Foreign fields offer Trump presidency a new playground if Republicans lose out

A caravan of Central American migrants snakes through Mexico towards the US border. Washington musters 15,000 troops to repel any incursions.

A combustible, unfolding situation is primed to explode in the days after America’s midterm elections.

So far, the situation has played into the president’s hands. But should the outcome of the vote deliver a setback for Donald Trump, the administration could use its Latin American backyard as a platform to reimpose its authority.

“The president that loses a majority in Congress often finds that foreign policy becomes the only place to make his mark,” said Jeremy Shapiro, an expert on US politics at the European Council on Foreign Relations.

Trump’s “America First” agenda has already upended established international approaches, including trade ties with China, policy on the Middle East, the isolation of Iran and non-proliferation treaties with Russia.

Looking south, Trump officials see only chaos. In addition to warnings of an illegal influx from its neighbours, the White House last week branded three South American states, including Venezuela, as a “troika of tyranny”.

One of the lessons of history, according to Mr Shapiro, is that limited military interventions can pay dividends for a beleaguered president.

“If the president is faced with a Congress that is willing to investigate him continually, then the classic option is a smaller-scale military operation that garners a lot of press attention but does not involve a lot of risk,” he said. “The invasion of Grenada was instrumental, for example, in reshaping president Ronald Reagan’s image as a decisive leader.”

The loss of a majority in the House of Representatives has been the fate of most recent presidents during midterm elections. Although the switch in control has mainly domestic consequences, the implications for the president often play out in foreign policy.

The president’s global agenda is an executive responsibility. The advice and consent functions of the constitution are reserved for the US Senate. Few pundits are predicting President Trump’s Republicans will lose both houses.

With Robert Mueller, the special investigator, reportedly poised to reveal details of his ongoing investigation into collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign within days of the vote, the combined fallout for the country’s relationship with the Kremlin will be closely watched.

Dana Allin, senior fellow for US foreign policy at the International Institute of Strategic Studies, points out that control of the House would grant subpoena power to Democratic chairs of its committees.

This would empower one, if not a series, of hostile investigations into allegations surrounding Mr Trump and his associates.

Mr Trump may have fewer moderating restraints as he sets policy against China. As global markets see-saw over Mr Trump’s push to secure trade concessions from Beijing, Mr Allin sees a Democrat-controlled House of Representatives as adding new complications to efforts to resolve the stand-off.

“In the case of China, the Democrats are not averse to being tougher than even Mr Trump. The House in Democratic hands is not necessarily going to act as a constraint on China policy.”

The Trump White House took pains to cast its Middle East policy as a dramatic departure from that pursued by Barack Obama. When George W Bush and the Republicans suffered a setback in the 2006 midterms, the result paved the way for the White House to step up its Iraq strategy. The surge of US forces in Iraq over the following two years stopped the country’s descent into civil war.

Similarly, President Trump’s push to isolate Iran can be maintained and intensified because the Democrats lack the firepower to dictate a return to Mr Obama’s policies.

Mr Shapiro pointed out that the incoming Congress will be as vulnerable to Mr Trump’s unpredictability as the rest of the world. All sides will remain reactive to a US leader who has called his own playbook.

After the elections, he expects Mr Trump to return to his attempts to coax North Korea’s Kim Jong-un into a deal.

“What is quite remarkable about President Trump is his inconsistency. Just a year ago North Korea was a threat to America’s very existence and then suddenly he is pursuing an extraordinary dialogue with Kim Jong-un virtually overnight,” Mr Shapiro said.

And more rabbits could be pulled from the hat should the results defy predictions of a Democratic “Blue Wave”.

More rabbits could be pulled from the hat should the results defy predictions of a Democratic ‘Blue Wave’