The most critical factor determining the outcome of any war is not military firepower but domestic political support - and the Trump administration has neglected it more thoroughly than any modern predecessor, a veteran defense analyst has argued in The Atlantic, "Hvylya" reports.
Eliot A. Cohen, a professor emeritus at Johns Hopkins University, drew on the historical record of five wars to make his case. Winston Churchill "rightly believed it essential to repeatedly give speeches justifying the war to the British people" despite leading what may have been the most legitimate conflict in modern history. Abraham Lincoln micromanaged the appointments of postmasters to shore up political support across the Union. Franklin D. Roosevelt "cunningly recruited Republicans to serve as secretaries of war and of the Navy."
Each understood that "domestic popular and legislative support, and competent alliance management, are the necessary reserves to meet such emergencies" as unforeseen enemy blows, collapsing allies, or grotesque military blunders. These reserves, Cohen argued, are what separate a competent wartime government from a reckless one.
The Trump administration, by contrast, has failed on every count. No congressional authorization, no presidential speech explaining the war, no disciplined messaging, and an approach to potential allies that Cohen described as so abrasive it repelled the very governments Washington needed. The secretary of defense can "brag or belittle but not explain," Cohen wrote. The result is a military campaign with no political shock absorbers.
Cohen also pointed to historical overconfidence about how wars end. George H. W. Bush thought the Gulf War would culminate in Saddam Hussein's overthrow. Barack Obama "probably did not think that the sustained bombing of Libya in 2011 would create as much chaos as it resolved." Woodrow Wilson was "utterly mistaken" about what World War I would achieve. The pattern, Cohen argued, is clear: wars never end the way leaders expect, which makes the political groundwork not optional but essential.
As for allies - "irritating as they always are" - Cohen wrote that they must be "conciliated, persuaded, coerced, bribed, cajoled, flattered, supported, and only occasionally misled." Managing an alliance, he noted, is a political art all to itself - one the current administration has declined to practice.
Also read: Trump's Iran Dilemma: Why Both Staying and Leaving Carry Devastating Consequences.