[ethbr1]

The meta of Trump mercurialness is convincing counterparties they should do whatever they can to make him happy, even on unrelated matters.

I think it's a braindead, 4th-grade way to run international negotiations, but it is a way.

[dmix]

People will forever take every bluff and proposition at face value though so it gets exhausting following online discourse, where everyone is trying to rationalize it at face value or spinning it into some grander conspiratorial geopolitical scheme. Doesn’t seem to matter how many times the outcome is dramatically different than the starting point with Trump, people want to believe and that’s what Trump hopes they do to get what he wants (basically some marginal gains through intimidation but largely what one could achieve through more traditional civil approaches when negotiating from a power position).

[ethbr1]

Exactly. I've made the case before that while it may be a temporarily winning approach in business (aside from becoming persona non grata with most banks' risk departments), it's a losing strategy in international geopolitics.

Because counterparty countries will still exist, you'll need to make future deals, and they'll remember the last time you fucked them over.