What is the “Madman Theory” That Trump is Using to Change the World

Trump and the Madman Theory

Madman Theory Applied

Allies Pressured by Fear

According to BBC News, Donald Trump has made unpredictability his most characteristic political hallmark.

In his ambiguous statements — like when he said, “Maybe I will. Maybe I won’t,” when speaking about a possible attack on Iran — lies a deliberate strategy: keeping the world guessing.

This way of acting is no coincidence but rather a well-studied doctrine: the so-called “Madman Theory.”

The principle is simple but unsettling.

Madman Theory: Trump and His Unpredictability as a Political Weapon

What is the “Madman Theory” That Trump is Using to Change the World – PHOTO: shutterstock

The Madman Theory Trump is using consists of convincing adversaries that one is willing to do anything, no matter how irrational it may seem, to force them to give in.

At the beginning of his term, Trump gave signs of moderation.

He let people believe he would hold back military actions to reopen negotiations with Iran.

However, he ended up ordering bombings anyway.

Madman Theory in History

Madman Theory: Trump PHOTO: Shutterstock

The pattern became established: the only predictable thing about Trump was his unpredictability.

This tactic transformed American foreign policy into a direct reflection of the president’s personality.

Professor Peter Trubowitz of the London School of Economics observes that by centralizing decisions, Trump made foreign policy dependent on his moods.

Unpredictability became doctrine.

Madman Theory: Results and Risks

Madman Theory: Trump PHOTO: Shutterstock

And its effects have been tangible: it has repositioned U.S. allies and provoked unprecedented tensions with enemies.

The concept has a famous historical precedent.

Richard Nixon used the “Madman Theory” during the Vietnam War, instructing his advisors to hint to the North Vietnamese that he was capable of anything.

The goal was to intimidate them into accepting a deal.

Allies Tense in the Face of Unpredictability

Trump’s unpredictability – Shutterstock

For Trump, the strategy had commercial logic: creating uncertainty as a negotiation tool.

On the international stage, his style generated mixed reactions.

He began his second term with friendly gestures toward Vladimir Putin while insulting allies like Canada.

He even suggested the military annexation of Greenland and reclaiming the Panama Canal.

The Madman Theory in NATO

Trump’s Foreign Policy Redefining World Politics PHOTO: Shutterstock

His words and gestures raised alarms about the U.S. commitment to NATO.

Article 5 of the Alliance, which guarantees mutual defense, was called into question.

Former British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace went so far as to say it was “in intensive care.”

Dominic Grieve, Conservative Attorney General in the United Kingdom, argued that the transatlantic alliance was “finished.”

Divided Over the Doctrine of Unpredictability

Trump’s Foreign Policy Redefining World Politics PHOTO: Shutterstock

Inside the White House, leaks revealed disdain for European allies.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wrote in a message: “I completely share his disgust for the freeloading Europeans.”

In Munich, Vice President JD Vance stated that the U.S. would no longer be the guarantor of European security.

These positions seemed to dismantle eighty years of transatlantic solidarity.

Trump, Iran, and Strategic Limits

Professor Trubowitz noted that Trump cast serious doubts on the reliability of U.S. international commitments.

In other words, nothing was guaranteed.

That uncertainty gave him negotiating power.

The logic was simple: if there are no certainties, more can be extracted at the negotiating table.

Unpredictability as a Weakness in Negotiations

The tactic produced concrete results.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced an increase in defense spending from 2.3% to 2.5% of GDP.

But at the last NATO summit, the figure rose even higher, to 5%, with nearly all allies following suit.

However, there’s an inherent problem with this strategy.

Allies and Enemies in the Face of the Madman Theory

The “Madman Theory” requires credibility.

If rivals begin to see unpredictability as a stable trait, it stops being intimidating.

Julie Norman of University College London notes that it’s hard to predict what will happen day-to-day, but that’s precisely Trump’s intention.

The problem arises when adversaries learn the pattern.

Trump and the Iranian Nuclear Threat

Vladimir Putin seems immune to both Trump’s charm and his threats.

After a phone call, Trump said he felt “disappointed” because Putin wasn’t ready to end the war in Ukraine.

In Iran, Trump’s Madman Theory strategy could have the opposite effect of what he wants.

Former British Foreign Secretary William Hague warned that his attacks could push Iran to develop nuclear weapons.

Trump, the Madman Theory and an Uncertain Future

Professor Michael Desch of the University of Notre Dame shares that concern.

According to him, the Iranians might conclude they need the ultimate deterrent, learning from the examples of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi.

Instead of surrendering, Iran might consolidate its regime.

And although Trump promised to end the “forever wars,” his decision to attack Iranian nuclear facilities was among the most unpredictable of his presidency.

Unpredictability and Global Security

In the long term, the question is whether this doctrine can sustain alliances.

Allies like Germany are already talking about operational independence from the U.S.

Professor Trubowitz emphasizes that U.S. strategic priorities have shifted.

For the MAGA coalition, China is the primary problem, not Russia.

Madman Theory: Redefining NATO

That forces Europe to redefine its security architecture.

Although Trump’s unpredictability has shaken the world order, it has also exposed its limits.

His doctrine mixes conscious calculation with immutable personal traits.

And while it has had an effect, especially among allies who yielded under pressure, it has also sown doubts about the reliability of the U.S. as a strategic partner.