PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.

The headline on this blog is borrowed from a piece in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), a commentary which underscores the mercurial, unpredictable nature of the person who currently sits in the Oval Office.

As I write about Donald Trump again, I feel a little like Dana Milbank, a columnist for the Washington Post who has made a living for more than two years now, lofting huge criticisms at the so-called “leader of the free World” nearly every day – criticisms often warranted. But I wish an opinion columnist like Milbank would find other targets once in a while. He is literally making a living off Trump.

I don’t join – or want to join Milbank – though I believe Trump’s recent conduct deserves disdain.

So, I rely on a column by William Galston in the WSJ that describes Trump’s conduct in words that create a profound sense of uncertainty for the rest of Trump’s term or terms, however long that is.

Galston’s column used this subhead: Allies can’t work with the U.S. unless they can trust it to follow through on promises. Then, he went on:

“In a telephone call about Syria two weeks ago, President Trump reportedly told Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, ‘You know what? It’s yours. I’m leaving,’ upending his administration’s strategy and setting in motion events that culminated in the resignation of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis.”

Galston says Trump’s behavior reminds us of some ancient truths we often take for granted.

“When we make a commitment,” he writes, “those who trust it make decisions that they would not otherwise have made. They may risk their fortunes, their honor and even their lives, relying on our word. If we break it, they may lose everything. And when they do, we are responsible.”

At least initially, Mattis persuaded the president to hold off the Syria withdrawal for six months. National security adviser John Bolton then took the lead in crafting a Syria strategy with three objectives—defeating Islamic State, establishing a new Syrian government, and inducing the Iranians to leave. Taken together, these goals implied the presence of U.S. troops.

In September, Bolton and other officials announced this new policy and assured all parties that it enjoyed the president’s support. There was no reason to doubt their sincerity, which made Trump’s declaration last week even more shocking, according to Galston.

The withdrawal will abandon Syria’s Kurds, who have borne the brunt of the battle against Islamic State, to the tender mercies of the Turks, who view them as terrorists. It will expose Syrians in Idlib and elsewhere to renewed attack from Bashar Assad’s forces. It will leave the Israelis face-to-face with the threatening Iranian presence in Syria. It betrays everyone who relied on the word of the U.S. And it hands a major victory to Vladimir Putin, who sees Syria as the linchpin of his effort to restore Russian influence in the Middle East.

“It is possible, Galston continues, “to suppose that Trump does not understand the difference between the government of the U.S. and a family business, and so does not understand why his mercurial behavior inflicts so much damage. When you are in charge of the executive branch, you cannot do everything on your own. You need an orderly policy process and senior officials who can implement the results of this process. These officials cannot be effective unless they can credibly claim to be acting on your behalf and with your support.

“When your national security adviser announces that a policy enjoys your imprimatur, the world will take him at his word—unless you contradict him and pull back the policy. Silence implies consent.

“An orderly policy process is also a president’s best protection against nasty surprises. During such a process, all arguments for and against a proposed policy will be aired, and the likely reactions of different groups with a stake in the outcome can be anticipated. The president is then in the position to make a considered judgment that objections cannot easily destabilize.”

Trump doesn’t care about decision-making processes in a huge institution — the federal government and specifically the White House. What he says is THE TRUTH.

He made a campaign promise that the U.S. was going to get out of Syria, so, unexpectedly, he makes good on that promise without a shred of thought for how the departure would or should occur.  Often, to put a phrase on it, the how matters as much as the what.

Trump telegraphed U.S. intentions to ISIS which continues to fight U.S. soldiers, he literally risked the lives of those soldiers, and he didn’t care about a variety of U.S. international relationships.

Back many years ago, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, President John F. Kennedy sent former Secretary of State Dean Acheson to show photos of the Russian sites to Charles de Gaulle. The French president did not look at the pictures. “The word of the president of the United States is good enough for me,” he said.

Can one imagine a world leader today taking President Trump at his word?

I can’t.

Footnote: Or, for another example, consider Trump’s curious actions in defense of “his wall.” If you were a Member of Congress, it would be impossible to negotiate a resolution with Trump, unless you capitulated to his every whim. It’s like negotiating with jello. Push it one way, it springs out the other way.