The article's central argument is that Donald Trump's foreign policy decisions closely resemble Henry Kissinger's pragmatic, realpolitik approach, prioritizing national interest and power over idealistic concerns like human rights and democracy promotion.
These actions demonstrate a dramatic shift away from traditional American engagement with human rights on the global stage.
The article contrasts Trump's actions with Kissinger's perspective. While Kissinger prioritized stability and avoided direct moral engagement, he still acknowledged the existence of a countervailing force of idealism within American foreign policy. His realpolitik was strategic, aimed at achieving greater geopolitical stability, even if it came at a moral cost.
Unlike Kissinger, Trump's approach seems less strategic and more driven by a dismissal of human rights as inherently worthless. While Kissinger's actions were transactional, serving a larger strategic objective, Trump's are described as purely transactional, lacking any overarching goal beyond national self-interest.
The article concludes that Trump's actions eliminate the role of human rights advocacy within American foreign policy, removing any mechanism for oversight or redress of human rights abuses abroad. This leaves vulnerable populations without a voice on the international stage.