The 2017 Korea crisis: First sign of the ‘madman’
In the fall of 2017, former U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer complained to President Donald Trump that South Korean negotiators were not making concessions. Trump's response was short and clear: “Tell them the madman in the White House is ready to tear up the deal at any moment.” This incident, reported by Axios, formed the cornerstone of Trump’s negotiation strategy.
Nixon's ‘madman’ legacy
The ‘madman’ theory emerged in 1969 during the Vietnam War under President Richard Nixon. When negotiations with North Vietnam in Paris stalled, Nixon's team leaked a message to the Soviet Union that the president was unpredictable in his anger and could resort to a nuclear option. Indeed, in October 1969, B-52 bombers carrying nuclear weapons were flown near Soviet airspace in a radar deception operation. This strategy, as recounted in the memoirs of Nixon's Chief of Staff Bob Haldeman, relied on intimidating the opponent with uncertainty.
Trump's difference: ‘The Art of the Deal’ in play
Trump, however, blended Nixon's tactic with the instincts of a real estate trader from his 1987 book ‘The Art of the Deal.’ In the book, Trump writes that he “plays to people's fantasies” and that people are “drawn to the biggest, the most impressive, and the most spectacular,” viewing “truthful hyperbole” as a legitimate marketing tool. In negotiation, he emphasizes that the worst thing is to show how eager you are and stresses the power of holding cards that the other party cannot live without.
Putting NATO on the table, threatening Mexico
As president, Trump applied this approach globally. In his first term, he demanded more defense spending from NATO allies while directly threatening to withdraw from the alliance. In 2019, he threatened Mexico with steep tariffs over immigration, forcing the country to deploy tens of thousands of troops to the border within days. In both cases, he secured concessions by creating chaos and uncertainty.
The Soleimani decision: The lure of the most extreme option
Trump's ‘madman’ reflex was most clearly seen in the January 2020 decision to kill Iranian General Qasem Soleimani. The Pentagon, when presenting retaliatory options for the death of an American in Iraq, had included the most extreme option—targeting Soleimani—as a way to make the others seem more reasonable. But Trump, unexpectedly to the generals, chose exactly that option. According to The New York Times, this aimed to send a message of “a president who does not abide by red lines.”
Controlling the state with ‘Schedule F’
Having faced bureaucratic resistance in his first term, Trump aimed to establish full control over the federal government in his second term through the ‘Schedule F’ plan. This plan, which makes it easier to fire thousands of senior civil servants, paves the way for him to be even more unpredictable at the negotiating table.
From the Atlantic to the Pacific: China as the new enemy
For Trump, the real rival is China. In his view, NATO is a drain on resources flowing to European “freeloaders,” while China is a giant factory that takes jobs away from the American working class. He prefers a direct, head-to-head confrontation against China rather than multilateral alliances. With midnight tweets praising the Chinese president and then raising tariff walls in the morning, he disrupts supply chains. This tactic of “weaponizing uncertainty” creates an environment that becomes a minefield for investors.
The Iran war: A message to both shores
Trump's military moves toward Iran also serve a dual purpose. On one hand, with tensions in the Strait of Hormuz, he tells Europe, “either pay your NATO bill or fend for yourselves,” while on the other hand, he reminds China and India, who buy their oil from Iran, of their energy dependence. He acts like a merchant who starts a fire and then sells fire extinguishers at three times the price.
