Since entering politics, Donald Trump has portrayed himself as being the anti-war candidate. However, what seemed like an anti-war promise to a large chunk of the American electorate quickly transformed into indiscriminate bombing and escalation. This may be a preview of what’s to come under his second administration.
In the 2024 campaign cycle, Vice President-elect JD Vance argued that the Trump campaign’s anti-war message resonated with working class America. Yet when President-elect Trump started the nomination process for his next administration, he nominated officials to diplomatic and defense positions who fit anything but his anti-war message. Similarly the Trump 2016 campaign ran an anti-war message by heavily criticizing his opponents’ support for the Iraq war. This was before he started escalating air strikes and tensions globally.
Political observers on both ends of the spectrum seem to agree that Trump’s anti-war platform was born from the sentiments of working class America. For decades, working people have seen their children and tax dollars being shipped off to conflicts where the reasons behind United States involvement were not clear.
In the 2016 campaign, Trump was able to tap into this backlash which perhaps was partially responsible for his election into the White House. It seemed at the time as though he had a mandate to de-escalate international conflict, decrease spending on war and implement a non-interventionist foreign policy.
Just a few months into Trump’s first administration, his foreign policy promises were quickly crushed. His administration escalated drone strikes by 432% and conducted more strikes in his first two years than Former President Barack Obama’s eight. His first military raid as president ended up killing an eight-year-old American girl, Anwar al-Awlaki. He further withdrew the U.S. from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), otherwise known as the Iran Nuclear Agreement, which international observers stated was operating as intended in preventing Iran’s nuclear program.
Despite his campaign promise to craft more non-interventionist policy, Trump proposed and received sharp increases in military spending all four years. He further failed to withdraw the U.S. from Iraq and Afghanistan, though he did negotiate the terms of the 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal.
While major international conflicts such as Israel-Gaza and Russia-Ukraine continue on, Trump’s first administration could be a preview of what’s to come. A continuation of breaking his anti-war, non-interventionist foreign policy promises seems all too likely.
Non-interventionist conservatives have once again been lied to about a massive revamp of American foreign policy. Instead, they have gotten quite the opposite: A policy of escalation that will continue to send American tax money and service members overseas for the foreseeable future.
Some may argue that Trump was an anti-war president since he did not get the U.S. involved in any new conflicts. While this is partially true, it is a narrow interpretation of what it means to be anti-war since Trump was anything but. A 400% increase in drone strikes that further escalated already volatile situations and withdrawing the U.S. from agreements bringing about more peace and security is the direct opposite of an anti-war stance. Obama too had no new wars under his administration, however, it would be wrong to consider him anything close to an anti-war president.
It fails to come as a shock to the public that a politician would lie about delivering on their campaign promises. However, considering Donald Trump has spent nearly a decade in American politics and four years as president, it is incumbent on the public to understand what his true policy goals are. In the 2024 election, the public was deceived again about his anti-war foreign policy, and we will once again pay the price.
Bret Fulton is a sophomore political science major. You can reach him at [email protected].
This post was originally published on here
