No, Elder Oaks, Trump’s No Santa Claus

Prior to the March 22nd Utah caucuses, LDS Church members may have been surprised to discover that Elder Robert Oaks, a former member of the Presidency of the Seventy (one of the Church’s chief governing bodies) and retired 4-star general, was serving on Donald Trump’s Utah campaign committee. While Mormons typically trend Republican, they have largely given the orange-faced demagogue the cold shoulder, especially in light of LDS icon Mitt Romney’s denunciation of “He-Who-Must-Comb-Over” and the Church’s condemnation of his calls to ban Muslims from the United States. So why did Elder Oaks, someone who hails from LDS “royalty,” break with his co-religionists (and presumably Church leadership) in endorsing the GOP’s bacchanalian blow-hard? Two words: national security.

What? Yeah, I was confused too. Trump has practically no grasp of foreign policy, much less national defense. From his inability to distinguish Hezbollah from Hamas, to his ludicrous proposal to build a “Great Wall of Mexico,” Trump has shown himself to be even more ignorant of geopolitics than Sarah “I Can See Russia From My House” Palin. While his ignorance of diplomacy and realpolitik is troubling, what is even more worrisome is his espousal of stances that actively undermine American foreign policy priorities. For example, in an era in which the U.S. has fiercely decried  Vladimir Putin’s Anschluss-like annexation of Crimea, Trump has gone all Romeo on Putin’s Juliet – there’s a reason why a Lithuanian muralist depicted the Donald and the Man Who Would Be Czar kissing on the side of a barbecue joint.

Setting aside his budding bromance with the Killer in the Kremlin, Trump’s policy inclinations vis-à-vis Russia’s relationship with Europe inspire even more unease. As nations like Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania warily eye a resurgent Russian military and look imploringly to Washington and the West for help in fending off a future Slavic blitzkrieg, Trump has contemplated pulling out of NATO, the organization that would protect the Baltics in the event of Russian aggression. Couple this with Trump’s hiring of Paul Manafort, a political operative who advised Ukrainian president and Putin lackey Viktor Yanukovych, and you have a formula for an American presidency that approaches the threat of Moscow more like Chamberlain and less like Churchill.

While Trump’s approach to Russia and Putin is more than enough to inspire a sense of foreboding in the conscientious world citizen, his rhetoric regarding Muslims and the Middle East could actually bring more terrorism to America’s doorstep. Although Elder Oaks believes that Trump’s policies would provide America with “the best defense from terror,” the fact is that his rhetoric alone has already made America less safe. Trump’s Islamophobic comments have been used in a recruiting video crafted by Al Shabaab, a Somali extremist organization, while his polarizing presence has ornamented an ISIS propaganda video celebrating the Brussels attacks. Every time Trump makes a xenophobic, jingoistic comment directed at the world’s Muslims, jihadists have an easier time painting the West as being “at war” with Islam. Such a narrative allows ISIS recruiters to persuade disillusioned and underemployed young Muslims that they are justified in joining the fight in Syria or staging lone wolf attacks in Western cities.

With all of this evidence that Trump is, and would be, horrible for American foreign policy and national security, why would Elder Oaks endorse “Mr. Yuuuge”? The answer to this question might be obvious when we look at Oaks’s history and past statements. For example, when he appeared in a Church video titled “Let Not Your Heart Be Troubled,” which was aimed at addressing the concerns of LDS military personnel, he seemed to cast war in very black-and-white terms. America always fought on the side of freedom; the other side always represented tyranny and oppression. While it is doubtless the case that America has often fought for right principles, many times it has not. A simple perusal of the history of American interventionism in South America and the Caribbean during the late 1800s and early 1900s is enough to prove that. But Oaks seems to ignore such history, buying into a more Manichean view of things, with such a perspective aligning very well with the “us vs. them” rhetoric that is trumpeted by Trump.

Even if Oaks does identify with the dualism of Trump’s Weltanschauung, he and others like him need to wake up and smell the hot cocoa – Trump occupies the wrong side of any reasonable moral duality. Contrary to what Oaks may believe, Trump is no Santa Claus who will deliver security and peace beneath the great national Christmas tree. Rather, he is a nefarious Krampus who will enable autocrats and terrorists as they seek to undermine the Pax Americana.