,
8 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
On the American side, we have three, possibly four or more, explanations of the failed summit in Hanoi. Pompeo, Bolton, and Trump have said several different things at different times. 1/
Trump makes decisions on the moment, does not discuss them in a way that Pompeo and Bolton can influence or understand them. His outbriefing is probably a mixture of misunderstanding and misdirection. 2/
Pompeo's primary motivation seems to be to keep his boss happy, which is difficult to do when you don't know what the boss wants. 3/
Bolton's primary motivation seems to be to hold his position, both organizational and ideological. Again, not really knowing what Trump wants makes this difficult, and some of Bolton's ideological preferences seem to conflict with Trump's. 4/
Both Bolton and Pompeo also may want to appear as reasonable foreign policy players. Trump doesn't care, so the two must bend what they say to fit reasonable expectations. This additional constraint adds to their difficulty. 5/
Reporting this, for reporters who believe they are serious foreign-policy reporters, is very difficult. They believe in a rational, unitary executive. 6/
But there is no such thing, just three people with grossly inadequate understanding of the situation following three different motives. And Trump could change his mind at any moment. 7/
It's a disservice to jam what Trump does in foreign policy into the standard expectations. Stand back, give up those expectations, and report what is happening. 8/8
