An Open Letter to President Trump: Imagining the U-Turn That Could Shock the World

Mr. President,
This letter is an exercise in political imagination—not a prediction, and certainly not an endorsement. I do not expect its suggestions to awaken your conscience. But with you, a dramatic reversal never seems entirely impossible. That is not necessarily a compliment. It does leave room to imagine something almost nobody expects: that you spend your final two years repairing the country rather than deepening its wounds.

Picture this: a sweeping Democratic victory has cost your party both the House and the Senate. You face a Congress prepared to investigate your administration and challenge your agenda. You could spend the next two years threatening, blaming, and settling scores. Nobody would be surprised.

Or make those years useful and do something genuinely shocking.

This is not an argument that an undiscovered Abraham Lincoln waits beneath your public persona. It is a challenge to a man who dislikes being told what he cannot do because only he can fix it.

You cannot undo your past. But why should your final chapter merely repeat it?

What would you like history to say?
You want your name attached to greatness, not merely to buildings. But a building and a place in history are different kinds of property. You can purchase one, but you cannot dictate history’s judgment.

Your critics see a man consumed by himself: a narcissist, hungry for admiration, intolerant of criticism, unwilling to accept responsibility, and indifferent to suffering. These are observations about your public conduct, not a clinical diagnosis.

Many Americans have reached a harsher judgment: dishonest, corrupt, vindictive, interested in the country chiefly when it serves you. You can denounce them, but denunciation is not revision.

Would you rather confirm their verdict—or force them to reckon with a final chapter they never imagined you capable of writing?

Start by changing the people—and the direction
Appointing the reviled Stephen Miller as your next Chief of Staff signals confrontation, not reconsideration. Choosing him to oversee reconciliation would resemble hiring an arsonist to inspect the fire extinguishers.

But you could reverse that choice. You have never treated personnel decisions as sacred commitments.

The important departure, however, would not be his. It would be yours—from policies and habits that have inflicted so much damage.

Changing an aide makes headlines. Changing course could make history.

Try an unfamiliar kind of victory
Invite Democratic congressional leaders to the White House. They would expect a confrontation. Ask instead: What can we accomplish together before I leave office?

Then let them answer. Not every silence requires another account of your electoral greatness.

Begin with healthcare. Negotiate more affordable coverage, protections for vulnerable patients, and lower prescription costs. You need not embrace the Democratic platform. You need to decide that Americans receiving care matters more than Democrats receiving credit.

On housing, support construction, necessary infrastructure, and practical help for households priced out of a home. Deliver a serious beginning, not another magnificent announcement.

On the cost of living, examine which policies ease household burdens and which increase them. Let evidence change your decisions. Defending yesterday’s mistake is not an economic strategy.

And restore federal funding for the scientific community. Help reverse the brain drain America is experiencing by giving researchers stable support and reasons to build their futures here. Stop treating universities and laboratories as political adversaries. America’s scientific leadership cannot survive on patriotic slogans while the scientists sustaining it look elsewhere.

You could call these agreements historic. You probably would. The country could tolerate the adjective if you delivered the noun.

None of this requires becoming a Democrat. It requires discovering that governing with opponents can accomplish more than endlessly campaigning against them.

Give the world a different surprise
Abroad, the stakes are greater—and failure more dangerous.

Reassure European allies that American commitment is unshakable and does not depend on your mood or their willingness to flatter you. Restore America’s indispensable partnership and friendship with Canada. Press NATO partners to assume greater responsibilities without treating the alliance as a protection racket. Reliability is an instrument of power, not a concession.

With Iran, pursue a serious negotiated settlement: verifiable nuclear commitments, reciprocal obligations, and clear consequences for violations. An agreement must withstand scrutiny, not merely provide a backdrop for your signature. Yes, you could put your name on it.

With China, seek a fair trade agreement that protects legitimate American economic and security interests. Competition does not require a fresh confrontation every morning.

End your most damaging trade war, which has damaged businesses and inflicted pain on every household.

In Ukraine, pursue a peace Ukrainians help shape and have credible reasons to trust. Ending the fighting is not enough if the agreement leaves Ukraine exposed to renewed coercion or attack. Make Ukrainian participation, credible security arrangements, and coordination with Europe indispensable—not inconvenient details.

These outcomes are not yours to command. Other countries have interests, agency, and memories. They will not surrender them because you announce that a deal is inevitable. Make American power help durable agreements possible—or merely supply the next threat.

Cooperation is not absolution
Here is the condition you would probably dislike most: accountability remains.

Democrats should not abandon legitimate investigations because you help pass a healthcare bill. Courts should not compromise their independence because you reassure allies. No diplomatic achievement should buy you immunity.

Constitutional limits would remain; so would your responsibility for your future conduct.

Two productive years would not erase the damage that preceded them because repair is not erasure and accomplishment is not virtue. The country would owe you an honest assessment of a change—not forgiveness.

The surprise would be sustaining it
Must all this begin with a moral awakening? No, we need not stake the proposition on something definitely uncertain. Start with what you want most: what serves my interest now?

Two more years of retaliation might satisfy your anger. They would also strengthen the judgment that you cannot distinguish the presidency from personal vindictiveness and vendettas.

Changing course would bring a different frustration. Your opponents would question your motives. Some would give you less credit than you believed you deserved.

Do you want to preserve an accomplished achievement rather than destroy it to punish the insufficiently grateful? That would be the real test.

Your disregard for consistency could, for once, serve a constructive purpose. Announce that circumstances have changed because of the mid-term elections, that another approach is necessary, and—naturally—that only you can deliver it, as you customarily claim.

Mr. President, political imagination is not political amnesia. Nothing proposed here would wipe away your horrific record at home or abroad. Those actions, their victims, and their consequences would remain part of history.

But a sustained, consequential U-turn could become the most astonishing feature of your presidency. Perhaps your legacy would be more for that reversal than for the damage that made it necessary—not because the damage vanished, but because the departure was so unexpected and its benefits so substantial.

That is the possibility this letter imagines, however improbable.

You have spent years insisting that you alone can do what others cannot.

Try doing what almost nobody believes you will.

Sincerely,
Alon Ben-Meir