Is Trump a Radical Departure From Past Presidents?

Judge Nap begins this interview by asking Mearsheimer a general question about how he would characterize Trump’s foreign policy. Mearsheimer starts by saying that it is a “radical change” from any previous president. It is not “more of the same”, it is qualitatively different in both what Trump says and what he does. This is not on account of the military actions that Trump has ordered. These are described as “pinprick attacks” that have not risked American lives. (I would say Obama and Clinton were actually much worse.) The radical differences that concern both Mearsheimer and the Judge lie in his outspoken disregard for constitutional and international law. Mearsheimer clearly describes the strategy being used by the US and Israel to attack Iran, which worked in Libya and Syria, but he says has failed (this time) in Iran. The attempt to destabilize Iran with violent demonstrations was unsuccessful. Mearsheimer says Trump called off the military attack because someone told him the demonstrations had failed. I think that is likely, but there is still a question in my mind about when he was told that. Was it before the New Year’s meeting with Netanyahu or afterwards? If it was before the meeting, then Trump was deliberately deceiving Netanyahu as well as Lindsey Graham and the neocons at the meeting. Scott Ritter mentions that possibility, and so does Alex Krainer. We have to suspend our moral judgements to evaluate Trump’s actions and words clearly. This is a possibility that Mearsheimer does not mention. We shall see as events develop.