Written by David Bass   

Figuring out the unifying theme in Donald Trump’s foreign policy has befuddled lots of smart folks lately. The Hill’s Michael Goldfien alternately describes a Trump Doctrine of “Strategic Ignorance” and “Don’t Know, Don’t Care.” Others call it “America First.” The Washington Post’s Mark Thiessen called it an “incoherent philosophical mishmash” stating “…the Trump Doctrine is that doctrines are for losers.”

A much simpler truth has been hiding in plain sight all along. The Trump Doctrine for foreign policy is Money First. Coming from a businessman who brags incessantly about his wealth and deal-making skill, this is no surprise.

His own chief policy advisor, retired Air Force colonel Sam Clovis, admitted this, saying “[o]ne, we want to take a very clear worldview in our foreign policy, dealing with the national interest, and let that be our organizing principles. Two is that we want to make sure that we engage in free markets, but we want those markets to be fairer as well. And three, if we do not have strong economic recovery, we can’t do the other two,” said Clovis. “If that’s not a Trump doctrine, I don’t know what is.”

When we examine the specifics, the unifying theme is money. Good financial bargains will be Trump’s guide.

On Mexico: Trump has pledged to build a wall to keep out illegal immigrants, and charge Mexico a one-time payment of $5-10 billion. Trump’s campaign website describes this as an easy business decision for Mexico.

On the Iran nuclear deal: While calling the deal “disastrous” he framed his objections primarily in monetary terms, saying it "gave back to Iran $150 billion and gave us nothing." Trump refers to a nuclear arms deal in business terms. “We have a horrible contract, but we do have a contract. I have all my life — I love to buy bad contracts where … people go bust, and I make those contracts good. This is a perfect example of taking over a bad contract. I will find something in that contract that will be very, very well-scrutinized by us, and I think they will not be able to do it, whatever it may be.” He’s content to stop there, complaining “[a]nd, by the way, making money. You see Russia [is] selling missiles and Germany’s involved. Everybody’s involved now with Iran selling them stuff. We’re probably [going to] be the only ones that won’t be selling them anything, but that’s all gone now.”

On nukes for Japan: Trump’s views on allowing Japan to build its own nuclear arsenal are also expressed in financial terms: “I would rather have them not arm, but I’m not going to continue to lose this tremendous amount of money.” The prospect of a conflict between a nuclear-armed Japan and North Korea would be “a terrible thing,” but “if they do, they do. We can’t be the policemen to the world and have $19 trillion in debt, going up to $21 trillion and we’re sitting on a bubble that’s going to explode and we’re going to all end up you know where.” After all, who wants to end up ‘you know where’ with extra debt?

On Iraq: Leading up to the invasion of Iraq in early 2003, Trump’s primary concern was how it would affect a $485 million junk-grade bond offering for his Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts business. As to the war itself, he was ambivalent, telling Fox Business’ Neil Cavuto that Bush needed to make a decision on Iraq. “Either you attack or you don’t attack,” he said, while offering no opinion of his own. Shortly after the invasion, Trump’s focus was on Wall Street’s reaction, predicting the market would “go up like a rocket” after apparent early successes.

A few month’s later, Trump began voicing concerns about the war’s cost, ignoring the fact that the war was financed with no new taxes and no offsetting domestic spending cuts when he told Hardball’s Chris Matthews: “I would love to see New York City and some of the cities and some of the states get some of the money that`s going toward Iraq and other places, because you know, they really need and it they need it badly.” He repeated this theme in later interviews, remaining ambivalent about “whether or not we should have been in Iraq in the first place.” In other words, if we can make more money off war, let’s have war.

On the U.N.: “Do they ever settle anything? It’s just like a political game. The United Nations — I mean the money we spend on the United Nations.” Last summer, however, he bragged that he could save the U.N. $1 billion on the projected costs of renovating its headquarters complex in Manhattan.

On NATO: Trump has repeatedly complained that NATO allies don’t pay their fair share in relation to the U.S. “Either they have to pay up for past deficiencies or they have to get out. And if it breaks up NATO, it breaks up NATO.” In the middle of his party’s nominating convention, he stirred this nest again, saying the U.S. would only defend NATO states attacked by Russia if those nations “have fulfilled their obligations to us.” In other words, pay us enough, and we’ll be your friend.

On Brexit: Trump spent the day following the Brexit vote promoting his Turnberry golf course in Scotland. “When the pound goes down, more people are coming to Turnberry, frankly. For traveling and for other things, I think it very well could turn out to be a positive.”

In every case, the unifying theme is that we must negotiate deals that are good for the U.S. in financial terms. Money First.