Trump’s ISIS Policy Is a Monument of Incoherence—and a Problem for the U.S.

Trump’s ISIS Policy Is a Monument of Incoherence—and a Problem for the U.S.
Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump during a speech on national security, Youngstown, Ohio, Aug. 15, 2016 (AP photo by Gerald Herbert).

After several disastrous weeks of gaffes and tumbling poll numbers, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump decided this week to turn his attention to what he considers a key selling point of his campaign: national security, particularly the threat from violent Islamic extremists. He used a speech in Youngstown, Ohio, to lay out his ideas on this issue. It offered an important window into Trump’s thinking and the mindset of his supporters. Unfortunately the picture that emerged was one of incoherence and complete disregard for the time-tested logic of strategy.

Like most Trump speeches, this one was full of hyperbole, bluster and misrepresentation. Near the beginning, for instance, Trump equated today’s conflict with the self-declared Islamic State to America’s 20th-century struggles with fascism, Nazism and communism. In reality, the Islamic State poses nowhere near the threat as those earlier enemies. Trump asserted that the 2015 nuclear agreement reached by the U.S. and other world powers with Iran put that nation “on a path to nuclear weapons,” when in reality it did the opposite. And he accused President Barack Obama of failing to “establish” a new status of forces agreement with Iraq when, again, in reality the Iraqi government was adamantly opposed to the idea and would never have accepted it.

Trump’s tendency to take credit for things done by others was also on full display in the Youngstown speech. He once again asserted that his criticism of NATO compelled the alliance to take on counterterrorism when, in reality, it has been doing so since the 9/11 attacks. Trump said that he would “aggressively pursue joint and coalition military operations to crush and destroy ISIS, international cooperation to cut off their funding, expanded intelligence sharing, and cyberwarfare to disrupt and disable their propaganda and recruiting.” Rather than reflecting innovation, this simply summarizes what the George W. Bush and Obama administrations have done to counter terrorist groups in general, including the Islamic State.

Keep reading for free!

Get instant access to the rest of this article by submitting your email address below. You'll also get access to three articles of your choice each month and our free newsletter:

Or, Subscribe now to get full access.

Already a subscriber? Log in here .

What you’ll get with an All-Access subscription to World Politics Review:

A WPR subscription is like no other resource — it’s like having a personal curator and expert analyst of global affairs news. Subscribe now, and you’ll get:

  • Immediate and instant access to the full searchable library of tens of thousands of articles.
  • Daily articles with original analysis, written by leading topic experts, delivered to you every weekday.
  • Regular in-depth articles with deep dives into important issues and countries.
  • The Daily Review email, with our take on the day’s most important news, the latest WPR analysis, what’s on our radar, and more.
  • The Weekly Review email, with quick summaries of the week’s most important coverage, and what’s to come.
  • Completely ad-free reading.

And all of this is available to you when you subscribe today.

More World Politics Review