S1: From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
S1: This is the morning edition. I'm Samantha Selinger Morris. It's Monday,
S1: February 17th. I call it the madman theory, Bob. These words,
S1: supposedly uttered by Richard Nixon and recounted by his chief
S1: of staff, Bob Haldeman, have perhaps never been as relevant
S1: as they are today. And they go to the question,
S1: can a powerful leader, who we think is just a
S1: little bit crazy, actually make the world a better place
S1: as Nixon thought he might be able to achieve? Enter
S1: Donald Trump, the current president of the United States is
S1: set to put the so-called Mad Men theory to the test,
S1: arguably like never before. Today, foreign affairs correspondent Matthew Knott
S1: on whether Trump's volatile approach to geopolitics will produce vital victories,
S1: or whether his perceived crazy is just a little too mad. So, Matt,
S1: you have written about the madman theory of politics, and
S1: I'd love it if you could briefly walk us through it,
S1: because I know, thanks to your writing, I've gone down
S1: a rabbit hole. It's an ancient concept, but it's one
S1: that various world leaders have tried to employ over the years.
S1: So take us through it.
S2: Uh, yes. Indeed. This idea has been around, as you say,
S2: for centuries, the idea that perhaps it's good if those
S2: you're negotiating with are those who might be your opponents. Uh,
S2: in in politics, I think that you're a little bit crazy.
S2: Think that you might behave irrationally. I think that you
S2: might do something, perhaps, that even inflicts damage on yourself,
S2: but will also hurt someone else. This is essentially the
S2: idea as far back in a 1517. This is a
S2: quote you'll often hear in this space from Machiavelli, who
S2: said that in certain circumstances it's a very wise thing
S2: to simulate madness, but this idea of the madman theory
S2: as an actually fully formed theory I was really sparked
S2: during the Nixon era. One of Nixon's top staffers are
S2: Bob Haldeman, later wrote a memoir, and he talked about
S2: Nixon actually using this phrase, saying, I call it the
S2: madman theory and discussing it in the context of the
S2: Vietnam War and saying that he was going to come
S2: in and he wanted the North Vietnamese to think that
S2: he was essentially crazy, that he would behave like a madman,
S2: that he would do anything, that he would escalate the
S2: war as a way to force the communists to the
S2: negotiating table and strike a peace deal that would favor America.
S3: It isn't just what I would call a madman theory.
S3: I think that overstates it. I remember Johnson.
S2: Interestingly, and Nixon actually said later that he didn't say this.
S2: He disavowed the idea, but it's taken on a life
S2: of its own because it is getting at something that
S2: leaders do use sometimes, particularly President Trump. That's why we're
S2: talking about it right now.
S3: You don't take them in order to prove that you're
S3: a madman, or that you're a tough guy or a
S3: macho on the rest. It's simply you take them when
S3: it is in the interest of your foreign policy, and
S3: also to make sure that you are a credible leader,
S3: a credible leader.
S1: When that brings me to really the crux of this,
S1: which is, does Donald Trump fit into the madman theory?
S1: And if he does, how?
S2: Well, yes, Donald Trump has actually spoken about this pretty explicitly,
S2: I would say, and acknowledged that this is a part
S2: of his negotiating style.
S4: We must, as a nation, be more unpredictable. We are
S4: totally predictable. We tell everything. We're sending troops. We tell
S4: them we're sending something else. We have a news conference.
S4: We have to be.
S2: Trump has spoken about it in his first term, for example,
S2: in the context of free trade and negotiations with South Korea.
S2: Now this is a very friendly nation towards the US.
S2: This is really an ally of America, a place where
S2: lots of American troops are based. And Trump reportedly told
S2: his aides, you know, I want you to make them
S2: think that I'm a madman, that I'm going to tear
S2: up this entire free trade deal, make them think I'm
S2: going to walk away, do something crazy here to force
S2: them to negotiate. So Trump has pretty explicitly acknowledged that
S2: this is a part of his diplomatic toolkit to keep
S2: people off balance, to not know whether he's serious. This
S2: creates a lot of instability and volatility in the system.
S5: North Korea best not make any more threats to the
S5: United States. They will be met with.
S4: Fire and fury like the world has never seen.
S1: And then we obviously cannot discuss the so-called madman theory
S1: and Donald Trump without bringing up what he recently said
S1: about Gaza and wanting to take it over and move
S1: its 2 million residents to Jordan and Egypt. So does
S1: that comment or that idea fit into this madman theory?
S2: Yeah, I think it does. A key element of the
S2: madman theory is that you're behaving irrationally, that you're behaving
S2: in a way that may harm your own interests. It's
S2: not simply a threatening to say, uh, attack someone else,
S2: that it's it's the idea that you're harming yourself in
S2: some way. And that's where Trump's idea did seem to
S2: fit in.
S4: US will take over the Gaza Strip and we will
S4: do a job with it, too. We'll own it.
S2: Trump's whole theory of global relations has been that America
S2: should focus on itself. This is the idea of America first,
S2: that America shouldn't be getting caught up in a foreign entanglements.
S2: He's spoken about the Iraq war as a disaster, about
S2: the Afghanistan war Afghanistan War was a disaster. The idea
S2: that you should be spending money in America and not
S2: spending it, trying to fix the world's problems. And here
S2: he was, standing next to Benjamin Netanyahu, saying that America
S2: would take ownership of this quite literally.
S6: Many world leaders wondering whether Donald Trump is actually going
S6: to follow through on this claim, or whether it is
S6: just a threat as part of a broader negotiating plan
S6: for the Middle East.
S2: So it did seem such an out of the box
S2: idea that I think we're very much in this terrain.
S1: And obviously, just of late we've been hearing Donald Trump
S1: and members of his cabinet make noises about how they
S1: want to try to negotiate with Russia and handle the
S1: war in Ukraine. So does this fit with this madman
S1: theory the way Donald Trump is approaching this?
S2: Well, interestingly, not from the perspective of forcing Putin and
S2: Russia to do anything. Perhaps if you think about it
S2: from the other angle, and encouraging Ukraine to try and
S2: stop fighting in defence of their own country. It could
S2: be because the way that we've seen Trump talk about
S2: the war in Ukraine is very different to Gaza. So
S2: in Ukraine, members of his administration are talking about. No,
S2: we're not going to allow a Ukraine to enter NATO.
S2: That's not a realistic idea. And no, we're not going
S2: to go back to the 2014 borders. In Ukraine, they're
S2: already essentially giving away some of these key aspects of
S2: what would be a peace negotiation. They're leaving Ukraine without
S2: so many things to negotiate with, and setting Putin off
S2: on a really strong way to start this peace settlement.
S2: So there's not much sign that Trump is trying to
S2: shake it up in the way that you could. The
S2: classic idea of the madman theory would be, perhaps, to
S2: say that we're going to give even more weapons to Ukraine.
S2: We'll allow them to attack within Russia. Maybe we'll try
S2: and take out Putin in some way. We'll have regime
S2: change in Russia. Will we be at a nuclear war
S2: with Russia? That would be the classic madman theory applied
S2: to Putin. But that's not at all what we're hearing
S2: from Trump. Instead, the pressure is really going on. Ukraine, perhaps,
S2: to essentially give up, cede significant chunks of its territory
S2: to Russia.
S1: We'll be back in a minute. And so, Matt, tell
S1: me what Donald Trump's track record is like in terms
S1: of when he has actually used the madman theory. Like,
S1: does it work for him, whether that be in his
S1: dealings within the United States or outside of it?
S2: Yeah. You describe it as hit and miss, although there
S2: are plenty of examples of where Trump comes out with
S2: these ideas or these proposals. And then you look back
S2: a few months later and you say, oh, that went
S2: absolutely nowhere and didn't necessarily achieve anything, but sometimes it
S2: it can work. One example I was thinking of that
S2: I remember because I was in the US reporting on
S2: this was uh, his initial, uh, initial tariff threat against Mexico.
S2: We're quite used to this now. We're seeing a lot
S2: of tariff talk now. But at the time when he
S2: proposed a 5% tariff on Mexican imports into the United States,
S2: this was a big controversy and caused a lot of anger, really,
S2: including among Republicans, because what Trump was saying was there
S2: were too many illegal immigrants coming across the border. And
S2: we're going to put a tariff on Mexican goods until
S2: Mexico stops that from happening. Now, many people said this
S2: would be crazy. You're only going to harm American consumers.
S2: You're going to force prices up, inflation up. You're going
S2: to harm American companies from what played out. It did
S2: seem to work and did seem to scare the Mexican
S2: government at the time. They did increase patrols at the
S2: border and crack down in a significant way to try
S2: and keep Trump happy. The tariffs were never put on,
S2: and unauthorized border crossings did drop really significantly in the
S2: months after. So that was an example where I think
S2: some people, including myself, who said this is an idea
S2: that seemed mad on the surface, actually paid off. I
S2: think we saw it again with the ceasefire negotiations that
S2: had been going absolutely nowhere under the Biden administration. The
S2: proposal was there as far back as last May. Donald
S2: Trump is elected. He starts tweeting about how all hell
S2: will break loose in the region if there isn't a deal,
S2: if Hamas doesn't agree to release the hostages. A lot
S2: of pressure from his advisers goes on to Israel as well.
S2: You've got to get something done here. We want this
S2: off our plate. And we saw the ceasefire deal go
S2: into effect just as Trump was coming into office. So
S2: he's really unorthodox approach did seem to pay dividends there.
S2: But you can imagine in Ukraine or even in, uh,
S2: Israel Palestine in the future, uh, the madman theory leading
S2: to outcomes that many people would find pretty disturbing.
S1: And I really wanted to ask you, because you are
S1: as we record this, you're sitting in Parliament House in
S1: the corridors of power. How are our leaders feeling about
S1: Donald Trump wielding the madman theory against us? Like, what
S1: are the greatest dangers for us in Australia when when
S1: dealing with a so-called madman politician?
S2: Well, yes, this is something that the Albanese government and
S2: indeed governments around the world have been grappling with. And
S2: what we've seen so far is that Prime Minister Albanese
S2: and other members of the cabinet have decided to take
S2: the most cautious approach, probably feasibly possible about Donald Trump,
S2: that they're really going to say almost nothing at all.
S2: No criticism at all. We saw this with the Trump
S2: Gaza proposal, where Albaneses line, which I think we might
S2: hear more of, was I'm not going to offer a
S2: running commentary on what the president says. The clear strategy
S2: that the government is adopting is that there's an incredibly volatile,
S2: sometimes even vengeful person in the white House, and we
S2: want to be as small a target as possible.
S1: And so, finally, Matt, just some lasting thoughts. You know,
S1: is the mad man theory seen as a successful tactic? Like,
S1: what has history shown us on this front?
S2: Uh, what most historians and analysts and scholars in this
S2: space say is that it doesn't tend to work very
S2: well in the end, that it can have some short
S2: term benefits. But as a long term strategy, there are
S2: a lot of problems. So, for example, to be Respected
S2: in the world for people to take you seriously. They
S2: also have to believe that you'll maintain your commitments that
S2: you make. So if you're striking treaties, peace deals, you
S2: have to be seen as reliable and so can you
S2: be seen as reliable at the same time as you're
S2: seen as a bit crazy and unpredictable. Those two ideas
S2: don't really go together. If we're talking about the madman
S2: theory of something that really began with Richard Nixon, it's
S2: important to remember that his strategy there didn't in any
S2: way work. If it is what he tried. It was
S2: North Vietnam that won the war. It was America that
S2: surrendered and left in what's regarded as a pretty catastrophic
S2: defeat for the US. So it's easier to talk about
S2: in theory often than it is to put in practice,
S2: even though Donald Trump clearly has had some success with
S2: it in his life.
S1: Well, thank you so much, Matt, for your time.
S2: No worries at all.
S1: Today's episode of The Morning Edition was produced by Tammy
S1: Mills with technical assistance by Debbie Harrington. Our head of
S1: audio is Tom McKendrick. The Morning Edition is a production
S1: of The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. If you
S1: enjoy the show and want more of our journalism, subscribe
S1: to our newspapers today. It's the best way to support
S1: what we do. Search the Age or Smh.com.au. Subscribe and
S1: sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter to receive a
S1: comprehensive summary of the day's most important news, analysis and
S1: insights in your inbox every day. Links are in the show. Notes.
S1: I'm Samantha Selinger. Morris. This is the morning edition. Thanks
S1: for listening.