How To Lead Like 'Wrecking Ball' Trump
I watched from the inside as the Trump wrecking ball hit NATO at the end of last week. The Alliance seemed to be in deep crisis during much of its two day biannual summit in Brussels. Even its survival was apparently at stake.
Really? It emerges at the start of this week far stronger than the angry bluster and exhibitionism from Trump seemed to suggest.
Major crises and massive failings are what President Trump wanted everyone to believe, including the other alliance leaders he faced. He brought his wrecking ball to Europe, then swung it all over the place – both towards NATO, then at the UK and Prime Minister Theresa May over her new Brexit policy to be unveiled as he flew to London. The Helsinki meeting with Putin was no exception, including the apparent mis-speak.
At NATO he continued to shout – literally – that being the Alliance’s biggest stakeholder was a bad deal for the US. The other 28 nations would not pay anything like as much as the US as a percentage of GDP. He grumbled. He launched accusations, using often spurious ‘facts’, especially about Germany being subservient to Russia.
On the second day he then manipulated the headlines and created visible shock among the wisest of experts and diplomats. Suddenly NATO nations would have to commit not to 2% of GDP on defence spending, but 4%. And not 2% by 2024, but 4% by next year! He demanded an instant crisis meeting.
The 28 heads of state and government wondered which planet Trump was working on.
But reality was different. On Day One they – including Trump - had agreed the most extraordinary joint statement ever. It was 22 pages with 79 sections of re-affirmations, endorsements and warnings about the threats to the security of NATO member nations.
As a long time summit watcher over 30 years I have never seen any communique which was so decisive, unequivocal and unambiguous in its determination and warnings. It had a remarkable, unconstrained list of explicit threats like Russia, terrorism, cyber attacks and migration. The language was barely diplomatic! The expression of unity was impressive.
Trump’s loud mouthed impetuousness betrayed what the leaders he meets now know to be his strategy and tactics. Apply the wrecking ball. Create the loudest fuss, and blame everyone but Trump and the US. Then claim agreement, and that he achieved it in a couple of hours. Finally praise all those he had so decisively irritated. And worse.
That is what happened. On Day Two, two hours after Trump’s apparently uncontrolled detonation, his wrecking ball swung back to being nice to the US’s allies. By lunchtime, as he left for London, he trumpeted that “NATO is much stronger now”. He left the impression that this was down to one thing only: his unique transactional Trump style. Nothing else. He celebrated that “members will pay even more”. He said the overall outcome was “really impressive”. The message: only Trump could have achieved that in two hours. Remarkable!
But Germany’s Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen suggested in a later TV interview that she and her global counterparts now have the measure of Trump: “We know how this President operates.” He drafts his tweets to cause “agitation and uncertainty”. So “we should just follow the path we’ve set ourselves”. In other words: be calm! Trump will eventually be realistic despite the claimed heat and fury.
And so the ‘wrecking ball’ style of leadership emerged.
For our ongoing Thinking The Unthinkable project on why all leaders struggle in this new era of disruption, we heard an important twist on what makes good leadership. Trump has an attractive skill. Here is Rose Gottemoeller, NATO’s Deputy Secretary General.
But NATO still has to sell itself in what is now its 70th year. The Trump histrionics are a distraction. The public don’t understand – and don’t believe - the unthinkable warnings of deep threats that they now face, as detailed in that massive communique.
They are chilling. The stability and security of where and how they live is no longer guaranteed with anything like the confidence of the past few decades since World War Two and when NATO was created. There is denial and naivety.
NATO recognizes that. How does it retain credibility and relevance with a hugely skeptical public in the face of the increasingly sinister threats and new challenges from Trump, cyber, migration, Russia, China etc
Those were critical issues aired by experts across the generations at the first ever NATO Engages conference. It took place in parallel for two days in a specially built, air conditioned warehouse-type building inside the NATO compound just down the hill from the new $1 billion Alliance headquarters (which Trump dislikes because it is so expensive).
As Thinking the Unthinkable’s founder and co-author I opened proceedings. I was a lead moderator at the two-day gathering. It was organised for NATO by the Atlantic Council, the Munich Security Conference, the German Marshall Fund and Women In International Security Brussels. Bringing together these four top thought leadership think tanks as joint stakeholders was inspired. It achieved much more than even they thought possible.
The proceedings were nothing like as formal as a NATO organised event would have had to be. This allowed diversity and inclusivity to be a main driver. 40% were women. 40% were under 35. The spirit and atmosphere was freewheeling, and by and large it did not pull punches (although some of the Next Gen attendees did say openly that it was too proper and politically correct)
At the end of the two days, I reflected on the achievements and positives and especially the concerns expressed by young and aspiring leaders. How can NATO get its message out well beyond the bubble of an official summit to tens of millions in 29 NATO member nations who are skeptical and suspicious? Perched on a stool in one session, Canada’s Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland had told the NATO Engages participants about barbeques in her Toronto constituency where people asked her about NATO issues with concern. And she had open discussions.
Tacan Ildem, NATO’s Assistant General Secretary for Public Diplomacy, reinforced this message. NATO Engages had achieved a new potential for public accessibility to the Alliance’s role and need. NATO had never really been bold enough to envisage this. He said he was ‘excited’ by the way that NATO Engages had developed and what it achieved in barely 36 hours. This was especially because the Next Gen participants had contributed to the discussion alongside presidents, prime ministers and other top government officials. They did not hold back.
This was just the start of the process for the Alliance to change its culture of engagement. It must reach beyond the ‘bubble’ of officials and ministers. Ambassador Ildem’s message to any one or group in the 29 member nations: tell us where you are meeting and NATO will engage with you there! We will come to you and explain what NATO does and why.
It was a remarkable spirit and commitment. At the start of last week it seemed unthinkable. Now after NATO Engages it seems achievable.