Constant job changes by Trump will only make the Iran crisis worse

Donald Trump campaigned for the presidency on being against costly and long intervention in the Middle East, and yet, according to reports, planes were in the air and ships were in position ready to fire on Iranian strategic targets in retaliation for the shooting down of a US drone. To complicate matters further, Iranian officials said that, before Trump called off the strike, they had received a message warning a US attack was imminent but that the president was against war and wanted talks on a range of issues.

So how did we get in this position, with mixed messages in such a high-pressure situation? Trump’s lack of foreign policy experience is one thing, but the bigger issue is the revolving cast of advisers he has had on national security and defence issues in his two-and-a-half years in the White House.

A solid rule of thumb is that an official appointed by the president will usually last around two years before moving on, although some last far longer. Yet in this White House, Trump has already seen massive turnover.

The president on his third national security advisor, having also had one person as acting security adviser for a while, and his second secretary of state, plus another two having served as acting. He has gone through two secretaries of homeland security, having also had two acting secretaries – with one of those currently in place – and two directors of the CIA (with an acting director for three days).

It is worth mentioning the acting officials because despite many serving short times while permanent appointments are being put in place or confirmed by the Senate, usually between one and four weeks, the Trump administration has had some long ones.

Patrick Shanahan had been acting defence secretary for nearly seven months before he withdrew from consideration for the post and stepped down. That will continue what is the longest time the US has gone without a permanent appointment to the role. His replacement Mark Esper is due to take up the role on Monday, but is already in meetings about the Iran situation.

Over at homeland security, Elaine Duke served four months while waiting for Kirstjen Nielsen to be confirmed (who has also now left the administration). That is only two months less than John Kelly served in the post before he was moved to become White House chief of staff (he too is now out of the White House).

If that sounds confusing, imagine what that means for decision making on defence issues. All this movement has placed power in the hands of current national security adviser John Bolton, who has always advocated taking a hard line on Iran, and secretary of state Mike Pompeo, another who generally takes a hard line on national security, and who has been one of the only constant presences around Trump, having served as his CIA director before being moved to his current post.

In a White House that is beset by factions, with Trump happy to have his aides compete for his attention, it appears that the Iran issue has come down to Bolton vs Trump, according to multiple reports – with Pompeo, Esper (who will head-up the Pentagon) and vice president Mike Pence seen as swing votes. Bolton wants a harsh reaction; the president is reluctant to head to war.

In a speech last month, former defence secretary James Mattis, who left the administration last year over his clashes with Trump and others on policy, gave an insight into the swirling of different views around what is essentially a foreign policy novice in Trump.

“The United States should buy time to keep peace and stability and allow diplomats to work diplomacy on how to keep peace for one more hour, one more day, one more week, a month or a year,” Mr Mattis said in the United Arab Emirates.

“Iran’s behaviour must change,” Mr Mattis added, “[but] the military must work to buy time for diplomats to work their magic.”

With Bolton seemingly pushing hard for military action the lack of clarity from the White House – reinforced by the reports of Trump’s pulling back from strikes – is worrying.

Congress has also been involved in the discussions with the president, with many members reticent to involve the military – another set of voices for the president to factor in. But the biggest fear for Democrats is a muddled Trump administration escalating the situation too far.