When Donald Trump was asked if he was planning to get involved in the Israeli-Iran conflict replied, “I can do it. May or not. No one knows what I’m going to do. “

He let people believe that he left two weeks in Iran in order to allow him to repeat the negotiations. A few hours later Iran bombed.

Political scientists agree that the The most predictable thing in Trump is its unpredictable nature. He changes his mind, contradicts himself, and in the end he is completely inconsistent.

“[Ο Τραμπ] He has set up a highly centralized policy -making function, undoubtedly the most centralized, at least in the field of foreign policy, since the Richard Nixon era, “says Peter Troumbovic at the BBC, a professor of international relations at London School of Economics.

This feature of Trump is called by scientists ‘The theory of crazy’in which a global leader seeks to convince his opponent that he is a idiosyncratic capable of anything to get concessions. When used successfully, it can be a form of coercion and Trump believes that he performs dividends, bringing the US allies where he wants them. But in reality is an approach that can work against enemies? And in the end, does this behavior, instead of creating something unpredictable in reality, becomes easier to predict?

Attacks, insults and hugs

Trump began his second presidency with Russian President Vladimir Putin and attacking the allies of America. He insulted Canada by saying that the 51st US state should be done, said he was ready to consider using military violence to annex Greenland and said the US would have to regain ownership and control of the Panama Canal.

The US president even put them with NATO. Article 5 of the Articles of Association is committed to each member to defend everything else. Trump even challenged America’s commitment to it.

A series of written messages have revealed the culture of contempt for Trump’s White House for European Allies. “I fully share your dislike for European stingles,” US Secretary of Defense Pitt Hegsez told his colleagues.

In Munich earlier this year, Trump Vice President Jay Di Vance said the US would no longer be the guarantor of European security.

This seemed to turn a page in 80 years of transatlantic solidarity. “What Trump has done is to raise serious doubts and questions about the credibility of America’s international commitments,” says Professor Trubovic.

‘Whatever the agreement these countries have [στην Ευρώπη] With the United States, on security, economy or other issues, they are now subject to negotiations at all times. “

“My feeling is that most people in Trump’s orbit believe that unpredictable nature is something good because it allows Donald Trump to exploit America’s influence for maximum profit …”

“This is one of his teachings from the negotiations in the real estate world.”

Trump’s approach has yielded fruit. Just four months ago, British Prime Minister Kir Starmer told the House of Commons that Britain would increase defense and security costs of 2.3% of GDP to 2.5%.

Last month, at the NATO Summit, this had increased to 5%, a huge increase, now corresponding to every member of the Alliance.

The predictability of the unpredictable

Trump is not the first American president to apply the doctrine of unpredictable ability. In 1968, when US President Richard Nixon was trying to end the war in Vietnam, he found that the northern Vietnam enemy was ruthless.

“At one point, Nixon told his consultant about national security, Henry Kissinger,” you should tell the northern Vietnam negotiators that Nixon is crazy and you do not know what he does, so you better come to an agreement before things are really crazy, ” “This is the theory of crazy.”

Julie Norman, Professor of Policy at University College London, agrees that there is now Doctrine of unpredictable ability.

“It’s very difficult to know what comes from day to day,” he says. “And that has always been Trump’s approach.”

Trump has successfully used his reputation for how unstable he is to change the transatlantic defensive relationship. And obviously to keep Trump on their side, some European leaders struck him, as NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte did with the “love” messages to Trump shortly before the NATO meeting in The Hague last month.

Opponents invalid in charm and threats

Then there is the question of whether the doctrine of the unpredictable or the theory of crazy can work on opponents.

Ukrainian President Volodimir Zelenski, an ally underestimated by Trump and Vass at the Oval Office, later agreed to grant the US to the US.

Vladimir Putin, on the other hand, apparently remains unaffected by Trump’s charm and threats. On Thursday, after a telephone call they had, Trump said “frustrated” that Putin was not ready to end the war against Ukraine.

And Iran? Trump promised on his basis that America would not get involved in the “eternal wars” of the Middle East. His decision to hit Iran’s nuclear facilities was perhaps the most unpredictable political choice of his second term so far. The question is whether it will have the desired result.

Former British Foreign Minister William Hague has argued that Trump will succeed exactly the opposite: he will make Iran more likely to seek to obtain nuclear weapons.

Loss of confidence in negotiations?

Looking forward, this unpredictable ability may not ultimately work on enemies, but it is not clear whether the recent changes it has brought among the allies can be maintained.

“People will not want to do jobs with the US unless they trust the US in the negotiations, if they are not sure that the US will support them on defense and security issues,” says Professor Norman. “So the isolation that many seek in the world of Maga, I think, will come back boomerang.”

The German Chancellor Friedrich Mertz, For example, he said that Europe now needs to be functionally independent of the US.

“The importance of the finance minister’s comment is that it is a recognition that US strategic priorities are changing,” says Professor Trubovic. “They are not going to return to the situation they were before taking his duties.”

“So yes, Europe should become more functionally independent.”

This would require the European nations to develop a much larger European defense industry, to obtain equipment and capabilities currently available by the US at the moment, Professor Des argues. For example, Europeans have some sophisticated potential of world intelligence, he says, but many of them are provided by the US.

“Europe, if it had to go ahead, would also require a significant increase in its independent productive capacity in weapons,” he continues. “Human resources would also be a problem. Western Europe would have to turn to Poland to see the level of human resources it would need. “

But all this takes years to build.