#495 — Foreign Policy for Sale
In this episode of Making Sense with Sam Harris, Sam Harris and Anne Applebaum discuss how the Trump administration has transformed American foreign policy through the dismantling of diplomatic institutions and the appointment of individuals with personal or business ties to Trump. Applebaum examines the alignment between American corporate interests and far-right European parties, describing how U.S. foreign policy now supports opposition movements that aim to destabilize the European Union rather than working with established governments.
The conversation also covers the current state of the Ukraine war, European rearmament in response to Russian aggression, and growing doubts among European leaders about U.S. commitment to NATO defense guarantees. Applebaum explains how Ukraine has developed capabilities for long-range strikes against Russian infrastructure while Russian forces continue to suffer high casualties. The episode explores how these developments reflect broader shifts in transatlantic relations and the increasing likelihood that Europe will pursue independent security strategies.
This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Oct 1, 2026 episode of the Making Sense with Sam Harris
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
1-Page Summary
Foreign Policy Exploitation by Trump: Corruption and Ideological Revolution
Sam Harris and Anne Applebaum examine how the Trump administration has transformed American foreign policy into an instrument of corruption, aiming for an ideological revolution that benefits cronies and authoritarian interests while dismantling established international norms.
Trump Administration Seeks to Dismantle Diplomatic Institutions and Norms
Applebaum describes a coordinated effort to dismantle traditional American diplomatic institutions and replace them with individuals who have close personal or business ties to Trump. Instead of experienced diplomats, positions are now filled by friends of the president, business associates, and ideologues, creating enormous potential for graft and self-dealing. She identifies multiple ideological factions at work: white supremacists, Christian nationalists seeking to transform America's secular state, libertarians aiming to destroy the "administrative state," and opportunists seeking profit.
Trump Administration Aligns Ideological Goals With Corporate Profits Globally
Applebaum highlights how American tech and cryptocurrency companies support far-right parties in Europe to oppose regulatory constraints. These companies financially back parties like the AFD in Germany because deregulation serves their interests. She notes a profound shift: U.S. foreign policy now focuses on building ties with far-right and opposition parties in Europe rather than established governments, supporting movements that aim to undermine the European Union and destabilize democratic governance for both ideological change and corporate gains.
U.S. Backing for European Far-right and Its Justifying Misconceptions
Supporting Far-right European Parties Relies On False Premises About Immigration and Security Threats
Applebaum, referencing her experience in Poland, explains that current immigration policies under centrist governments are actually stricter than those under previous far-right governments. Contrary to right-wing rhetoric, borders are not open and there is no mass influx of migrants threatening civilization. Harris discusses how "civilizational concerns" about Islamism and immigration sometimes prompt support for far-right parties, but notes this focus often obscures the clear neo-Nazi elements within these movements that threaten liberal democracy.
Far-right European Parties Like AfD Contradict Western Values
Applebaum details that the AfD in Germany is openly pro-Russian, harbors neo-Nazis among its members, and aims to withdraw Germany from the European Union. She highlights a paradox: while the U.S. urges Europe to rearm, it risks empowering a German government sympathetic to Russia and disinterested in opposing Moscow. Applebaum argues that U.S. support for these movements, described as efforts to "protect the West," actually masks projects to destabilize Europe and promote extreme politics for the benefit of Trump-aligned corporate interests.
Nato Credibility, European Rearmament, Escalating Russian Threat
Europe's Rearmament Driven by Real, Rising Russian Threat, Not Trump's Influence
Applebaum explains that European rearmament results from a clear and rising Russian threat, not Trump's influence. She details a series of Russian acts including sabotage attacks, assassination attempts, cyber operations, and military provocations that have fundamentally changed European threat perceptions. While Trump's inconsistency as an ally contributes to anxiety, the visible escalation of the war in Ukraine and an emboldened Russia are the main drivers for Europe's defense shift.
European Leaders Doubt U.S. Commitment to Nato Article 5
Applebaum notes that while few European leaders would openly express doubts about U.S. commitment to NATO's Article 5 defense guarantees, many question in private whether the U.S. would honor those guarantees. Ambiguous potential scenarios—like an accidental missile strike or border incursions—create uncertainty about whether NATO would respond. This environment prompts countries across Europe to pursue independent defense strategies, viewing the U.S. as unreliable. Applebaum concludes that Europe is increasingly compelled to rely on its own resources to ensure security.
Ukraine War: Current State and Victory Prospects
Ukrainian Forces Gain Tactical Edge With Tech Innovation and Drone Superiority; Russian Constraints Persist
Applebaum describes a static front defined by a 20-30 kilometer-wide no-man's-land saturated with drone surveillance, making any Russian advance effectively suicidal. While Ukrainian forces secure limited territorial gains, Russian tactics have devolved to sending waves of personnel into the kill zone, resulting in exceptionally high casualties without meaningful progress.
Russia Targets Ukrainian Civilian Infrastructure With Chechnya/Syria Tactics
In parallel with the front-line deadlock, Russia has intensified attacks on Ukrainian civilian infrastructure including kindergartens, hospitals, and academic institutions. Applebaum notes this strategy follows Russian operations in Chechnya and Syria, with the goal of maximizing destruction. Russia has deployed new jet-powered drones, while Ukrainian forces work to develop countermeasures.
Ukraine Gains Long-Range Means to Harm Russian Economic, Military Infrastructure
A significant development is Ukraine's capacity to conduct long-range strikes deep inside Russia. Ukrainian forces now conduct daily raids on Russian oil refineries, removing an estimated 30 to 40 percent of Russia's refining capability. These strikes compromise Russia's economic output and military logistics, offering Ukraine a powerful asymmetric tool.
1-Page Summary
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- While the Trump administration did appoint some individuals with personal or business ties to the president, many career diplomats and experienced officials remained in key positions, and the practice of political appointments is not unique to this administration.
- The claim that the administration was dominated by white supremacists and Christian nationalists is disputed by some analysts, who argue that the administration’s policy decisions were often driven by pragmatic or transactional considerations rather than a unified ideological agenda.
- The assertion that American tech and cryptocurrency companies broadly support far-right European parties is contested; while some individuals or entities may have provided support, there is limited public evidence of widespread, coordinated financial backing from major U.S. firms.
- U.S. foreign policy has historically engaged with a range of political actors abroad, including opposition parties, as part of broader diplomatic strategies, and such engagement is not unique to the Trump administration.
- Some critics argue that concerns about immigration and security threats in Europe are not entirely unfounded, as there have been documented challenges related to integration and security in some countries, even if the scale is often exaggerated in political rhetoric.
- The AfD’s pro-Russian stance and presence of extremist elements are acknowledged, but the party also has a significant base of support among voters concerned with economic and social issues, not solely extremist ideology.
- European doubts about U.S. commitment to NATO predate the Trump administration, with similar concerns arising during previous administrations due to shifting U.S. foreign policy priorities.
- European rearmament is influenced by a complex set of factors, including long-standing debates about burden-sharing within NATO and evolving security environments, not solely the Russian threat or U.S. policy shifts.
- The effectiveness and sustainability of Ukraine’s long-range strikes on Russian infrastructure are debated, with some analysts cautioning that such actions may provoke escalatory responses or have limited long-term impact on Russia’s overall warfighting capability.
Actionables
- you can track and compare the public statements and actions of political leaders and parties in your country with their actual policy outcomes to spot discrepancies and potential self-serving motives, then share your findings in a simple online post or with friends to encourage critical awareness of political narratives versus reality.
- a practical way to recognize and resist the influence of foreign or corporate-backed misinformation is to set up keyword alerts for far-right party funding, tech lobbying, and foreign policy shifts in your preferred news aggregator, so you can quickly spot patterns and question the motives behind sudden changes in political messaging or alliances.
- you can support local or online educational initiatives that teach media literacy and fact-checking skills, such as volunteering to help create or distribute easy-to-understand guides that help others identify propaganda, misleading narratives about immigration, or the manipulation of international events for ideological or corporate gain.
Get access to the context and additional materials
Foreign Policy Exploitation by Trump: Corruption and Ideological Revolution
Sam Harris and Anne Applebaum examine how the Trump administration has transformed American foreign policy into an unprecedented instrument of corruption, aiming for an ideological revolution that benefits cronies and authoritarian interests while eroding established international norms.
Trump Administration Seeks to Dismantle Diplomatic Institutions and Norms
Applebaum describes a concerted effort by those around Trump to raze traditional American diplomatic institutions and expert-driven norms. A coordinated group of ideologues, businesspeople, and cronies aims to remove established diplomatic expertise and practices, replacing long-standing customs of U.S. foreign policy with their own decision-making. Rather than experienced diplomats, these positions are now filled by friends of the president, business associates, and ideologues, allowing them to become the official face and voice of America on the world stage.
A Coordinated Group of Ideologues, Businesspeople, and Cronies Aims to Replace Traditional Diplomatic Expertise and Established American Foreign Policy Practices With Their Own Decision-Making
The new approach involves clearing away the bureaucratic structures and expert-driven processes that have guided American foreign policy for nearly a century. In their place, individuals with close personal or business ties to Trump, or those adherent to hard ideological lines, are appointed. This creates enormous potential for graft, self-dealing, and lawlessness, as American foreign policy becomes a vehicle for private enrichment and the advancement of ideological agendas.
Ideological Factions: White Supremacists, Christian Nationalists, Libertarians, and Opportunists
Applebaum identifies multiple ideological factions working in concert. There are proponents of Western civilization, often coded language for white supremacists, as well as Christian nationalists intent on turning the secular American state into a Christian one. Libertarians seek to destroy the "administrative state"—in practice, the American government itself. Finally, there are opportunists drawn by the opportunity to profit from the resulting power vacuums.
Trump Administration Aligns Ideological Goals With Corporate Profits Globally
Applebaum highlights how Trump-aligned companies and U.S. businesses are using American foreign policy as a tool for international business, especially in Europe. The administration’s ideological goals are closely intertwined with corporate profit motives.
Tech and Crypto Firms Back Far-right Movements to Oppose Corporate Regulation Constraints
Far-right and libertarian parties in Europe, labeled as enemies of ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Foreign Policy Exploitation by Trump: Corruption and Ideological Revolution
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- While the Trump administration did appoint some individuals with personal or business ties to the president, many key diplomatic and national security positions continued to be filled by experienced professionals and career officials.
- The claim that U.S. foreign policy was transformed solely into an instrument of corruption and ideological revolution is contested; some argue that the administration pursued policies—such as increased pressure on China and renegotiation of trade agreements—that reflected longstanding American interests.
- The assertion that the administration aligned exclusively with far-right or opposition parties in Europe overlooks continued engagement with established governments and traditional allies on issues like NATO funding and counterterrorism.
- The involvement of American tech and crypto companies in European politics is a broader trend not unique to the Trump administration, and support for deregulation is a common business interest rather than evidence of a coordinated ideological project.
- Critics of the prev ...
Actionables
- you can track and compare the public statements and actions of current diplomats and foreign policy officials with those of previous administrations to spot shifts in priorities, then share a simple summary with friends or family to spark conversations about how these changes might affect international relationships and norms.
- a practical way to recognize the influence of business and ideological interests in foreign policy is to follow the business dealings and political donations of companies mentioned in the news, then note any patterns between their interests and shifts in international policy, helping you become more aware of how private interests might shape public decisio ...
Get access to the context and additional materials
U.S. Backing for European Far-right and Its Justifying Misconceptions
Supporting Far-right European Parties Relies On the False Premise That Moderate and Centrist Governments Have Failed to Address Security Threats Like Islamism and Immigration
Anne Applebaum, referencing her experience in Poland, highlights that current immigration policies under centrist and center-right coalition governments are stricter than those under the previous far-right, nationalist government. This trend is present in most European countries, with only a few exceptions. Contrary to right-wing rhetoric, borders are not open, there is no mass influx of migrants, and the notion that civilization is at risk is unfounded. These misconceptions fuel support for far-right parties by perpetuating the belief that only they will defend Europe from perceived existential threats.
Sam Harris discusses how “civilizational concerns” about Islamism, unchecked immigration, and anti-Semitism sometimes prompt support for the far-right AfD in Germany and similar parties elsewhere. He notes that while anti-Semitism on the left and so-called "red-green alliances" (leftist and Islamist partnerships) feature prominently in debate, this focus often obscures or minimizes the clear neo-Nazi elements found within far-right parties. Supporters may rationalize their stance by claiming not to be Nazis, or that members of these parties aren’t Nazis, while neglecting how these far-right groups threaten liberal democracy and Jewish communities.
Far-right European Parties Like AfD Contradict Western Values
Anne Applebaum details that the AfD in Germany is an openly and aggressively pro-Russian party, harboring neo-Nazis among its parliamentary members. The party’s goals include drastically altering the nature of the modern German state, withdrawing Germany from the European Union, and abolishing the judicial and legal boundaries that have historically positioned Germany as a stabilizing force in Europe. AfD’s ambition to remove Germany from the EU would cause significant economic chaos and disorder, and the party demonstrates a sustained interest in undermining European stability.
She also highlights a paradox for U.S. policy: while the U.S. government urges Europe to rearm and Germany specifically to take a stronger defense stance, it risks empowering a German go ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
U.S. Backing for European Far-right and Its Justifying Misconceptions
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- While centrist and moderate governments have implemented stricter immigration policies in some cases, public perception of security threats and cultural change may still drive support for far-right parties, regardless of actual policy differences.
- The assertion that there is "no mass influx of migrants" may not fully account for regional variations within Europe, where some countries or localities have experienced significant demographic changes or strains on public services.
- Concerns about Islamism, anti-Semitism, and immigration are not exclusive to far-right supporters; individuals across the political spectrum may share these concerns, even if they disagree on solutions.
- Not all supporters of far-right parties are motivated by neo-Nazi ideology; some may be primarily concerned with issues such as national sovereignty, economic policy, or dissatisfaction with mainstream parties.
- The characterization of all U.S. support for European far-right movements as being driven by corporate interests or Trump associates may not reflect the diversity of motivations among American actors, which ca ...
Actionables
- You can fact-check news stories and social media posts about immigration and security by comparing them with official government statistics and independent reports, then share a simple summary of your findings with friends or family who express concerns about these topics, helping to counteract misinformation in your immediate circle.
- A practical way to recognize and avoid supporting extremist groups is to review the platforms and public statements of political parties or candidates before voting or discussing politics, looking specifically for evidence of anti-democratic goals, foreign allegiances, or extremist rhetoric, and making a personal checklist to guide your choices.
- You can track which com ...
Get access to the context and additional materials
Nato Credibility, European Rearmament, Escalating Russian Threat
Europe's Rearmament Driven by Real, Rising Russian Threat, Not Trump's Influence
Anne Applebaum explains that the rearmament in Europe is not a result of Donald Trump’s policies or influence, but instead due to a clear and rising threat from Russia on Europe's eastern border—a threat that European leaders have only recently fully acknowledged. Applebaum details a series of Russian acts that have altered European threat perceptions, including frequent sabotage attacks, assassination attempts, cyber operations, and military provocations. There have been armed drones discovered at German airports, a failed attack on a Polish passenger train, and bombs and missiles landing near Polish borders. These direct actions by Russia have fundamentally changed the conversation within Europe about defense and security.
While Trump's lack of consistency as an ally has contributed to anxiety, Applebaum emphasizes that, absent the real threat from Russia, there would be no renewed push for rearmament. Previously, terrorist threats from the south or elsewhere did not require Europe to rethink mobilization, build larger armies, or develop military-industrial partnerships like the current deals with the Ukrainian drone industry. Now, the visible escalation of the war in Ukraine and an emboldened Russia are the main drivers for Europe’s defense shift. Trump’s perceived neutrality and the United States’ ambivalence about Ukraine only reinforce the need for European self-reliance.
European Leaders Doubt U.S. Commitment to Nato Article 5
Applebaum notes that few European leaders would openly express doubts about the United States’ commitment to NATO’s Article 5 defense guarantees. However, in private, many question whether the U.S. would honor those guarantees, especially under the current administration. This uncertainty arises from ambiguous potential scenarios: for example, if a missile were to strike a German city and Russia claimed it was an accident, or if unidentified border guards crossed into Estonia and made a raid, it remains unclear whether and how NATO—particularly the U.S.—would respond. These ambiguous situations cause anxiety among European policymakers, who remain uncertain about guaranteed U.S. military intervention.
Europe Rethinks Security Amid Doubts About U.S. Reliability
Thi ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Nato Credibility, European Rearmament, Escalating Russian Threat
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- While Russian aggression is a significant factor, some analysts argue that Europe’s rearmament is also influenced by longstanding U.S. pressure for NATO members to meet defense spending targets, which predates both the Trump administration and the recent escalation in Ukraine.
- The perception of U.S. unreliability is not universally shared across all European countries; some states, particularly in Eastern Europe, continue to view the U.S. as a critical security partner and advocate for a strong transatlantic alliance.
- European defense spending and cooperation have historically fluctuated in response to a variety of threats, including terrorism and instability in the Middle East and North Africa, not solely due to Russian actions.
- The assertion that Trump’s policies are the primary driver of European doubts about U.S. commitment may overlook broader trends of American political polarization and isolationist sentiment that have developed over multiple administrations.
- Some experts contend that NATO’s collective d ...
Actionables
- you can create a personal emergency readiness checklist tailored to current European security concerns, including steps like identifying safe meeting points, understanding local emergency alerts, and keeping essential documents and supplies accessible, so you feel more prepared for unexpected disruptions or threats.
- a practical way to strengthen your sense of security is to map out local and regional resources—such as embassies, consulates, and civil defense organizations—and save their contact information in your phone, so you know exactly where to turn for help or information if tensions rise.
- you can buil ...
Get access to the context and additional materials
Ukraine War: Current State and Victory Prospects
Ukrainian Forces Gain Tactical Edge With Tech Innovation and Drone Superiority; Russian Constraints Persist
Anne Applebaum describes the current front as a static or marginally advancing line, with Ukrainians managing to retake some territory. The modern battlefield is defined by a 20-30 kilometer-wide no-man's-land, saturated with omnipresent drone surveillance. Within this strip, all movement—be it a person, tank, or even a motorcycle—is visible and immediately vulnerable to drone strikes. This makes any Russian attempt to traverse or advance into this territory effectively suicidal, stalling their ability to press forward.
While Ukrainian forces have demonstrated some ability to maneuver and secure limited territorial gains, Russian tactics have devolved to repeatedly sending waves of personnel into the kill zone. These frontal assaults result in exceptionally high casualties for Russia, costing thousands of dead and wounded each month without yielding meaningful progress, thus highlighting Ukraine's tactical edge and Russia’s persistent operational constraints.
Russia Targets Ukrainian Civilian Infrastructure With Chechnya/Syria Tactics
In parallel with the front-line deadlock, Russia has intensified its campaign against Ukrainian civilian infrastructure. Applebaum notes a recent escalation in attacks targeting kindergartens, hospitals, academic institutions like the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences in Kiev, and a variety of civilian factories. The deliberate targeting follows a strategy reminiscent of Russian operations in Chechnya and Syria, with the goal of maximizing destruction and wrecking as much of Ukrainian society and economy as possible. The range and intensity of attacks on Kiev have increased, shifting the city from relative safety to a state of renewed insecurity and altering the psychological atmosphere across Ukraine.
Amid this assault, Russia h ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Ukraine War: Current State and Victory Prospects
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- While Ukrainian drone and technological innovations have provided tactical advantages, Russia has also adapted by improving its own electronic warfare, air defenses, and drone capabilities, leading to a technological arms race rather than clear Ukrainian superiority.
- The static nature of the front line suggests that neither side currently possesses a decisive advantage, and Ukrainian territorial gains have been limited and costly.
- Russian forces have demonstrated the ability to adapt their tactics over time, including the use of small-unit infiltration, electronic warfare, and increased use of their own drones, which complicates the narrative of purely "suicidal" Russian advances.
- High Russian casualties are significant, but Russia has shown a willingness to absorb losses and continue offensive operations, raising questions about the long-term sustainability of Ukraine's defensive edge.
- Attacks on civilian infrastructure, while destructive and widely condemned, have not yet resulted in the collapse of Ukrainian morale or society, and Ukraine has demonstrated resilience in maintaining essential services.
- The effectiveness and sustainability of Ukraine's long-range strikes on Russian infrastructure are debated, as Russia has managed to repair some facilities and reroute logistics, mitiga ...
Actionables
- you can strengthen your own digital privacy by setting up basic surveillance countermeasures at home, such as using privacy screens, disabling unnecessary device cameras and microphones, and practicing mindful online sharing, to reduce your visibility and vulnerability in a world where constant monitoring is increasingly common.
- a practical way to build resilience against psychological stress from external threats is to create a personal emergency comfort kit with items and routines that help you quickly regain a sense of safety and calm during periods of heightened anxiety or insecurity, such as blackout curtains, noise-canceling headphones, favorite books, or guided breathing exercises.
- you can experiment with asy ...
Get access to the context and additional materials
Create Summaries for anything on the web
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser
