From Iran to Disagreements over North Korea: Rex Tillerson’s Fall

After many clashes and disagreements between the two, Trump ended up removing Tillerson from office. The former secretary of state was a fish out of water in the administration from day one, as he was unable to win the president’s trust and influence his foreign policy.

The last straw was Iran, at least according to Donald Trump. This is how the president explains firing his secretary of state: “We — we got along actually quite well, but we disagreed on things. When you look at the Iran deal, I think it’s terrible. I guess he thought it was OK. I wanted to either break it or do something, and he felt a little bit differently.” While the difference of opinion on Iran certainly played an important role, it was actually only one of many clashes between the U.S. president and his “alleged” head of diplomacy. The former secretary of state was a fish out of water in the administration from day one, as he was unable to win the president’s trust, much less influence his foreign policy. He also failed at taking up the reins at the State Department, from which personnel is fleeing in a steady stream of resignations, and where many crucial posts have been unoccupied for months.

Disagreements between Tillerson and Trump were so frequent that they became barely newsworthy. The same issue kept arising: Tillerson would suggest a more moderate, traditionalist strategy, consistent with the orthodoxy of his (Republican or even Democrat) predecessors, whereas Trump would brutally disown him with constant divisive stunts. For example, when he discussed NATO’s role and relations with Vladimir Putin, Tillerson always tried to reassure longtime allies, while Trump kept scaring them with his attacks and threats not to defend countries that did not pay enough for their military budget. Regarding the Middle East or Korea, Tillerson attempted to preserve some part of Obama’s foreign policy, whereas Trump tore it down with the violence of a bulldozer. Eventually, the secretary of state’s position concerning Korea was implicitly validated when Trump agreed to a summit with Kim. However, in no way did he admit that Tillerson had been the advocate for negotiations. Furthermore, the president rushed into accepting the North Korean invitation without consulting diplomats who have experience in the area.

Paradoxically, oil tycoon Tillerson (he built his entire career as a top executive at Exxon) had an attitude that was less about global warming denial and more about conciliation than his boss regarding the Paris agreement on climate change. Then an incident occurred which may have been fatal: the leak that must have irredeemably compromised the relationship between the two. It occurred at a high-level summit at the White House, where military leaders were also in attendance along with the president and the secretary of state. Once Trump left, Tillerson allegedly called him a “moron.” Similar assessments re-emerged in Michael Wolff’s book, “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House.” Tillerson is a top executive who is accustomed to examining dossiers. Having to obey a president who refused to read even a two-page intelligence report must have been irritating, off-putting and exasperating for him.

Nevertheless, the president got rid of Tillerson before he decided to quit. His replacement is a faithful Trump supporter, the same Mike Pompeo who was chosen to head the CIA in order to “normalize” it, without much success, quite frankly. It remains to be seen whether Pompeo will have better results with the diplomats (the ones who are still left anyway).