In his handling of international relations, President Donald Trump has had a history of making bold, provocative declarations that dominate the news cycle before backtracking and sometimes entirely switching his position on the issue. This week, Trump had made his latest contribution to this trope with his apparent switch-up of core parts of MAGA foreign policy with his newly announced support of aid to Gaza and denunciation of Russia’s aggression in the war in Ukraine.
In a meeting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Monday, Trump said that he would “probably not” agree with Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu’s claim that there is no starvation in the Gaza Strip, and that “those kids look pretty hungry.” Later on he stated that “we have to get the kids fed” and that Israel has to allow “every ounce of food” into Gaza.
That tone marks a stark shift from Trump’s past rhetoric on the issue. In his first term he was a staunch defender of Israel, moving the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and even leading the US into an exit of the United Nations Human Rights Council in protest of the organization’s stance on the issue. He also often attacked Arabs in the area on racial lines, notably using the term “Palestinian” as a slur against former president Joe Biden in the first 2024 debate.
Trump also complained about president of Russia Vladimir Putin’s prolongation of his invasion of Ukraine, and says that “launching rockets into nursing homes” and leaving “bodies lying in the street” was “not the way to do it.” He then said that Moscow now has ten to twelve days to agree to a ceasefire and to avoid new sanctions. It was the latest episode in his war of words with Putin, who in recent weeks he has called “absolutely crazy” and said that the Russian president’s decisions to continue drone strikes on Ukraine were getting him “pissed off”.
Yet this was yet another back-track from past policy, as Trump has had a long history of taking Russia’s side on the conflict and in other matters, including declining to say that he wanted Ukraine to win the war during the 2024 debate against Kamala Harris. Notably, in February he loudly berated Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Oval Office before siding with Russia to block a United Nations resolution calling for the end to the invasion, a series of events that dismantled the traditional post-Cold War hostility to the Kremlin.
Though some suggested these statements marked the latest phase of the administration’s foreign policy, it’s hard to be so certain. This is far from the first time Trump has surprised the media with other such alterations to official US international goals.
For example, in February he drew praise from the Israeli far-right after floating a US takeover of the Gaza Strip and forced relocations of Palestinians in the area. Despite members of Trump’s administration including Secretary of State Marco Rubio walking back portions of the plan, he followed the proposal up on Instagram with an AI-generated video of “Trump Gaza”, featuring casinos, belly dancers, sunbathers, a golden statue of the president, and Elon Musk being showered with cash. Yet only several months removed from the incident he has almost entirely ceased talking about the proposition. Perhaps Trump lost interest in creating what he described as the “riveria of the Middle East”, or maybe he was just trolling pro-Palestinian critics. Either way, it was an unserious proposal.
But it wasn’t the only one. Another imperialistic streak had already bubbled into national news in the weeks leading up to the inauguration ceremony after Trump had suggested taking over Greenland and the Panama Canal, possibly using the military, and using “economic force” to make Canada the “51st state”. None of this has even been attempted apart from being used for soundbites, and talk of these proposals have died down. Even the early April “Liberation Day” tariffs, once a major part of the president’s agenda, have been scaled down and reworked.
Trump’s new humanitarian guise could very well be the same way. His comments on being concerned about starvation in Gaza and calling out Russian aggression are neither as offensive nor as shocking in the way that his other foreign policy controversies have been, but they still made major headlines for their deviation from his base’s priorities. Maybe he’s trying to win ground with independents who support ceasefires, or maybe he’s just tweaking the noses of the ultraconservatives in Congress who are breaking with him over the Jeffery Epstein case. Either way, Trump’s following a similar pattern. You might never know what he’s going to say next, but when it comes to international affairs, you do know how unlikely it is that he’s going to follow through with it.
