By Elliot Kaufman
Thursday, August 03, 2017
This morning, the Washington
Post published leaked transcripts of President Trump’s January phone calls
with the leaders of Mexico and Australia. At the time of the calls, many of
their key details were leaked to the Post,
which reported on them extensively. So why release the full transcripts now?
One reason is that they show Trump saying all sorts of
embarrassing things. He calls New Hampshire a “drug-infested den.” He
acknowledges that his promise to get Mexico to pay for a border wall has left
him cornered, and he describes the wall as, in actuality, “the least important
thing that we are talking about.” It is worth noting that Trump did not
threaten to send troops to Mexico, as had been previously reported. But he did
tell President Enrique Pena Nieto that America was “willing to help” Mexico fight
the “pretty tough hombres” who run its powerful drug cartels.
This could all have been reported in a regular article.
Publishing full transcripts of phone calls including the comments of foreign
leaders, however, is bad for the country. They should not have been leaked —
that is the first, most egregious problem — and they should not have been
published. Tommy Vietor, the spokesman for the National Security Council during
President Obama’s second term, wrote on Twitter that, “I would’ve lost my mind
if transcripts of Obama’s calls to foreign leaders leaked.” And he would have
been well within his rights to do so.
Presidents need to be able to converse openly, honestly,
and bluntly with foreign leaders. They sometimes need to reveal things that
they cannot say publicly. This allows them to develop both personal and working
relationships. Though it can be unpleasant to contemplate, politicians need
this kind of flexibility to move past public pronouncements and get down to
their nations’ real interests.
Neither Trump nor his foreign counterparts can have such
flexibility in their mutual dealings if they fear that their remarks will be
leaked to the press and then to the public.
For example, the Post’s
transcript shows that Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull of Australia told
President Trump that he thinks the Germans made a huge mistake in letting in so
many refugees. Turnbull even linked that decision to the Brexit vote in
Britain. He’ll now have to answer for that comment at home and whenever he next
meets with Angela Merkel, the German chancellor. Similarly, the Post quotes President Peña Nieto musing
about “creative ways” to pay for Trump’s border wall. In public, Nieto’s
position is far more intransigent, but it is a good thing that he was able to
level with our president and explain the constraints of his own political
situation. In the future, Turnbull, Nieto, and every other foreign leader will
think twice before opening up.
There is also another risk. Tamara Cofman Wittes, a
senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, speculated on Twitter that
President Trump may now “refuse notetakers at other major phone
calls/meetings.” This would not be unreasonable of him. After all, he can only
tolerate so many leaks that damage his ability to do his job before he says
enough is enough.
But this sort of secrecy is unhelpful. The president is
busy and may have trouble remembering everything that was said on a given call.
Full transcripts are also extremely useful for transmitting key information to
staff who were not on the call. Summaries, by definition, are narratives. They
are subjective and inevitably biased accounts of what happened, as the
summarizer’s own preconceptions influence his interpretation of events. The
only way to get around this sort of problem, which presents itself in daily
life but takes on unusual importance in the White House, is to access the bare
facts: the transcript.
It is unclear why these transcripts were leaked. The
calls occurred in January, after all, and are really no longer relevant.
Perhaps an operative wants to undermine General Kelly, who was having a
generally successful and well-ordered first week as the president’s chief of
staff. It does not ultimately matter. This leak will have one overriding
effect: It will further restrict the White House’s ability to receive, convey,
and retain valuable information. However enticing it may be to read and laugh
about each of President Trump’s tics and word choices, it is not worth damaging
the U.S. government.
No comments:
Post a Comment