| This is Bloomberg Opinion Today, the technocratic takeover of Bloomberg Opinion’s opinions. On Sundays, we look at the major themes of the week past and how they will define the week ahead. Sign up for the daily newsletter here . Well, that shoe took a while to drop, didn’t it? As soon as word emerged about Signalgate, the highly sensitive national-security conversation on the highly unsensitive communications app overheard by the none-too-sensitive journalist Jeff Goldberg, you knew at least one head was going to roll. And you had to think it would have featured the permanently pursed lips of National Security Adviser Mike Waltz. But that was weeks ago: Why did it take so long for the president to pull the trigger on one of the most unsurprising surprises in national security history? One explanation is President Donald Trump’s well-known aversion to admitting mistakes — as John Kelly, chief of staff during the president’s first romp through the White House, put it, “His manhood is at issue.” But I’m not sure that flies. Trump is never wrong, it’s the people around him who are wrong: Waltz’s predecessors Michael Flynn, HR McMaster and John Bolton were all jettisoned, and Trump’s manhood is all too secure. Another theory is that Waltz’s continued presence deflected attention from his enemies in the court of intrigue, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth in particular, who was on that Signal chat as well. It’s also possible that, like a drunken mob outside Newgate Prison in a Dickens novel, they simply enjoyed watching the spectacle of Waltz standing nervously on the scaffold. Vice President JD Vance probably brought the popcorn.  Mind the drop. Source: Museum of London/Heritage Images/Getty Images Wait, you might say, Waltz didn’t take the long drop — he received the prestigious post of US representative to the United Nations. Well, as John F. Kennedy said regarding Adlai Stevenson: Keep your friends close, and send your enemies to Turtle Bay. (OK, I may not have that exactly right, but whatever.) Recall that Trump previously gave that chalice to Nikki Haley, and it was pure poison. As my colleague Hal Brands has astutely observed, while all presidents have a foreign policy, Trump has five. That is, five warring factions for the president’s ear. And Waltz personified the “global hawks” — the advisers with the unfashionable temerity to insist these are Bad Things: Well, what’s done is done, and the last global hawk standing is Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who now has four jobs and zero backbone. As Andreas Kluth put it early in the week: “Rubio, ever articulate to the point of being glib, justifies whichever whim the president expressed most recently, even if the one at lunch contradicts the version at breakfast.” So what does Waltz leave behind? This, mostly:  Courtesy Michael Waltz as seen on Signal “Those were Waltz’s reactions in that Signal chat shortly after American warplanes, at Hegseth’s direction, bombed Houthi targets,” Andreas wrote soon after the national security adviser’s defenestration. “So much for disciplined statecraft in the Trump administration. His America is instead well on the way to becoming a personality cult run by amateurs on ego trips, a nation that wantonly sows chaos at home and abroad, a country that drops payloads as though they were emojis.” And, fist-pump emojis aside, they’re not even very good at punching down. Marc Champion, looking over the latest draft of Trump’s “nice country you’ve got there” offer for Ukraine, thinks President Volodymyr Zelenskiy is the leader who has really mastered the art of the deal. “There’s no hiding that Trump and his administration wanted more,” writes Marc. “The earlier drafts were so punitive that they seemed designed to force Zelenskiy into a position where he either rejected the approach outright, allowing Trump to cut off arms supplies and force Ukraine’s capitulation, or accept and be swept away by public outrage. Whatever the plan was, Trump also appears to have miscalculated. Zelenskiy fell into neither trap.” Speaking of Trumpian miscalculations, the US president’s thirst for strategic metals is leading him down a rabbit hole. “Trump cloaks his imperial ambitions for Ukraine and Greenland with the desire to exploit their rare earths,” writes Javier Blas. “Only this month, the White House announced several executive orders on critical minerals. Read what Trump signed, and it feels like USA Inc. is experiencing a supply crunch depriving it of key ingredients to make electric cars, fighter jets and super computers. The reality is very different. Market forces, rather than government intervention, can be counted on to resolve any shortages.” Zelenskiy may have played a weak hand brilliantly, but it’s still Putin who holds the Trump cards. “The White House deserves credit for revitalizing diplomacy to end the war in Ukraine,” write The Editors. “In its haste for a deal, however, its proposals have too often looked indistinguishable from a surrender on Russia’s terms. If the US wants to secure a lasting peace, it will need to put forward a more credible offer — and, most important, increase the pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin to accept.” I have little faith in this, perhaps the recent “counter-trend correction” shows markets have more. Even false hope is a kind of hope, I guess. “If almost all the announced tariffs are repealed and China and the US thrash out an accommodation, while Washington resumes enthusiastic support for Ukraine and works closely with European allies, then things will begin to look very different,” writes John Authers. “The mood music of the last few days suggests that all of this is just about conceivable. Tax cuts on top — which Trump is sensibly returning to the conversation — would juice things up further. Judge for yourselves how plausible that scenario is. Trump doesn’t admit errors.” Just ask Mike Waltz. Bonus Hanging Around Reading: What’s the World Got in Store ? - Merz’s chancellor confirmation, May 6: US-Europe Ties Will Worsen Before There’s Any Improvement — Max Hastings
- Fed rate decision, May 7: Six Ways the Federal Reserve Can Do a Better Job — Bill Dudley
- UK rate decision, May 8: The End of Pax Americana Holds Opportunities for the UK — Rosa Prince
I’m going to write about Canada now, and avoid the easy hits, eh? No jokes about maple syrup reserves, or milk in a bag, or the eternal mystery that is Tim Hortons, or the gravy-soaked deliciousness that is poutine, or the mystery-meaty deliciousness that is smoked meat or — well, I haven’t even made it past food yet, but you get the idea. [1] Daniel Moss and Hal Brands think the neighbors to the north are nothing to joke about. Nor is victorious Prime Minister Mark Carney. For Dan, the two-time former central bank chief is the latest step toward The Triumph of the Technocrats! “It would be a mistake to see Carney as just contra-Trump. He embodies the rise of central bankers to all-purpose troubleshooters,” Dan writes. “From Lucas Papademos, the one-time European Central Bank vice president, who led Greece through a short though perilous period when it teetered on collapse, to Mario Draghi, who became Italian prime minister when Rome, enduring a deep recession, was unable to break an impasse among parties about a new coalition lineup. Carney’s ascent, though, is in its own league.” Let’s hope so, because the threat to the south hasn’t diminished. “Donald Trump’s provocative, pointless threats to annex Canada helped Mark Carney win that country’s recent election. Now it will represent the prime minister’s defining challenge,” Hal writes. “While Americans understand the importance of the trade relationship, they may not realize just how crucial a friendly Canada is to their security and status as a global superpower — or just how much Trump risks squandering strategic blessings the US has long enjoyed.” It’s not just that the Canadians stood with US troops in two world wars and three Middle Eastern invasions, or that Canada provides protection against attacks over the pole, or that Ottawa and Washington share intelligence as freely as any two sovereign states. The most important lesson for Trump comes from millennia of military history: “Countries with insecure land borders deplete their strength near home. Countries that are invulnerable on their frontiers roam far and wide.” I’d be OK with deporting Tim Horton, but why would Trump want to smash a protective shield 5,500 miles long?  Source: X Notes: Please send Nanaimo bars and feedback to Tobin Harshaw at tharshaw@bloomberg.net. | 
