Trump’s Use of War as a Diversion
It’s a tried-and-true formula in the world of political strategy: when embroiled in domestic scandal or controversy, shift the national conversation by flexing military might. The tactic is often referred to as the “Wag the Dog” strategy, named after the 1997 movie that depicted a President creating a fictional war to divert attention from a sex scandal. While the strategy isn’t new, its recent application by former President Donald Trump is notable for its frequency and the risks it imposes.
Syria: Timing Raises Questions
The timing of Trump’s 2018 airstrikes on Syria, which were executed in response to a suspected chemical weapons attack, could not escape scrutiny. Launched while Special Counsel Robert Mueller was investigating the President’s potential collusion with Russia during the 2016 election, the military action was, to some, highly convenient. The air strikes allowed Trump to position himself as a decisive leader at a moment when his credibility was under siege. But was it the right move morally and strategically, or was it a self-serving ploy to distract from the Mueller investigation? The lines are blurred, and that’s problematic.
Soleimani Assassination: Escalation for Evasion?
Fast forward to 2020, and another instance emerges. Trump ordered the killing of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani, a man responsible for considerable instability in the Middle East. The timing coincided with Trump’s first impeachment proceedings. Ordered to trial for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, Trump’s order to assassinate Soleimani led some to argue that he was less concerned about national security and more focused on shifting headlines away from his impeachment. Not to mention, the killing brought the U.S. and Iran to the brink of war, raising ethical questions about the cost of such a diversion tactic. The assassination could have triggered a much larger conflict, putting American lives and international stability at risk. All this for what? A distraction?
The 2024 Campaign: Fear-Mongering as Strategy
As if to complete a trilogy of distractions, Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign is making waves with its rhetoric. Vowing to reinstate a travel ban on predominantly Muslim countries and making unsubstantiated claims about terrorists crossing the U.S.-Mexico border, Trump is again leveraging international tensions for domestic gain. Further fanning the flames, he’s tying the Israel-Hamas conflict to U.S. border security and even floating the possibility of war with North Korea. The danger in these tactics lies in their potential to not only divert attention but also to polarize an already divided nation. The concern is not merely that he’s trying to distract from ongoing investigations into his conduct but also that he’s willing to stoke fears and inflame international tensions to do so.
Undermining Democracy
What we see is a pattern: a leader who is willing to gamble with national security and international relations to safeguard his personal and political interests. This is more than mere political maneuvering; it’s a recklessness that undermines the very foundations of our democracy. It erodes trust in leadership, cheapens the grave decisions that come with military action, and raises questions about the ethical boundaries of political strategy.
By using military actions and international crises as distractions from his legal and ethical woes, Trump invites us to question not just his intentions but also the systems that allow for such risky political plays. It’s high time we scrutinize not only the actions of the man but also the political landscape that makes these diversion tactics possible and even effective for him.
