson are up to at the moment --
hashing out their divergent views in full view of the president in hopes
of convincing him of the rightness of their argument.
Strange in any other administration. In this one? Standard operating procedure.
No comments:
Post a Comment