President Donald Trump delivered a strong speech to congress, departing from his script only occasionally to needle unhappy Democratic Party members in his audience.
The speech was a mix of longstanding Trump themes: strengthening borders; deporting illegal immigrants; rebuilding the economy behind tariff barriers; strengthening the American military.
As presidents do in these congressional addresses, Trump tied policy themes to the (mostly tragic) personal stories of individuals invited to attend: family survivors of violent crime; a poor young boy with brain cancer; the wife and daughters of an individual killed at the Pennsylvania rally where Trump was hit by, and miraculously survived, a sniper’s bullet.
As political theatre this was an assured, one might even say a great, performance, were it not for Trump’s instinct always to score the partisan point, rather than to unite his audience towards a common goal.
There were flashes of humour: Trump repeated his objective of reclaiming the Panama Canal; “we’re taking it back” he said. Then, to broad laughter and looking at Secretary of State Marco Rubio: “Good luck, Marco. We know who to blame if anything goes wrong.”
Trump’s ability to talk about political issues in ways that resonate with American voters is remarkable.
He devoted a lengthy part of his speech to detailing American aid programs – millions to produce the “Arab Sesame Street”, for example, or to impossibly large numbers of centenarians still apparently on social security lists.
To these supposed examples of waste, fraud and mismanagement, The New York Times’ rolling coverage of the speech self-importantly applied labels such as “this is misleading” or “this needs context”.
Even more pathetic were Democrat members in congress holding up little paddles with phrases such as “Musk steals” or “False”.
Trump’s opponents have made no headway since the presidential election in November on how to regain some political momentum.
For the moment at least, Trump is sweeping all before him.
The key political message from the speech is that Trump will not be stopped in pursuing his political agenda.
Spending cuts, tariffs, eliminating funding for woke causes, pursuing allies to pay more for their own security, and chasing investment in the US economy.
Australia was not mentioned.
Canada, Mexico, India and China all took regular hits for their unfair economic policies. Anthony Albanese might hope there is still a faint chance we might be granted an exclusion on steel and alumina tariffs. My view is that there is no chance Australia will be exempted, unless we can offer some compelling advantage for Trump not yet in contemplation.
Trump will never be in a stronger position than he is today. He received a resounding endorsement from American voters, narrowly controls congress, has political momentum from a fast and largely effective entry into the Oval Office, and his political opponents are in disarray.
And Trump knows what he wants to do: display unilateral strength internationally; cut the size and cost of government; strengthen the economy; put subordinate people and countries in their more inferior place.
Trump’s speech ended with some resounding phrases about American ingenuity, capacity to overcome hardship and build for the future.
It’s such a pity these higher-sounding phrases get lost in the day-to-day style of the Trump White House, which is more about the brutal business of who has power and who doesn’t.
We know Trump thinks of politics and international affairs as being like a poker game. Many strong cards are in Trump’s hand, and these were prominently displayed in his speech to congress.
What about Trump’s weak cards? I think his biggest weakness is being unable to take advice or indeed tolerate subordinates who may advance different ideas.
In this, Trump has a lot in common with predecessor Joe Biden.
Biden assembled a cabinet of low-profile implementers; he brooked no advice countering his disastrous withdrawal of forces from Afghanistan; he privileged a small group of family and friends around him, and governed by instinct.
Biden’s approach worked for a year or two, but when his mental deterioration overwhelmed him, the administration drifted on cruise control.
Might that happen to Trump? He is clearly mentally stronger then Biden, but age catches up with everyone. What looks like energy and direction now will falter in time as reality catches up with the Trump machine.
One reality is that Russia is not a genuine partner of America. Vladimir Putin’s interests and priorities, and his destructive activities around the world, are ultimately damaging to the US.
Putin is playing a different card game, one that ultimately attacks US interests in Europe, the Middle East and Asia.
Here’s a small example of what I mean: overnight it was revealed Russia sent senior missile technology experts to Iran on several visits in 2024.
Help with its missile programs is Tehran’s reward for selling Russia drones. Trump may not be worried about Iranian drones being used to kill Ukrainians, but Iranian nuclear-armed missiles threaten Israel, Saudi and American interests in the Middle East.
Russia is likewise helping North Korea to improve its missile capabilities.
Nuclear-armed North Korean intercontinental ballistic missiles already can directly target American cities. It’s not in American interests to let Russia help Kim Jong-un build a stronger nuclear arsenal.
Putin will never submit himself to a public dressing down in the Oval Office. It turns out that type of treatment can only really be handed out to allies.
The complexities of America’s international interests will ultimately confound a Trump strategy that thinks quick deal-making – don’t worry about the details – will deliver strength in an ugly, competitive world.
Trump’s speech mostly covered old ground, but here are some new elements he announced.
He quoted from a letter he said he received from Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky just before giving his speech. The letter seems to indicate Zelensky is now “ready for peace”. It seems the Ukrainians have rethought how they need to deal with Trump.
Trump has also said he had received “strong signals” that Russia is ready for peace: “Wouldn’t that be beautiful?”
Well, maybe! It’s well over time for the White House to start pressuring Putin for some public concessions on the way to a ceasefire.
My read of the past week is that JD Vance derailed a planned deal with Ukraine on rare earths in that disastrous Oval Office media conference. It seems Zelensky has offered Trump a way back from his Vice-President’s intemperate behaviour.
Trump announced an initiative to establish a “golden dome” missile defence shield over the American homeland. His claim was that technology has advanced from the days of Ronald Reagan’s “Star Wars” missile defence program of the 1980s, such that a defensive shield is now possible.
I’m sceptical. The physics of countering an intercontinental ballistic missile reaching its target with a terminal velocity of 6-8 kilometres per second (that is 22,000-29,000km/h) remain stubbornly hard to counter. Good luck with that aspiration, Mr President.
Lastly, Trump announced he would “resurrect shipbuilding” by establishing a “new office of shipbuilding in the White House”.
That’s an interesting move and, at last, Anthony Albanese has an opportunity to share a common story of mutual failure to build ships for our national defence.
An American interest to lift the priority of military shipbuilding could help save AUKUS. Both countries have a common need to build ships and submarines faster.
So, there is an opportunity for an Australian Prime Minister to say to Trump that we can be a meaningful part of his shipbuilding renaissance.
While American shipyards struggle to expand, we can apply some workforce capability to shared naval ends.
The challenge for Australia is to grow our maritime workforce so we can build AUKUS submarines, but there will be no work for years.
Surely there is an opportunity here for us to help build American naval capabilities while we wait for the AUKUS design to be completed?
As always, Australia’s challenge is to make the alliance case to the Americans. Trump is a very different president, so we need a new approach, but we are far from having no cards in our hand. It all comes down to how we play them.
Peter Jennings is a director of Strategic Analysis Australia.
More Coverage
With our defence ‘dangerously weak’, we must supercharge drone technology
One of our closest guarded secrets is that we are among the world leaders in drones and radar technology, which we must exploit amid rising global tensions.
It’s hard to see America made great again if this is the message
There is much to support in the Trump agenda. But it’s almost unimaginable that any previous president would have made a media spectacle of a brave ally so that he could look strong.