Latest news with #internationalaffairs
BBC News
2 days ago
- Business
- BBC News
Starmer pressed on 'fear and anxiety' caused by welfare changes in grilling by MPs
Update: Date: 16:54 BST Title: Starmer fields difficult questions ahead of summer recess Content: Keir Starmer faced more than an hour of questions on tackling poverty and international affairs from senior MPs ahead of Parliament's summer recess. Here are some of the key takeaways from Starmer's 90-minute stint in the hot seat: On tackling poverty: On international affairs: This now brings our live coverage of Keir Starmer's appearance before the Liaison Committee to a close. Thank you for joining us. Update: Date: 16:33 BST Title: An even-keeled performance for Starmer Content: Helen CattPolitical correspondent Downing Street is likely to feel pretty pleased with how that session of the Liaison Committee went. The prime minister didn't appear to make any major slip-ups or to have been put uncomfortably on the spot. He even seemed comfortable enough to smile as he batted away questions about what might or might not be in the Budget. The most awkward moment was the exchange with Labour MP Debbie Abrahams, as she didn't hold back on her views on the welfare reforms. He, though, stuck firmly to the government's line and didn't make any further headlines. Update: Date: 16:18 BST Title: What's happened to poverty over the last 30 years? Content: By Robert Cuffe One of the main areas that Keir Starmer was quizzed by senior MPs about was how the Labour government plans to tackle poverty. Just over 20% of people in the UK were living in poverty last year - a figure that has barely changed over the last two decades. The number of children affected has remained close to 30% over the same period. The most commonly used measure says you're in poverty if your household's income is at least 40% lower than the average household's. And so the poverty rate doesn't always fall when living standards improve. It falls when the lowest incomes - most affected by changes to the minimum wage or benefits - catch up with those of average households. The child poverty rate has been drifting up since it dipped during the pandemic. Last year, it rose back up near the level seen just before the pandemic, which itself was the highest seen since the mid-2000s. Update: Date: 16:10 BST Title: Starmer's grilling by senior MPs comes to a close Content: The questions for the prime minister are now finishing, after just over 90 minutes of discussions on poverty and international affairs. We'll bring you a recap of the key lines shortly - stay with us. Update: Date: 16:09 BST Title: 'We need to make sure we protect BBC World Service' Content: In one of the final questions put to the PM, Dame Caroline Dinenage touches on the BBC again. She asks Starmer if he agrees that the BBC World Service "bolsters national and global security" and if so, whether more government departments should contribute to fund it? Starmer says the World Service "is really important". He then says there are other states that are happy to assist in broadcasting or other areas if there's a gap left. "We need to make sure we protect the World Service," he adds. Dinenage says that in countries like Liberia, Lebanon and Kenya - where BBC World Service has pulled out - Russia Today and the Chinese state media have backfilled. She says it's important for the government to have this on its radar. Update: Date: 16:06 BST Title: Will US trade talks water-down regulations on fighting misinformation? Content: Chi Onwurah, chair of the science and technology committee, put to the prime minister questions about misinformation online. Can Starmer give a commitment that trade talks with the US will not lead to regulations being watered down? Starmer doesn't address that point directly, but points out that further measures in the Online Safety Act will come into force imminently and he wants to go further than that. The prime minister says his priority is to make sure British democracy can function effectively and that elections are not impacted by misinformation. He adds that he was "very worried" about misinformation during the last general election campaign, and is worried it could be a factor in the future. Update: Date: 16:04 BST Title: Afghan data breach a 'shocking inheritance', Starmer says Content: Thornberry now asks the prime minister about what she calls "that shocking Afghan data breach". "Do you think there was a better way in which the previous government could have dealt with the breach? Do you think a super injunction the right way?" she asks. Starmer agrees that it was a "shocking inheritance" for his government. He says that it created a sense of discomfort for him and others, which is why a review was set up - led by Paul Rimmer - to ask if it is necessary for the arrangement to still be in place. The review produced the answer "no" and the injunction was lifted. Starmer adds that the select committee is now looking into the data breach and he hopes the previous government will appear before the committee and provide their own explanations. Update: Date: 16:02 BST Title: PM: UK has made 'real progress' in resetting EU relationship Content: Emily Thornberry, chair of the foreign affairs committee, is next and asks Starmer about the UK's relations with the EU. She asks if further standards - such as for medicines or chemicals - could be agreed on with the EU at the next summit. Starmer says his government has made "real progress" and has reset relations with partners in Europe, which they had pledged to do. He adds that the UK has led with the French on the "coalition of the willing" - showing its ability to pull allies together in response to the conflict in Ukraine. Thornberry then asks what a better relationship with the EU on defence could look like. Starmer says the EU countries need to cooperate more if they are going to spend more on defence. He adds that Nato has been a "cornerstone of our peace" for decades but it requires "more heavy lifting from the Europeans". Update: Date: 15:53 BST Title: 'We need a ceasefire and we need it straight away' - Starmer Content: The questions for the prime minister now shift from how the government plans to tackle poverty to focus on international affairs. Andy Slaughter begins this section of questioning, and says: "every day it is clearer that the civilian population of Gaza is being starved, killed and displaced in a systematic, yet indiscriminate, way." He then says the steps taken by the UK so far have had no effect on the actions of the Israeli government. Slaughter asks: "What further steps will the government take to protect Palestinians from mass killing and the destruction of their homes and communities?" Starmer replies by saying that "we need a ceasefire and we need it straight away". He adds that this will "create a space for the remaining hostages to be released... and aid to get in at speed and at volume". The prime minister says the only way to get a sustained peace in Gaza is by making space for a political process. Update: Date: 15:48 BST Title: Threat of cyber-attacks on UK pose a serious risk, PM says Content: The prime minister is now asked about cybersecurity by Nick Smith, who references recent high-profile attacks on high street names like Marks and Spencer. Does the prime minister agree that investing in the domestic private cybersecurity industry could be a pipeline for jobs and reduce the risk firms face? Starmer says he does because there are many more cyber incidents than most people appreciate. They are a serious risk which the government and public services face every day, he adds. Update: Date: 15:44 BST Title: The Budget set out biggest devolution settlement for Scotland, Starmer says Content: Patricia Ferguson, chair of the Scottish affairs committee, says that in Scotland, persistent long-term poverty and poor outcomes occur in former industrial areas, particularly those that are not close to major towns. "What steps is the government taking to ensure the benefits of the industrial strategy reach those communities?" she asks. Starmer responds by saying some levers to do with poverty are devolved, but that the government will work on those that aren't. Areas where the government can do things directly include: He adds that last year's Budget set out the biggest devolution settlement for Scotland. Update: Date: 15:41 BST Title: Starmer: 'We need to invest across Wales, and south Wales' Content: Nick Smith now tells the prime minister that almost a quarter of people are economically inactive in the south Wales valleys, as he points out some of the UK's former industrial areas are "harder to revitalise". He asks the prime minister if the government will look at investment for areas that once "powered our country". Starmer acknowledges there are "long-term issues in these communities that have been overlooked". He says the government is taking a number of measures, citing the Cardiff and Newport investment zone to drive growth in manufacturing in the area. He adds that there is also a Newport semi-conductor cluster to support hundreds of highly-skilled jobs. Starmer also cites the support being placed into Port Talbot steel, owned by Tata, saying: "I was very pleased to see the electric arch furnace work start last week, or the week before." "We also need to invest across Wales, and south Wales in particular, in transport and rail," he adds. Update: Date: 15:38 BST Title: 'Transportation deserts' - how is the government tackling them? Content: Ruth Cadbury, chair of the transport committee, says people without cars are often dependent on "minimal" bus services. More than half of small towns in south-west and north-east England are "complete public transport deserts", she says - so how will the government ensure planned changes to bus services will help? Starmer says a lot of money was invested in buses in the last Budget and the government has capped bus fares at £3 until March 2027. The government is supporting reforms to ensure local leaders have more control over setting bus routes, the prime minister adds. He says this will help prevent private firms from axing non-profitable routes. Update: Date: 15:35 BST Title: 'We're keeping an open mind on what to do with the licence fee' Content: Dinenage now moves on to the BBC's licence fee, describing it as a "regressive tax". She asks for Starmer's views on how it could be reformed and when the Charter Review will be concluded. Starmer says they are going through the review and it will come to its conclusion. "We're keeping an open mind on what to do with the licence fee," he says, adding that the government is working closely with the BBC. Update: Date: 15:34 BST Title: Wry smile from PM after donor gifts dig Content: Helen CattPolitical correspondent A wry smile from the prime minister as Conservative MP Dame Caroline Dinenage has a little dig about him being happy to be on the receiving end of philanthropy. That's a reference to gifts of clothing, glasses and football tickets he accepted from a Labour donor, which were are the centre of a media row last year She does it as she reads out figures that suggest his constituency is among the least generous in the country He seems to take it in good heart though and says his area will have to "up its game". Update: Date: 15:33 BST Title: 'That's it?', MP asks, as Starmer faces questions over supporting charity sector Content: Attention turns away from fiscal forecasts and is now squarely focused on what Starmer's government is doing to support the charity sector. Dame Caroline Dinenage says 86% of charities are seeing an increased demand for the services, though fewer corporations are donating as their overhead expenses rise. Starmer says the government is looking at what can be done for business rates for charities. "That's it?" Dinenage replies. Starmer says he will write to her on the topic. She points out that Starmer earlier said tackling poverty is "central to everything government does" and that charities work to provide that support. She continues: "Isn't it time to offer a blanket carve out to charities?" The prime minister says no, but adds that "one of the things we launched last Thursday was the civil service covenant... to bring the government and charities together through partnership". "We inherited both a broken economy and broken public services." Update: Date: 15:29 BST Title: 'Fluctuations' in borrowing 'broadly driven' by global factors, Starmer argues Content: Steve Barclay, chair of the finance committee, puts to Starmer that government borrowing in May was at its second-highest level on record. Starmer acknowledges that, but says he expects borrowing to be in line with forecasts despite monthly "fluctuations", which he says are "broadly driven" by global factors. Barclay points out that between the chancellor's last two fiscal statements, economic changes meant the government had £14bn less to spend than it thought it had six months early. Analysts say something similar could happen ahead of this Budget - does the prime minister agree? Starmer refuses to be drawn on forecasts, saying there are lots of competing predictions which change on a "pretty regular basis" and that he will look at the situation as it is at the Budget. Update: Date: 15:26 BST Title: How does Labour plan to help the poorest households? Content: Liam Byrne now asks Starmer if he wants everybody in society to feel better off over the next three years, including the poorest 40% of households. Yes, Starmer says. The chair of the business and trade committee then proceeds to list forecasts from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, which claim that - with the government's current measures in place - the bottom 40% of society are not going to be better off. They will actually be £12,000 worse off each year, Byrne says. What needs to change between now and the end of parliament, he asks. Starmer says the priority should be growth and creating more wealth. He says the measures in the Budget and Spending Review aim to achieve this and ensure wages go up. Byrne then raises the Bank of England's forecasts that predict wage growth to slow and taxes and bills to rise faster than wages. He asks once again what is needed for everyone to enjoy higher living standards. Starmer lists what the government has already done, including: He adds that the central focus "has to be on creating more wealth". Update: Date: 15:13 BST Title: Out of work young people are 'huge challenge for country' - PM Content: Turning now to the nearly one million young people out of work in the UK, Starmer says they are a "huge challenge for the country", and that the system is "broken and needs to be mended". Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown says the UK has a "long-term trend of unemployment increasing every month", adding that it now stands at 4.7% with 1.6m people out of work. He says this is "perplexing", citing an inquiry into job centres - released on 2 July - which found that there were 2,100 work coaches in these centres than the year before. Clifton-Brown pushes the prime minister on how this can be reversed. Starmer says the employment rate is up, 0.8% over the year, and unemployment rate is up - which he acknowledges could be seen as a "slight contradiction". He explains this contradiction by pointing out that the inactivity numbers have gone down. This, he says, means that those not looking for work have begun to look for work, meaning the employment rate is going up at the same time that the unemployment rate rises. The PM says this highlights the importance of work coaches in job centres to support people into work. Update: Date: 15:08 BST Title: An uncomfortable exchange on welfare reforms Content: Helen CattPolitical correspondent The exchange with Debbie Abrahams that we just witnessed was an example of the unique platform the Liaison Committee provides. We saw a Labour MP telling a Labour prime minister face-to-face that his welfare cuts have been "far removed from Labour values" and that they "must do better". It looked a little uncomfortable. Starmer stuck to the government's line that getting people into work was an "important Labour value". That was never the point though for the rebels - as the cuts they objected to were to benefits that also get paid to working people.
The Independent
16-07-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Not our finest hour: When Britain's allies put their lives on the line, we abandoned them – and covered it up
P erfidious Albion, in modern terms, means that when it comes to international affairs, Britain is seen as treacherous and unreliable – and has turned mendacity into an art. Students of imperial history will recall the hundreds of treaties signed with local chiefs, kings and leaders that were waved aside in the interests of the empire. The French call their deep distrust of Les Anglo-Saxons 'Fashoda syndrome' – named after a sordid episode of British duplicity that delivered an obscure bit of southern Sudan to the UK in the 19th century, and triggered the enduring distrust of our closest neighbour up to this day. Now we have the Kabul cock-up. It will inevitably serve to undermine Britain's woeful and feeble international reputation – and drive some of those who have been betrayed into the arms of our enemies. The disastrous accidental release of up to 100,000 names and numbers of Afghans seeking safety in the UK, a noble but feeble effort to save some of them, and the desperate cover-up using the courts to ensure that the British public knew nothing of the whole farrago, can only be reported today, two years after it was uncovered. The official reason for a superinjunction to hide the mess was to protect Afghans who wanted to get out of Afghanistan before the Taliban found and killed them. But their numbers, emails, and names were already in the public domain as a result of the leak. The Taliban are not illiterate morons. They beat the Soviets, they beat Nato and the US at war. They would have got hold of the list within moments of a clumsy British Ministry of Defence official hitting the 'send' button on an email containing all those sensitive details to sources in, or near, Afghanistan. Rather than take the lead and act on principle to protect human lives, the British government did what it always does and went into overdrive to protect its own embarrassment and to avoid making the case for, not against, immigration to this country. Ministers could have stood up and admitted to the leak. They could, and should, have defended the right – and need – of people who had literally risked their lives to settle in the UK; people who believed this to be a country in which decency is a first principle. But because British politicians from the two mainstream parties live in fear of Reform, they had already embarked on their betrayal of the soldiers who had given the most to the UK during its hopeless war in Afghanistan. As The Independent has previously reported, Afghan special forces teams from task forces 333 and 444 – paid and trained by the UK, who fought alongside the SBS and the SAS for years – were ditched when the Taliban took control of Kabul in mid-2021. Very senior British officers, who knew the capabilities and the loyalty of these men, formally suggested that they could be brought to the UK and used as tier two special forces operators in the British army. They were sneered at. Some of those Afghan special forces operators, intelligence sources have told The Independent, are now living in Iran. Imagine their skills being put to work for a regime that is planning revenge for the recent attacks carried out on it by Israel and the US. Some have been relocated to the UK after a campaign by this newspaper. But many others were abandoned. So, when the massive leak of names was reported to the British government, it did set about trying to help some of the potential victims. But it kept most in the dark in an effort to hide a British snafu – not to save the lives of loyal servants to the crown, who did not know that the Taliban probably knew who they were. The Independent 's Holly Bancroft uncovered the story in the autumn of 2023, but was unable to report it because of the ongoing evacuation operation. 'In total, 23,900 Afghans linked to the breach have been offered relocation to the UK, with more than 16,000 already in the UK. The MoD says 6,900 of these are people who would not otherwise have been brought to Britain,' she wrote, once the superinjunction had been lifted. Why not? Why were these 6,900 Afghans – originally deemed ineligible – suddenly given access to the UK? Could their previous ineligibility have been due to politicians being reluctant to make the case, either moral or economic, for immigration? It's feeble enough that this government, like the last, continues to campaign against immigration while businesses, led by the Confederation of British Industry, are crying out for skilled and unskilled labour to fuel growth. It's just as feeble that, although the economic case for rejoining the European single market is overwhelming, no senior politician in government is making that case. So, if there is no effort to show leadership in areas of clear national interest, one should not be surprised that ministers hide within the mob that clings to irrational beliefs fomented by disinformation and extremist populism. They'd rather just abandon battlefield allies, hide the fact that these people have been accidentally endangered, and gag anyone who wishes to talk about it. The first instinct is perfidy and obfuscation, not leadership. 'Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose,' as they'd say next door.
The Independent
15-07-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Not our finest hour: When Britain's allies put their lives on the line, we abandoned them – and hushed it all up
Perfidious Albion, in modern terms, means when it comes to international affairs, Britain is seen as treacherous and unreliable - and has turned mendacity into an art. Students of imperial history will recall the hundreds of treaties signed with local chiefs, kings and leaders that were waved aside in the interests of the empire. The French call their deep distrust of the Les Ango-Saxons the 'Fashoda Syndrome' – named after a sordid episode of British duplicity which delivered an obscure bit of southern Sudan to the UK in the 19th century - and triggered the enduring distrust of our closest neighbour up to this day. Now we have the Kabul Cockup. It will inevitably serve to undermine Britain's woeful and feeble international reputation – and drive some of those who have been betrayed into the arms of our enemies. The disastrous accidental release of 100,000 names and numbers of Afghans seeking safety in the UK, a noble but feeble effort to save some of them, and the desperate cover up using the courts to ensure that the British public knew nothing of the whole farrago, can only be reported today, two years after it was uncovered. The official reason for a superinjunction to hide the mess was to protect Afghans who wanted to get out of Afghanistan, before the Taliban found and killed them. But their numbers, emails, and names were already in the public domain after the leak. The Taliban are not illiterate morons. They beat the Soviets, they beat Nato and the US at war. They would have got hold of the list within moments of a clumsy British Ministry of Defence official hitting the 'send' button on an email containing all those sensitive details to sources in, or near, Afghanistan. Rather than take the lead and act on principle to protect human lives, the British government did what it always does and went into overdrive to protect its own embarrassment and to avoid making the case for, not against, immigration to this country. Ministers could have stood up and admitted to the leak. They could, and should, have defended the right and need for people who had literally risked their lives to settle into the UK because they believed this is a country of decency as a first principle. But because British politicians of the two mainstream parties live in fear of Reform, they had already embarked on betraying the soldiers who had given most to the UK in its hopeless war in Afghanistan. As The Independent has previously reported, Afghan Special Forces teams from task forces 333 and 444 - paid and trained by the UK, who fought alongside the SBS and the SAS for years - were ditched when the Taliban took over Kabul in mid 2021. Very senior British officers, who knew the capabilities and the loyalty of these men, formally suggested they could be brought to the UK and used as Tier Two special forces operators in the British army. They were sneered away. Some of those Afghan special forces operators, intelligence sources have told The Independent, are now living in Iran. Imagine their skills put to work for a regime that is planning revenge for the Israeli and US attacks on it recently. Some have been relocated to the UK after a campaign by this newspaper. But many others were abandoned. So, when the massive leak of names was reported to the British government, it did set about trying to help some of the potential victims. But it kept most in the dark to hide a British snafu, not to save the lives of loyal servants to the Crown who did not know that the Taliban probably knew who they were. The Independent's Holly Bancroft uncovered the story in the autumn of 2023, but was unable to report it because of the ongoing evacuation operation. 'In total, 23,900 Afghans linked to the breach have been offered relocation to the UK, with more than 16,000 already in the UK. The MoD says 6,900 of those are people who would not have otherwise been brought to Britain,' she wrote, now that the superinjunction has been lifted. Why not? Why were these 6,900 Afghans - originally deemed ineligible - suddenly given access to the UK? Could it be because politicians had been reluctant to make the case, moral or economic, for immigration? It's feeble enough that this government, like the last, continues to campaign against immigration while businesses, led by the Confederation of British Industry, are crying out for skilled and unskilled labour to fuel growth. It's just as feeble that no matter that although the economic case for rejoining the European common market is overwhelming, no senior politician in government is making the case. So, if there is no effort to show leadership in areas of clear national self-interest, one should not be surprised that ministers hide in the mob which clings to irrational beliefs fomented by disinformation and extremist populism. They'd rather just abandon battlefield allies, hide the fact they've been accidentally endangered, and gag anyone talking about it. The first instinct is perfidy and obfuscation, not leadership. 'Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose,' as they'd say next door.
Arab News
13-07-2025
- Politics
- Arab News
Russia warns US, South Korea and Japan against forming security alliance targeting North Korea
SEOUL, South Korea: Russia's foreign minister warned the US, South Korea and Japan against forming a security partnership targeting North Korea as he visited his country's ally for talks on further solidifying their booming military and other cooperation. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov spoke Saturday at North Korea's eastern Wonsan city, where he met the country's leader, Kim Jong Un, and conveyed greetings from President Vladimir Putin. Kim during the meeting reaffirmed his government's commitment to 'unconditionally support and encourage all measures' taken by Russia in its conflict with Ukraine. He said Pyongyang and Moscow share identical views on 'all strategic issues in conformity with the level of alliance,' according to North Korea's official Korean Central News Agency. Lavrov called for the two countries to further strengthen their 'strategic and tactical cooperation and intensify concerted action' in international affairs, KCNA reported. Relations between Russia and North Korea have been flourishing in recent years, with North Korea supplying troops and ammunition to support Russia's war against Ukraine in return for military and economic assistance. That has raised concerns among South Korea, the US and others that Russia might also transfer sensitive technologies to North Korea that can increase the danger of its nuclear and missile programs. Speaking with reporters after a meeting with his North Korean counterpart Choe Son Hui, Lavrov accused the US, South Korea and Japan of what he called military buildups around North Korea. 'We warn against exploiting these ties to build alliances directed against anyone, including North Korea and, of course, Russia,' he said, according to Russia's state Tass news agency. The US, South Korea and Japan have expanded or restored their trilateral military exercises in response to North Korea's advancing nuclear program. The three countries held a joint air drill Friday involving US nuclear-capable bombers near the Korean Peninsula as their top military officers met in Seoul and urged North Korea to cease all unlawful activities threatening regional security. North Korea views major US-led military drills as invasion rehearsals and has long argued it is forced to develop nuclear weapons to defend itself from US military threats. Russia understands North Korea's decision to seek nuclear weapons, Lavrov said. 'The technologies used by North Korea are the result of the work of its own scientists. We respect North Korea's aspirations and understand the reasons why it is pursuing nuclear development,' Lavrov said, according to Tass. During their meeting, Choe reiterated North Korea 'unconditionally' supports Russia's fight against Ukraine, as Lavrov repeated Russia's gratitude for the contribution North Korean troops made in efforts to repel a Ukrainian incursion into Russia's Kursk border region. North Korea recently opened a mammoth beach resort in Wonsan city, the meeting venue, that it says can accommodate nearly 20,000 people. In his comments at the start of his meeting with Choe, Lavrov said, 'I am sure that Russian tourists will be increasingly eager to come here. We will do everything we can to facilitate this, creating conditions for this, including air travel,' according to the Russian Foreign Ministry. The Wonsan-Kalma tourist zone is at the center of Kim's push to boost tourism to improve his country's troubled economy. However, prospects for the tourist complex aren't clear as North Korea appears unlikely to fully reopen its borders and embrace Western tourists anytime soon.
Forbes
29-06-2025
- Politics
- Forbes
How Trump Differs From Predecessors In The Handling Of Foreign Crises
President Donald Trump delivers an address to the nation accompanied by Vice President JD Vance, ... More Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth from the White House on June 21, 2025 in Washington, D.C. Trump addressed the three Iranian nuclear facilities that were struck by the U.S. military. (Photo by Carlos Barria - Pool/Getty Images) A chaotic and unpredictable approach for communicating about and managing crisis situations cam be as dangerous and unsettling in the corporate world as on the international stage. Business executives who have any doubts how a leader's personality and management style can affect a company's response to a crisis should compare President Donald Trump's management of foreign affairs and international crises in his second term against those of many of his predecessors. Trump's approach to international affairs 'is significantly more chaotic than prior administrations. [He] seems to be governed more by emotions, particularly anger and frustration, than clear actionable information from the intelligence services,' Joseph W. Roberts, Professor and Chair of Politics and International Relations at Roger Williams University in Bristol, Rhode Island, told me in an email interview. Trump 'is quick to post on Truth Social before the facts are clear and without regard to the potential consequences for the U.S. and her allies,' he pointed out. Generating Concerns And Headlines Trump's penchant for announcing decisions or issuing warnings and ultimatums on social media has generated international headlines and concerns. There are few if any boards of directors that would tolerate a CEO who relied on social media the way he does to address or try to resolve a crisis. As the tensions between Israel and Iran increased, and after the surprise U.S. attacks on Iran last week, Trump 'has been carrying out the delicate art of diplomacy through blunt social media posts, full of the bravado—and capital letters—that characterize much of his communications….The president's social media diplomacy, often carried out in his signature all-caps style, has garnered renewed attention, remarkable for its break from what presidents traditionally do,' NBC News reported. A Dramatic Departure From Obama And Biden Trump's style of international crisis management is a dramatic departure from that of former presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden. 'For one thing, Obama and Biden favor a leadership style that relies on broad consultation and pretty much all-hands-on-deck consensus-building within both their immediate staff and the larger allied community,' Mike Fahey, CEO and founder of Fahey Communications, a national PR firm specializing in political campaigns, observed in an email interview with me. Compared to other presidents, Trump has been more of a maverick and solo act. 'His circle of advisors is much smaller; his consultation, much less. And in using his obviously very personal and instinct-driven (and often quite combustible) leadership style, Trump tends to favor what might be called the 'Crisis on Demand' approach to decision-making,' Fahey noted. A Shift In Strategy His direct approach for dealing with a crisis can manifest itself in in surprising and unexpected actions to address a crisis. 'The key shift in strategy from Trump's predecessors has obviously been to take direct action against Iranian nuclear sites. Although the Bush, Obama, and Biden Administrations, all worked to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, they also avoided military action to achieve that goal,' Jim Ronan, an adjunct professor of political science at Villanova University, told me in an email interview. Academics need to go back to the 1960s and 1970s to find another president who compares with Trump's foreign crisis management style. 'Whether intentional or not, Trump seems to be utilizing the Madman Theory employed by [President]Foreign leaders who must deal with the apparent zig-zag nature and comparatively hectic pace of Trump's orders, threats and social media posts, find that they 'can send him pinging from the priority of one moment to another. He describes himself as 'flexible' in negotiations, such as those in which he threatened big tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China only to back down during talks,' according to the Associated Press. Those who depend on freewheeling and shoot-from-the-hip strategies and tactics to address a crisis are ignoring or disregarding fundamental crisis management best practices that favor a calm, deliberate, and thoughtful approach.
