Jazz Hands and Hard Power

The question isn't whether President Trump will shake things up (he will) but whether his unorthodox foreign policy can translate into lasting diplomatic achievements

I'm back, Cosmopolitans.

I took the last two months away from Substack and the media circus. I needed time to think. Really think. Not just about settling into my fellowship at the Council on Foreign Relations and dealing with personal matters (which I'll spare you), but about what comes next: a new administration, a transformed Middle East, and America's evolving role in both.

Why the silence? Because in today's hot-take culture, you didn't need another voice rushing to join the overcrowded chorus with something quick and dirty. The changes that have happened over the last several weeks – from Trump's return to the White House to the reshaping of regional power dynamics in Europe, Asia and the Middle East – deserved more than instant analysis served up like a cup of ramen noodles. That's not what you have come to expect from me.

For decades, I've lived in the breaking news cycle, chasing the latest developments as they unfold. But as I transition from straight reporting to a hybrid of more in-depth reporting and analysis, I'm discovering the value of pause and perspective. The world is shifting beneath our feet. These aren't changes that fit neatly into a tweet or cable news chyron.

Throughout my career covering seven administrations, I've tried to maintain one consistent principle: call balls and strikes as I see them, giving credit where due while pulling no punches when criticism is warranted. That hasn't changed. What has changed is my conviction that this moment demands more than knee-jerk reactions to predictable partisan positions.

Take Biden's Ukraine policy. While he deserves credit for rallying Western support, his administration settled for helping Ukraine survive rather than win. In Gaza, despite Hamas' brutal October 7 attacks demanding a forceful response, Biden's team appeared more focused on managing the conflict than ending it. When Secretary of State Antony Blinken, during his last week in office, laid out what was called an “audacious final message”at the Atlantic Council, it was too little, too late – a road map that could have saved lives and secured hostages months earlier had it been delivered with conviction coupled with strategically applied pressure on Israel to end the war and efforts to help the Palestinians create better governance.

While I had plenty of problems with Trump's first term foreign policy, his unorthodox approach produced unexpected breakthroughs. The Abraham Accords shattered the conventional wisdom that Palestinian statehood was a prerequisite for regional peace. His pressure on NATO allies, while brash, achieved what decades of polite requests couldn't - increased defense spending. Even his direct engagement with North Korea, while imperfect and undisciplined, marked the first serious attempt to break decades of diplomatic stalemate.

This time around, Trump's erratic diplomacy may suggest a more strategic calculus. Yes, his talk of seizing the Panama Canal and acquiring Greenland prompted mockery – but beneath the bombastic delivery is a coherent focus on hemispheric security and countering Chinese and Russian influence in the Arctic. His appointment of Marco Rubio as Secretary of State – a stark contrast to Mike Pompeo, whom I have characterized as perhaps the worst Secretary of State in modern history – signals Trump favors actual foreign policy expertise rather than political ambition driving diplomacy. The selection of Mike Waltz as National Security Advisor, with his military background and clear-eyed view of great power competition, further suggests an administration preparing for strategic rivalry rather than retreat.

That doesn't mean there aren't serious questions about U.S. foreign policy and America's role in the world in a second Trump term. For example, among the President’s first acts in office were withdrawing from the Paris Climate Treaty and World Health Organization. Neither bode well for American leadership on the world stage

But what makes Trump uniquely positioned for this moment is his immunity to conventional political constraints. He can demand concessions from Israel without being labeled anti-Semitic. He can negotiate with China without being called soft. He can push European allies to do more without being accused of abandoning them. In each case, his willingness to walk away from the table - and be genuinely unpredictable about it - creates leverage that traditional diplomacy simply can't match.

As Trump returns to office, the foreign policy establishment is bracing for more disruption. But perhaps that's exactly what American foreign policy needs. Is there any question American diplomacy could use – shall we say, some "jazz hands?" The traditional playbook hasn't delivered solutions in Gaza, Ukraine, or in deterring Iran's nuclear ambitions. With Tehran's regional position weakened and its proxies from Hamas to Hezbollah under pressure, even this challenge might benefit from Trump's unconventional approach.

Already, we're seeing what some call the "Trump Effect" at work. Before even taking office, his mere election helped catalyze movement on the Gaza hostage negotiations that had eluded diplomats for months. Combined with a foreign policy team that blends hawkish instincts with diplomatic experience, Trump's dealmaker approach might be exactly what's required to break through long-standing geopolitical gridlock.

The question isn't whether Trump will shake things up – he will. The real question is whether his unconventional approach, backed by a more experienced team, can translate into lasting diplomatic achievements that enhance American interests and global stability. That's what I've been contemplating during my hiatus, and what I'll be analyzing in the weeks and months ahead - giving credit where it's due while holding this administration accountable when it falls short.

A final note to my readers, particularly those who have kept in touch during my absence: Thank you for your patience. I know some will read this piece as cheerleading for Trump or an endorsement if his approach. It’s not. It's an attempt to analyze the potential of his administration’s foreign policy without fear or favor – recognizing the opportunities and risks amid the chaos with clear eyes. I'm looking forward to reengaging with all of you to make sense of this pivotal moment in American foreign policy and our nation's evolving role in the world.