Trump like Dschingis Khan? Historians draws terrifying comparison

Historians draws terrifying comparison

“People who talk like this are very dangerous”

British historian Peter Frankopan draws a drastic parallel: Donald Trump’s strategy reminds of that of Dschingis Khan. What does he mean?

The British historian Peter Frankopan compares the political approach of US President Donald Trump with the methods of the Mongolian conqueror Dschingis Khan. In an interview with the magazine “Stern”, the Oxford professor describes that Trump’s unconventional approach to politics and external relationships has great similarities with the strategic maneuvers of the Mongol leader in the 13th century.

According to Frankopan, Trump’s policy is based on targeted maximum demands and a difficult to predict strategy of threats and fog candles. This can be compared to the tactics of Dschingis Khans, who frightened his opponents through unpredictable and often brutal measures.

The Mongols not only distinguished themselves through military violence, but also through effective government, financial organization and trade networks.

Trump also made it a habit to act with unexpected demands and threats – be it in relation to the Panama Canal, Greenland or the Gaza Strip. From a geopolitical point of view, this unpredictability can certainly bring advantages, according to Francopan: “This can be very practical. So you can do foreign policy.”

Despite the strategic advantages that Trump may achieve through his approach, Frankopan warns of the long -term consequences of such a style. Trump’s most recent idea is to transform the Gaza Strip into a “Riviera of the Middle East”. According to Frankopan, this reminds Stark of Adolf Hitler’s plans to build a motorway from Germany to the Crimea in order to establish a holiday region for Germans. “History teaches us: people who talk like this are very dangerous.”

The historian sees Europe with existential challenges. While Trump and other global actors pursued aggressive strategies, there is a lack of clear leadership and vision in Europe. “We are so busy looking at ourselves in the mirror that we hardly know what Europe should be there for,” said Frankopan. The central question is whether Europe continues to remain a reliable ally of the United States or develop an independent political identity towards Russia, China and other powers.