Hopeful signs overseas

Trump has shown some smarts in foreign policy

President Donald Trump’s foreign policy has been taking a shellacking. With his insensitive tweets after the terrible June 3 attacks in London, ongoing allegations of improper ties between his presidential campaign and the Russians, and ill-advised intelligence disclosures, the president’s second 100 days in office are not going any easier than the first 100.

Of course, much of the brouhaha is Trump-induced. And there is perhaps an element of poetic justice in seeing a man who insulted his way to the presidency paid back in kind. But the nation’s politics will be further dragged down — and Mr. Trump’s critics will be less likely to influence his future policies — if things become so poisoned that every debate ends up in a zerosum shouting match between the White House and its critics.

Although there is certainly a lot to worry about in Mr. Trump’s approach to the world (leaving aside his domestic policies, a separate and equally serious subject), there are several hopeful signs. His critics (including us) need to remember these facts and support his good decisions, even as we continue our strong critiques when he goes astray.

First is the quality of his national security team — which Mr. Trump handpicked, to his credit. The top advisers appear collectively as good as any in modern U.S. history. But the widespread sighs of relief that were almost audible when Jim Mattis, Nikki Haley, H.R. McMaster, John Kelly and Rex Tillerson joined the administration stopped. Indeed, some critics have even called for their resignations (which would be deeply counterproductive).

An inner circle of White House advisers with extreme views complicates things, of course. But Adm. McMaster, the national security adviser, has successfully persuaded the president not to include firebrand Stephen Bannon on the National Security Council, among other encouraging steps.

Mr. Trump’s national security team has already walked back many of candidate Mr. Trump’s controversial, even dangerous, ideas. In his first week in office, Defense Secretary Mattis reassured the Asia about the United States’ continued commitment to its allies and interests there — a message that he and Secretary of State Tillerson reiterated last week and that Vice President Mike Pence has conveyed as well.

The cruise missile strike in Syria in April was a proportionate response to an abominable action by the government of President Bashar Assad. In Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan, Mr. Trump has built on President Barack Obama’s policies, gradually and modestly escalating U.S. involvement inmost of those places.

Mr. Trump has wisely chosen not to use military force in response to North Korean provocations, attempting instead to work with China to apply economic pressure. And he dropped his campaign promise to designate China a currency manipulator and has not pushed his proposed 45 percent tariffs on all trade with China — actions that would have risked a trade warand recession.

Yet Mr. Trump has not turned a blind eye to China’s behavior when it has been troublesome. Notably, the U.S. Navy recently conducted freedom-of-navigation exercises in the South China Sea, designed to push back against China’s assertive claims there. These were done in matter-of-fact style, without tweets or other histrionics.

Then there is the NATO Article 5 mutual-defense question. To be sure, Mr. Trump insults allies in ways we find off-putting at best, and often disturbing. But the recent outcry over his supposed abandonment of NATO has been badly overdone. In his speech in Brussels in May and again on Friday, Mr. Trump has explicitly said that the United States would not leave allies inthe lurch.

Paying lip service to Article 5 at the recent NATO summit would not have settled any issues over European security. Its language is intentionally ambiguous: The way NATO should respond to one scenario is necessarily different from how it should respond to another.

Also, actions speak at least as loudly as words — and we still have thousands of U.S. troops undergirding our commitment to Poland and the Baltic States in case of Russian aggression. Mr. Trump hasn’t suggested pulling these forces back. Nor has he unconditionally lifted sanctions on Russia over the Ukraine crisis, as some feared he might.

This president is not exactly our cup of tea when it comes to foreign policy. But he has shown some openness to advice, rationality and dialogue — and his critics should be careful about closing off all avenues of communication with an administration that is still feeling its way.