Whether it is bargaining with China over trade, forcing Mexico to pay for a border wall or getting along with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump asserts that he can “win” based on his negotiating skills. He lays out a series of bargaining strategies — “Trump Cards” — in Chapter 2 of his 1987 book with Tony Schwartz, Trump: The Art of the Deal, and says they have made him a success in real estate and other business dealings.
But how applicable are they to the world of international politics and diplomacy? Many of Trump’s principles are standard negotiation practice taught in university classes and business seminars on negotiation. Missing, however, are the more subtle arguments that a president needs to understand to operate on the global stage:
Think big. Yes, going for a home run (Trump’s analogy) can pay off. It can also lead to a strikeout. When a pitcher (your opponent) has your number, you are better off going for the single (reining in your ambitions). Trump’s fatally flawed quick fixes for large problems are instructive. They include his plans to solve the national debt by negotiating better terms with creditors (in essence claiming bankruptcy); solve the immigration problem by deporting 11 million undocumented immigrants, and solve terrorism by keeping Muslims out of the country.
Be focused or single-minded. Yes, keeping your eyes on the prize is good advice. The problem is that Trump does not distinguish between the prize and the process. Unwavering dedication to negotiating positions, such as insisting that Mexico pay for a border wall, is a recipe for impasse.
Protect the downside and maximize options. Again, sensible advice. Although fallback positions and expanded options can prevent caving in for bad deals, they can also steer the process away from good compromises. Trump’s lack of dependence on other nations and international organizations enables him to criticize what he views as “bad” deals. The problem is that he risks alienating these critical allies, who would view him as a loose cannon.
Use your leverage. Surely, negotiating power is an asset. But it can also embolden weaker parties. Long ago, Thomas Schelling introduced us to the “paradox of weakness.” Reacting to the power asymmetry, weak parties can increase their leverage by reducing their dependence on stronger opponents, developing alternative alliances, and reframing the issues. Mexico might be tempted to do this, given Trump’s rhetoric on trade and immigration.
Reframe. Good idea, especially when stuck in an impasse. The problem is that Trump’s take on the term is manipulative. For example, he writes that “a little hyperbole never hurts,” and reframes the phrase “truthful hyperbole” as an “innocent form of exaggeration.” That is not useful.
Get the word out. News media attention creates value. In his own campaign, Trump is showing that even negative publicity generates support. But is this good advice for diplomats? The most ambitious international agreements — the recent talks with Cuba, the 1990s Oslo Accords that produced a breakthrough in Israeli-Palestinian relations, practically all of the successful peace and arms control deals — were negotiated privately.
Fight back. And why not, especially when treated unfairly. Indeed, Bernie Sanders makes this a cornerstone of his campaign. But for Trump, who keeps track of who is “nice” or “mean” to him, fighting back is usually on behalf of himself. Imagine negotiators fighting back at each other. They'd be on a collision course where neither gains anything and the focus is misdirected to personal rather than substantive concerns.
POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media
Deliver the goods. Your credibility depends on following through. Reputation is important for future deals, and here is the rub. Trump sees himself as a man of action and is not overly concerned about the impact of his policies. Many of his ideas could create new problems, such as a trade war with China, even as he was flaunting his image as a doer. This is the wrong motivation for a president.
Rely on your instincts. Now this is bad advice, not because intuition is always misleading but because it defies the odds. The chances for negotiation success are improved when analysis is used to support intuition. Trump mentions that he learns from his own “random” surveys. It is not clear that he understands the meaning of random sampling, and he appears to reject empirical evidence based on data.
Trump perceives his world to be full of vultures. Life is a game to be won while having fun keeping score. That’s fine perhaps in the niche of Manhattan real estate. It is not fine for a president. Effective presidents understand that conflicts are problems to be solved, not games to be won. They know the value of fostering cooperation and relationships with adversaries. Patience, perspective and empathy are essential skills in a complex world of domestic and international politics. These realizations seem to elude Trump as he moves closer toward securing the Republican Party’s nomination in Cleveland.
Daniel Druckman, a professor of public and international affairs at George Mason University, has trained negotiators and diplomats at the State Department, the United Nations, the European Union and many other institutions. Paul F. Diehl, associate provost and Ashbel Smith professor of political science at the University of Texas-Dallas, is a former president of the International Studies Association. The two have written many books on conflict resolution and are co-authors of Evaluating Peace Operations (2010).
In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors. To read more columns, go to the Opinion front page and follow us on Twitter @USATOpinion.
