by Kitty Testa
It was less than a year ago that Mitt Romney castigated Donald Trump for—well—being Donald Trump. Last March, when Trump was shockingly leading the pack in the GOP primary, Romney gave a speech that consisted of a laundry list of reasons that Trump was unsuited to the presidency. Romney’s tirade was hyperbolic, to be sure, but was delivered with such aplomb that his portrayal of Trump induced visions of Alfred E. Neuman riding into Washington D.C. with the four horsemen of the apocalypse.
And yet, here we are, nine months later, and Mitt Romney is the leading contender for president-elect Trump’s Secretary of State. Ironic? Sure. But 2016 is the Year of Irony.
Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s victorious campaign manager, has expressed outrage over Trump’s consideration of Romney for any cabinet post given Romney’s opposition to the Trump presidency. Whether the outrage is real or the stuff of reality television, we may never know. Trump has already removed two of his top surrogates from consideration for cabinet positions. Rudy Giuliani and Chris Christie are out. Along with Conway, they all expressed faith in Trump’s judgment, and this isn’t exactly the appropriate time for a public bout of buyer’s remorse as Trump morphs from the candidate into the chief executive.
Trump’s cabinet is already a strange mix of outsiders and insiders, and one can imagine cabinet meetings becoming contentious. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Barack Obama has operated in an echo chamber throughout his presidency, disinterested in dissent, preferring to avoid opposing views. Surely Trump is aware that his temperament—at least his persona—has alarmed allies and enemies alike. His choice for Secretary of State may well be his most important appointment. Of course I would have preferred to see a more libertarian-minded Secretary of State, but I’m a realist, and I’m hoping for the best among limited options. Mitt Romney could be just the right person for this role in a Trump administration. In fact, as long as he champions Trump’s non-interventionist stance, Romney may well make an excellent secretary of state. Here are five reasons why.
1. Romney is the anti-Trump
Trump scares people. He’s unpredictable. He turns on a dime.
Mitt Romney is measured and staid—reassuring, in fact. The grinding gears of diplomacy require constant greasing. Good manners and civility are the lubricant that keeps them slowly turning. Romney is so polished that he shines.
Yes, American voters thought his upper lip too stiff, his hair too perfect to be president. But as Secretary of State, the uber-conservative grandfather is the perfect archetype to conduct foreign policy. He can provide a counterbalance of caution to keep Trump from sabotaging his own administration.
Romney will be the grown-up in the war room. When Trump serves up the crazy, Romney can talk him down. And as an added bonus, teetotaler Trump will have someone with whom to enjoy his Arnold Palmers at the White House cocktail parties.
2. Romney is a turnaround guy
Private equity gets a bad rap. Most people don’t even know what private equity firms do. They love Shark Tank, but they hate Bain Capital. When Romney was running for president in 2012, the words, “Bain Capital,” were uttered as an epithet requiring no further explanation.
As president and general manager of Bain Capital, Romney led a firm that specialized in turnarounds. The private equity concern bought up companies that often had crushing debt, and attempted to turn them into profitable operations. Romney’s critics observed that Bain Capital’s success record was sketchy. There is a lot of risk in private equity; it’s a “you win some, you lose some” kind of business. While some companies failed anyway, Bain Capital’s financial successes outweighed its failures.
Mitt Romney’s introduction to the national stage was the 2002 Olympics. Salt Lake City got into a bit of scandal for bribing international Olympic officials in a bid to bring the games to Utah. The committee was over budget and mired in bad publicity. Romney played the turnaround guy, nixing 5-star travel plans and free pizza for volunteers. The 2002 games sold 95% of available tickets and boasted a financial surplus at its conclusion.
After the Olympics, Romney became governor of Massachusetts, where he again, played the role of the turnaround guy. Granted, his solutions were a mix of spending cuts and increased tax revenues, but he was able to balance the state budget.
American foreign policy needs a turnaround guy. Foreign policy under Obama has been indecisive and meandering with no clear goals. This is where Romney can help, again, as long as he can project the Reagan ideal of peace through strength, and avoid the U.S. becoming mired in foreign conflicts.
3. Romney has foresight
A mere four years ago, Democrats mocked Mitt Romney for stating that Russia is America’s number one geopolitical foe. All we’ve heard from democrats over the past six months is Russia! Russia! Russia!
While Russia is not the enemy of Western interests that the U.S.S.R. was, it is certainly clear that Vladimir Putin and his predecessor, Dmitry Medvedev have embraced a foreign policy that aims to put Moscow on equal footing with the U.S. as a global force. It is also clear that this desire for supremacy in the East escaped Barack Obama’s notice, until it became politically expedient to find a scapegoat upon whom to blame the WikiLeaks email scandal. From the beginning of Obama’s tenure, the U.S. and Russia had a “reset” of relations, during which time Russia invaded Ukraine and Crimea, and inserted its military into Syria, and yet the current administration has seemed unalarmed.
Also on Obama’s watch we have seen aggressive destabilization of the Middle East, with the governments of Egypt and Libya overthrown, a languishing war in Yemen, and the emergence of ISIS.
A Secretary of State needs foresight, the ability to recognize and acknowledge the present dangers and future threats to a peaceful foreign policy. Recognizing the fact that Russia was positioning itself as a rival super power, and expressing that unpopular opinion in the face of ridicule is admirable. Unlike Hillary Clinton, the cautious Mitt Romney is likely to consider the ramifications of decisions—what happens after an action or as a result of a policy decision.
4. Romney has independence
Like Donald Trump, Mitt Romney is financially independent. While the Clintons used public office as a revenue stream, the chances of Romney attempting to profit from the office are slim.
While he is certainly an establishment figure, he does not appear to be financially beholden to the party or to special interests or foreign nations.
Romney is also politically independent, promoting an ill-gotten state-wide healthcare proposal which ultimately was the original blueprint for Obamacare. As a governor he was willing to try a less-than-conservative approach to solve a problem, and later, having had experience with the less-than-perfect solution, he did not think it was a sustainable idea at the national level.
Those who lack independence are unlikely to seek novel solutions to persistent problems, instead worrying about the opinions and interests of their friends or benefactors. That shouldn’t be the case with Romney. He has demonstrated that he can bring groups together to achieve a common goal and doesn’t mind stepping on a few toes.
Will Romney be willing to step on President Trump’s toes? We can’t know for sure, but my guess is that he will, if he believes Trump is making a terrible mistake.
5. Romney can keep free market diplomacy on the table
Romney has expressed a belief in free markets, the wealth that they build and how free markets lead to a more peaceful world. It’s always bad idea to shoot your customers.
Donald Trump’s protectionist trade policies, including tariffs and punishment for American businesses that outsource labor, are likely to decrease supply and increase consumer prices while doing little to increase employment and wages. Romney could well force Trump to realize how intertwined international trade and foreign policy have become.
Trump wants to renegotiate trade deals. Romney can help by discouraging trade policies that harm foreign relations.
Romney is also a far better communicator than Trump, whose freewheeling monologues that flit from one subject to another can leave you wondering what he just said. Trump needs an intermediary like Romney just to keep him from infuriating our allies and emboldening our enemies.
As foreign leaders are skittish about Trump, it would behoove him to assuage their anxieties by appointing a Secretary of State who is successful in his own right, confident, and temperate. If Romney is really good, he might even be able to persuade the president to give up Twitter.