From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age. This is the morning edition. I'm Samantha Selinger Morris. It's Monday, February 17th. I call it the madman theory, Bob. These words, supposedly uttered by Richard Nixon and recounted by his chief of staff, Bob Haldeman, have perhaps never been as relevant as they are today. And they go to the question, can a powerful leader, who we think is just a little bit crazy, actually make the world a better place as Nixon thought he might be able to achieve? Enter Donald Trump, the current president of the United States is set to put the so-called Mad Men theory to the test, arguably like never before. Today, foreign affairs correspondent Matthew Knott on whether Trump's volatile approach to geopolitics will produce vital victories, or whether his perceived crazy is just a little too mad. So, Matt, you have written about the madman theory of politics, and I'd love it if you could briefly walk us through it, because I know, thanks to your writing, I've gone down a rabbit hole. It's an ancient concept, but it's one that various world leaders have tried to employ over the years. So take us through it.

From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age. This is the morning edition. I'm Samantha Selinger Morris. It's Monday, February 17th. I call it the madman theory, Bob. These words, supposedly uttered by Richard Nixon and recounted by his chief of staff, Bob Haldeman, have perhaps never been as relevant as they are today. And they go to the question, can a powerful leader, who we think is just a little bit crazy, actually make the world a better place as Nixon thought he might be able to achieve? Enter Donald Trump, the current president of the United States is set to put the so-called Mad Men theory to the test, arguably like never before. Today, foreign affairs correspondent Matthew Knott on whether Trump's volatile approach to geopolitics will produce vital victories, or whether his perceived crazy is just a little too mad. So, Matt, you have written about the madman theory of politics, and I'd love it if you could briefly walk us through it, because I know, thanks to your writing, I've gone down a rabbit hole. It's an ancient concept, but it's one that various world leaders have tried to employ over the years. So take us through it.

Uh, yes. Indeed. This idea has been around, as you say, for centuries, the idea that perhaps it's good if those you're negotiating with are those who might be your opponents. Uh, in in politics, I think that you're a little bit crazy. Think that you might behave irrationally. I think that you might do something, perhaps, that even inflicts damage on yourself, but will also hurt someone else. This is essentially the idea as far back in a 1517. This is a quote you'll often hear in this space from Machiavelli, who said that in certain circumstances it's a very wise thing to simulate madness, but this idea of the madman theory as an actually fully formed theory I was really sparked during the Nixon era. One of Nixon's top staffers are Bob Haldeman, later wrote a memoir, and he talked about Nixon actually using this phrase, saying, I call it the madman theory and discussing it in the context of the Vietnam War and saying that he was going to come in and he wanted the North Vietnamese to think that he was essentially crazy, that he would behave like a madman, that he would do anything, that he would escalate the war as a way to force the communists to the negotiating table and strike a peace deal that would favor America.

Uh, yes. Indeed. This idea has been around, as you say, for centuries, the idea that perhaps it's good if those you're negotiating with are those who might be your opponents. Uh, in in politics, I think that you're a little bit crazy. Think that you might behave irrationally. I think that you might do something, perhaps, that even inflicts damage on yourself, but will also hurt someone else. This is essentially the idea as far back in a 1517. This is a quote you'll often hear in this space from Machiavelli, who said that in certain circumstances it's a very wise thing to simulate madness, but this idea of the madman theory as an actually fully formed theory I was really sparked during the Nixon era. One of Nixon's top staffers are Bob Haldeman, later wrote a memoir, and he talked about Nixon actually using this phrase, saying, I call it the madman theory and discussing it in the context of the Vietnam War and saying that he was going to come in and he wanted the North Vietnamese to think that he was essentially crazy, that he would behave like a madman, that he would do anything, that he would escalate the war as a way to force the communists to the negotiating table and strike a peace deal that would favor America.

It isn't just what I would call a madman theory. I think that overstates it. I remember Johnson.

It isn't just what I would call a madman theory. I think that overstates it. I remember Johnson.

Interestingly, and Nixon actually said later that he didn't say this. He disavowed the idea, but it's taken on a life of its own because it is getting at something that leaders do use sometimes, particularly President Trump. That's why we're talking about it right now.

Interestingly, and Nixon actually said later that he didn't say this. He disavowed the idea, but it's taken on a life of its own because it is getting at something that leaders do use sometimes, particularly President Trump. That's why we're talking about it right now.

You don't take them in order to prove that you're a madman, or that you're a tough guy or a macho on the rest. It's simply you take them when it is in the interest of your foreign policy, and also to make sure that you are a credible leader, a credible leader.

You don't take them in order to prove that you're a madman, or that you're a tough guy or a macho on the rest. It's simply you take them when it is in the interest of your foreign policy, and also to make sure that you are a credible leader, a credible leader.

When that brings me to really the crux of this, which is, does Donald Trump fit into the madman theory? And if he does, how?

When that brings me to really the crux of this, which is, does Donald Trump fit into the madman theory? And if he does, how?

Well, yes, Donald Trump has actually spoken about this pretty explicitly, I would say, and acknowledged that this is a part of his negotiating style.

Well, yes, Donald Trump has actually spoken about this pretty explicitly, I would say, and acknowledged that this is a part of his negotiating style.

We must, as a nation, be more unpredictable. We are totally predictable. We tell everything. We're sending troops. We tell them we're sending something else. We have a news conference. We have to be.

We must, as a nation, be more unpredictable. We are totally predictable. We tell everything. We're sending troops. We tell them we're sending something else. We have a news conference. We have to be.

Trump has spoken about it in his first term, for example, in the context of free trade and negotiations with South Korea. Now this is a very friendly nation towards the US. This is really an ally of America, a place where lots of American troops are based. And Trump reportedly told his aides, you know, I want you to make them think that I'm a madman, that I'm going to tear up this entire free trade deal, make them think I'm going to walk away, do something crazy here to force them to negotiate. So Trump has pretty explicitly acknowledged that this is a part of his diplomatic toolkit to keep people off balance, to not know whether he's serious. This creates a lot of instability and volatility in the system.

Trump has spoken about it in his first term, for example, in the context of free trade and negotiations with South Korea. Now this is a very friendly nation towards the US. This is really an ally of America, a place where lots of American troops are based. And Trump reportedly told his aides, you know, I want you to make them think that I'm a madman, that I'm going to tear up this entire free trade deal, make them think I'm going to walk away, do something crazy here to force them to negotiate. So Trump has pretty explicitly acknowledged that this is a part of his diplomatic toolkit to keep people off balance, to not know whether he's serious. This creates a lot of instability and volatility in the system.

North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with.

North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with.

Fire and fury like the world has never seen.

Fire and fury like the world has never seen.

And then we obviously cannot discuss the so-called madman theory and Donald Trump without bringing up what he recently said about Gaza and wanting to take it over and move its 2 million residents to Jordan and Egypt. So does that comment or that idea fit into this madman theory?

And then we obviously cannot discuss the so-called madman theory and Donald Trump without bringing up what he recently said about Gaza and wanting to take it over and move its 2 million residents to Jordan and Egypt. So does that comment or that idea fit into this madman theory?

Yeah, I think it does. A key element of the madman theory is that you're behaving irrationally, that you're behaving in a way that may harm your own interests. It's not simply a threatening to say, uh, attack someone else, that it's it's the idea that you're harming yourself in some way. And that's where Trump's idea did seem to fit in.

Yeah, I think it does. A key element of the madman theory is that you're behaving irrationally, that you're behaving in a way that may harm your own interests. It's not simply a threatening to say, uh, attack someone else, that it's it's the idea that you're harming yourself in some way. And that's where Trump's idea did seem to fit in.

US will take over the Gaza Strip and we will do a job with it, too. We'll own it.

US will take over the Gaza Strip and we will do a job with it, too. We'll own it.

Trump's whole theory of global relations has been that America should focus on itself. This is the idea of America first, that America shouldn't be getting caught up in a foreign entanglements. He's spoken about the Iraq war as a disaster, about the Afghanistan war Afghanistan War was a disaster. The idea that you should be spending money in America and not spending it, trying to fix the world's problems. And here he was, standing next to Benjamin Netanyahu, saying that America would take ownership of this quite literally.

Trump's whole theory of global relations has been that America should focus on itself. This is the idea of America first, that America shouldn't be getting caught up in a foreign entanglements. He's spoken about the Iraq war as a disaster, about the Afghanistan war Afghanistan War was a disaster. The idea that you should be spending money in America and not spending it, trying to fix the world's problems. And here he was, standing next to Benjamin Netanyahu, saying that America would take ownership of this quite literally.

Many world leaders wondering whether Donald Trump is actually going to follow through on this claim, or whether it is just a threat as part of a broader negotiating plan for the Middle East.

Many world leaders wondering whether Donald Trump is actually going to follow through on this claim, or whether it is just a threat as part of a broader negotiating plan for the Middle East.

So it did seem such an out of the box idea that I think we're very much in this terrain.

So it did seem such an out of the box idea that I think we're very much in this terrain.

And obviously, just of late we've been hearing Donald Trump and members of his cabinet make noises about how they want to try to negotiate with Russia and handle the war in Ukraine. So does this fit with this madman theory the way Donald Trump is approaching this?

And obviously, just of late we've been hearing Donald Trump and members of his cabinet make noises about how they want to try to negotiate with Russia and handle the war in Ukraine. So does this fit with this madman theory the way Donald Trump is approaching this?

Well, interestingly, not from the perspective of forcing Putin and Russia to do anything. Perhaps if you think about it from the other angle, and encouraging Ukraine to try and stop fighting in defence of their own country. It could be because the way that we've seen Trump talk about the war in Ukraine is very different to Gaza. So in Ukraine, members of his administration are talking about. No, we're not going to allow a Ukraine to enter NATO. That's not a realistic idea. And no, we're not going to go back to the 2014 borders. In Ukraine, they're already essentially giving away some of these key aspects of what would be a peace negotiation. They're leaving Ukraine without so many things to negotiate with, and setting Putin off on a really strong way to start this peace settlement. So there's not much sign that Trump is trying to shake it up in the way that you could. The classic idea of the madman theory would be, perhaps, to say that we're going to give even more weapons to Ukraine. We'll allow them to attack within Russia. Maybe we'll try and take out Putin in some way. We'll have regime change in Russia. Will we be at a nuclear war with Russia? That would be the classic madman theory applied to Putin. But that's not at all what we're hearing from Trump. Instead, the pressure is really going on. Ukraine, perhaps, to essentially give up, cede significant chunks of its territory to Russia.

Well, interestingly, not from the perspective of forcing Putin and Russia to do anything. Perhaps if you think about it from the other angle, and encouraging Ukraine to try and stop fighting in defence of their own country. It could be because the way that we've seen Trump talk about the war in Ukraine is very different to Gaza. So in Ukraine, members of his administration are talking about. No, we're not going to allow a Ukraine to enter NATO. That's not a realistic idea. And no, we're not going to go back to the 2014 borders. In Ukraine, they're already essentially giving away some of these key aspects of what would be a peace negotiation. They're leaving Ukraine without so many things to negotiate with, and setting Putin off on a really strong way to start this peace settlement. So there's not much sign that Trump is trying to shake it up in the way that you could. The classic idea of the madman theory would be, perhaps, to say that we're going to give even more weapons to Ukraine. We'll allow them to attack within Russia. Maybe we'll try and take out Putin in some way. We'll have regime change in Russia. Will we be at a nuclear war with Russia? That would be the classic madman theory applied to Putin. But that's not at all what we're hearing from Trump. Instead, the pressure is really going on. Ukraine, perhaps, to essentially give up, cede significant chunks of its territory to Russia.

We'll be back in a minute. And so, Matt, tell me what Donald Trump's track record is like in terms of when he has actually used the madman theory. Like, does it work for him, whether that be in his dealings within the United States or outside of it?

We'll be back in a minute. And so, Matt, tell me what Donald Trump's track record is like in terms of when he has actually used the madman theory. Like, does it work for him, whether that be in his dealings within the United States or outside of it?

Yeah. You describe it as hit and miss, although there are plenty of examples of where Trump comes out with these ideas or these proposals. And then you look back a few months later and you say, oh, that went absolutely nowhere and didn't necessarily achieve anything, but sometimes it it can work. One example I was thinking of that I remember because I was in the US reporting on this was uh, his initial, uh, initial tariff threat against Mexico. We're quite used to this now. We're seeing a lot of tariff talk now. But at the time when he proposed a 5% tariff on Mexican imports into the United States, this was a big controversy and caused a lot of anger, really, including among Republicans, because what Trump was saying was there were too many illegal immigrants coming across the border. And we're going to put a tariff on Mexican goods until Mexico stops that from happening. Now, many people said this would be crazy. You're only going to harm American consumers. You're going to force prices up, inflation up. You're going to harm American companies from what played out. It did seem to work and did seem to scare the Mexican government at the time. They did increase patrols at the border and crack down in a significant way to try and keep Trump happy. The tariffs were never put on, and unauthorized border crossings did drop really significantly in the months after. So that was an example where I think some people, including myself, who said this is an idea that seemed mad on the surface, actually paid off. I think we saw it again with the ceasefire negotiations that had been going absolutely nowhere under the Biden administration. The proposal was there as far back as last May. Donald Trump is elected. He starts tweeting about how all hell will break loose in the region if there isn't a deal, if Hamas doesn't agree to release the hostages. A lot of pressure from his advisers goes on to Israel as well. You've got to get something done here. We want this off our plate. And we saw the ceasefire deal go into effect just as Trump was coming into office. So he's really unorthodox approach did seem to pay dividends there. But you can imagine in Ukraine or even in, uh, Israel Palestine in the future, uh, the madman theory leading to outcomes that many people would find pretty disturbing.

Yeah. You describe it as hit and miss, although there are plenty of examples of where Trump comes out with these ideas or these proposals. And then you look back a few months later and you say, oh, that went absolutely nowhere and didn't necessarily achieve anything, but sometimes it it can work. One example I was thinking of that I remember because I was in the US reporting on this was uh, his initial, uh, initial tariff threat against Mexico. We're quite used to this now. We're seeing a lot of tariff talk now. But at the time when he proposed a 5% tariff on Mexican imports into the United States, this was a big controversy and caused a lot of anger, really, including among Republicans, because what Trump was saying was there were too many illegal immigrants coming across the border. And we're going to put a tariff on Mexican goods until Mexico stops that from happening. Now, many people said this would be crazy. You're only going to harm American consumers. You're going to force prices up, inflation up. You're going to harm American companies from what played out. It did seem to work and did seem to scare the Mexican government at the time. They did increase patrols at the border and crack down in a significant way to try and keep Trump happy. The tariffs were never put on, and unauthorized border crossings did drop really significantly in the months after. So that was an example where I think some people, including myself, who said this is an idea that seemed mad on the surface, actually paid off. I think we saw it again with the ceasefire negotiations that had been going absolutely nowhere under the Biden administration. The proposal was there as far back as last May. Donald Trump is elected. He starts tweeting about how all hell will break loose in the region if there isn't a deal, if Hamas doesn't agree to release the hostages. A lot of pressure from his advisers goes on to Israel as well. You've got to get something done here. We want this off our plate. And we saw the ceasefire deal go into effect just as Trump was coming into office. So he's really unorthodox approach did seem to pay dividends there. But you can imagine in Ukraine or even in, uh, Israel Palestine in the future, uh, the madman theory leading to outcomes that many people would find pretty disturbing.

And I really wanted to ask you, because you are as we record this, you're sitting in Parliament House in the corridors of power. How are our leaders feeling about Donald Trump wielding the madman theory against us? Like, what are the greatest dangers for us in Australia when when dealing with a so-called madman politician?

And I really wanted to ask you, because you are as we record this, you're sitting in Parliament House in the corridors of power. How are our leaders feeling about Donald Trump wielding the madman theory against us? Like, what are the greatest dangers for us in Australia when when dealing with a so-called madman politician?

Well, yes, this is something that the Albanese government and indeed governments around the world have been grappling with. And what we've seen so far is that Prime Minister Albanese and other members of the cabinet have decided to take the most cautious approach, probably feasibly possible about Donald Trump, that they're really going to say almost nothing at all. No criticism at all. We saw this with the Trump Gaza proposal, where Albaneses line, which I think we might hear more of, was I'm not going to offer a running commentary on what the president says. The clear strategy that the government is adopting is that there's an incredibly volatile, sometimes even vengeful person in the white House, and we want to be as small a target as possible.

Well, yes, this is something that the Albanese government and indeed governments around the world have been grappling with. And what we've seen so far is that Prime Minister Albanese and other members of the cabinet have decided to take the most cautious approach, probably feasibly possible about Donald Trump, that they're really going to say almost nothing at all. No criticism at all. We saw this with the Trump Gaza proposal, where Albaneses line, which I think we might hear more of, was I'm not going to offer a running commentary on what the president says. The clear strategy that the government is adopting is that there's an incredibly volatile, sometimes even vengeful person in the white House, and we want to be as small a target as possible.

And so, finally, Matt, just some lasting thoughts. You know, is the mad man theory seen as a successful tactic? Like, what has history shown us on this front?

And so, finally, Matt, just some lasting thoughts. You know, is the mad man theory seen as a successful tactic? Like, what has history shown us on this front?

Uh, what most historians and analysts and scholars in this space say is that it doesn't tend to work very well in the end, that it can have some short term benefits. But as a long term strategy, there are a lot of problems. So, for example, to be Respected in the world for people to take you seriously. They also have to believe that you'll maintain your commitments that you make. So if you're striking treaties, peace deals, you have to be seen as reliable and so can you be seen as reliable at the same time as you're seen as a bit crazy and unpredictable. Those two ideas don't really go together. If we're talking about the madman theory of something that really began with Richard Nixon, it's important to remember that his strategy there didn't in any way work. If it is what he tried. It was North Vietnam that won the war. It was America that surrendered and left in what's regarded as a pretty catastrophic defeat for the US. So it's easier to talk about in theory often than it is to put in practice, even though Donald Trump clearly has had some success with it in his life.

Uh, what most historians and analysts and scholars in this space say is that it doesn't tend to work very well in the end, that it can have some short term benefits. But as a long term strategy, there are a lot of problems. So, for example, to be Respected in the world for people to take you seriously. They also have to believe that you'll maintain your commitments that you make. So if you're striking treaties, peace deals, you have to be seen as reliable and so can you be seen as reliable at the same time as you're seen as a bit crazy and unpredictable. Those two ideas don't really go together. If we're talking about the madman theory of something that really began with Richard Nixon, it's important to remember that his strategy there didn't in any way work. If it is what he tried. It was North Vietnam that won the war. It was America that surrendered and left in what's regarded as a pretty catastrophic defeat for the US. So it's easier to talk about in theory often than it is to put in practice, even though Donald Trump clearly has had some success with it in his life.

Well, thank you so much, Matt, for your time.

Well, thank you so much, Matt, for your time.

No worries at all.

No worries at all.

Today's episode of The Morning Edition was produced by Tammy Mills with technical assistance by Debbie Harrington. Our head of audio is Tom McKendrick. The Morning Edition is a production of The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. If you enjoy the show and want more of our journalism, subscribe to our newspapers today. It's the best way to support what we do. Search the Age or Smh.com.au. Subscribe and sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter to receive a comprehensive summary of the day's most important news, analysis and insights in your inbox every day. Links are in the show. Notes. I'm Samantha Selinger. Morris. This is the morning edition. Thanks for listening.

Today's episode of The Morning Edition was produced by Tammy Mills with technical assistance by Debbie Harrington. Our head of audio is Tom McKendrick. The Morning Edition is a production of The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. If you enjoy the show and want more of our journalism, subscribe to our newspapers today. It's the best way to support what we do. Search the Age or Smh.com.au. Subscribe and sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter to receive a comprehensive summary of the day's most important news, analysis and insights in your inbox every day. Links are in the show. Notes. I'm Samantha Selinger. Morris. This is the morning edition. Thanks for listening.