One of the stories that came to define President Trump’s second first one hundred days was the scandal now known as “Signalgate,” and its chaotic aftermath.
Back in March, a group chat with several high-ranking administration officials and members of their respective staffs was created on the popular encrypted messaging platform Signal. In a manner that, as of yet, is still unclear, Trump’s national security advisor, Michael Waltz, added Atlantic reporter—and known Trump critic—Jeffery Goldberg to the group.
On Friday, March 14, administration officials had a very short discussion about an apparent decision to bomb the Houthis of Yemen. Vice President JD Vance was the only one to show the slightest aversion to the planned strikes—softly suggesting they wait a month before quickly submitting to the approval of the majority.
The next day—in full view of the anti-Trump journalist who had been mysteriously added to the group—Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth sent the group a fairly detailed rundown on the nature and specific timeline of a series of strikes that would go on to be carried out a few hours later.
After the strikes, Waltz reported that a Houthi leader had been identified entering an apartment building that had been destroyed—presumably killing the people inside, including the target—which evoked messages of celebration from the Signal chat.
With that, Goldberg gathered screenshots, left the group, and then penned a detailed Atlantic feature on what had transpired that turned the matter into a full-blown scandal—the ramifications of which we’re still feeling over a month and a half later.
The establishment media, of course, used the episode to hound the president and his team for their irresponsible handling of classified material. The administration tried to weather the storm by ignoring it or by saying this was Goldberg trying, yet again, to invent a scandal to hurt Trump.
But the optics were too bad. In recent weeks, three members of Pete Hegseth’s staff—all of whom happen to be vocal opponents of the war with Iran that some parts of the administration are reportedly pushing for—were fired for reasons we were told are related to the unsanctioned release of classified material.
Meanwhile, Trump’s opponents in the media have launched an obvious campaign to characterize Secretary Hegseth as unfit for office, which the administration is having a harder and harder time dispelling.
Regardless of what happens to Hegseth specifically, this whole episode reflects a broader problem that those in Trump’s orbit who really want to see American foreign policy transformed in a way that actually benefits the American people, for a change, need to understand: there is a troubling lack of seriousness in this administration.
To be clear, that does not apply to everyone. The factions, interest groups, and foreign lobbies who want Trump to continue or expand the warfare state are working hard and effectively to accomplish their goals. This group clearly learned after his first term that Trump cannot easily be shamed into changing his mind on foreign policy. But he will completely pivot and embrace the foreign policy status quo with enthusiasm if doing so is presented to him in terms that sound like they were plucked out of one of his campaign rally speeches.
The narrative in Trump’s circle is no longer that the Biden administration was reckless on the world stage but simply that they were “weak”—implying, ridiculously, that they were unwilling to intervene in conflicts around the world.
That’s allowed Trump’s team to continue and expand the exact same policies Biden carried out in the Middle East—like bombing the Houthis—and present it as something brand new.
And while Trump’s best foreign policy campaign promise—to bring a negotiated end to the war in Ukraine—has not yet been abandoned, it feels more like an annoying chore that Trump’s team had earlier agreed to do than the beginning of the healthy new phase of American foreign policy that many were hoping for.
Trump 2.0’s adoption of the neoconservative status quo may not be surprising, but it’s still rather remarkable. Because it required the war hawks to truly understand the reality they were facing.
Trump was vocally against hiring neoconservatives and establishment Republicans in the lead-up to inauguration day. There was no talking him out of that, and likely still isn’t. But by calling the same old neoconservative doctrine something new, like “peace through strength,” they can accomplish the same goal with little to no resistance.
The shrinking faction that appears to actually want to change the substance of American foreign policy does not understand the reality of what they face in the same way.
If you were serious about using the power of the executive branch to bring about real, meaningful changes to American foreign policy, you wouldn’t be going out of your way to give the foreign policy establishment some of what it wants in some futile attempt to get them to like you.
Giving Ukraine lethal aid back in 2017 didn’t stop them from calling Trump a Russian agent and continuing Biden’s Yemen policy has not stopped them from calling Trump’s team “isolationist.” It doesn’t matter how hawkish you are in practice, if you float any ideas that threaten the racket at the heart of American foreign policy, the political establishment is going to try to destroy you.
If you’re actually going to change things, you have to weather that storm. You have to be strong enough to let the war hawks call you weak.
You also wouldn’t whine about the establishment media treating you unfairly. Of course, they are treating you unfairly. You are actively threatening policies that are making them and their friends in Washington and on Wall Street ridiculously rich. Don’t be surprised that they are using the same dishonest tactics to derail you that they’ve been using for almost ten years. Understand those tactics so you can identify and explain them when used against you.
And, importantly, you would do everything you could to avoid handing the media easy victories in their effort against you by, for instance, illegally texting war plans to one of those journalists by accident. When the world’s wealthiest, most powerful media outlets are pulling all the stops to bring you down, you have to be significantly more disciplined, diligent, and discrete than anyone on any other side.
It is clear that some people in Trump’s orbit and among his base are serious about using executive power to finally move away from the neoconservative and neoliberal doctrines that have brought us over thirty years of disastrous wars. But too many are evidently content to take the easy path and continue the status quo as long as they get to pretend like they’re making a change.
It’s up to those of us who want real change to put pressure on these folks that matches or exceeds the pressure they’re undergoing to abandon their promises. Some of us were serious when we said we were done with endless wars. It’s time we act like it.
