Muslim World Report

Trump Prioritizes Golf Dinner Over Dignified Transfer of Soldiers

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Apr 5, 2025 10:12 AM | 9 min read | 1749 words

TL;DR: Former President Donald Trump’s choice to attend a Saudi-backed LIV Golf fundraiser instead of honoring fallen U.S. soldiers has sparked significant outrage, questioning his commitment to veterans. This incident could reshape the Republican Party and military support ahead of the 2024 elections.

The Situation

Former President Donald Trump’s recent choice to prioritize a Saudi-backed LIV Golf fundraiser over attending the dignified transfer ceremony for four U.S. soldiers who lost their lives during a training exercise in Lithuania has sparked renewed outrage. The soldiers—Sgt. Jose Duenez Jr., Sgt. Edvin F. Franco, Pfc. Dante D. Taitano, and Staff Sgt. Troy S. Knutson-Collins—were honored with tributes from Lithuanian officials, reflecting a profound respect for military sacrifice that contrasts sharply with Trump’s actions.

This decision has been interpreted by many as emblematic of Trump’s longstanding disregard for military personnel, a sentiment reinforced by his infamous past remarks labeling veterans as “suckers and losers” (Hambrick & Mason, 1984).

This incident has ignited widespread condemnation from:

  • Veterans
  • Military families
  • The public at large

It raises essential questions about the cultural and political implications of such choices. Trump’s absence from a solemn ceremony not only casts doubt on his respect for those who serve but also reveals a troubling disconnection from the sacrifices made by American military personnel.

Historically, veterans have been a crucial demographic within Trump’s political base. However, episodes like this one could lead to significant discontent among military families and veterans, potentially reshaping the political landscape as we approach the 2024 elections (Kalyvas & Balcells, 2010).

Moreover, Trump’s actions serve as a stark reminder of the intertwining of personal interests and public service in contemporary politics. His decision to prioritize a high-profile golf event over honoring fallen soldiers raises alarms about trust in leadership. The optics of favoring commercial endeavors over the sacrifices of soldiers convey a troubling message that could erode public confidence in those who wield power (O’Sullivan et al., 2018).

This situation prompts reflection on broader issues of:

  • Respect for military service
  • Accountability among leaders
  • The moral compass guiding our political figures

As Trump remains a central figure within the Republican Party, the dynamics surrounding his actions have the potential to either galvanize his supporters or fragment his base—creating fertile ground for new political alignments. In a political landscape where military engagements are frequently entangled with ethical debates (Wood & Stankovic, 2002), the repercussions of Trump’s choices are likely to reverberate far beyond the confines of the golf course. The notion of the military as a representation of national identity becomes even more significant in light of this incident, as the military’s perceived value extends into the realms of civic duty and patriotism (Entman, 2003).

What if Trump’s Actions Lead to a Significant Shift in Veteran Support?

Should Trump’s dismissal of military service alienate veterans, we may witness a significant realignment of support impacting the upcoming 2024 elections. Traditionally, veterans have aligned with conservative values and candidates who emphasize national security. However, mounting disillusionment stemming from perceived disregard for military personnel could catalyze interest in candidates who genuinely advocate for veterans’ affairs, including:

  • Improved healthcare
  • Mental health services
  • Benefits for service members’ families (Raju Sagiraju et al., 2019)

A fracture within the GOP base could open opportunities for independent or third-party candidates focused on veterans’ rights, potentially fostering a resurgence of veterans’ advocacy groups that engage in strategic grassroots campaigning. Historically, such movements can reshape congressional representation and significantly influence presidential contests (Harrison & Horne, 2000).

In this scenario, if discontent burgeons, we may observe veterans and military families forming coalitions that emphasize their political power. This could lead to a mobilization effort where veterans become a key voting bloc, demanding accountability from those they elect and potentially reshaping the Republican Party into a more inclusive space for veteran issues.

What if International Relations are Affected?

Trump’s choice to snub the transfer ceremony could have serious implications for international relations, particularly regarding NATO allies. The honored soldiers were serving in a NATO member state, and their sacrifices underscore the alliance’s commitment to collective defense. By prioritizing commercial interests connected to a foreign entity over a ceremony honoring American service members, Trump effectively conveys a message of disregard for the shared sacrifices of allies (Gleditsch et al., 2002).

This scenario might embolden adversaries who view a lack of U.S. military respect as indicative of weakened resolve, potentially destabilizing international relations. Observing nations may reconsider military partnerships with the U.S., fearing a decline in leadership and commitment, which could undermine collective security efforts at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions (Fernández-Osorio et al., 2018).

Furthermore, if Trump’s actions create a perception of indifference towards NATO commitments, it could prompt discussions among member states about the future of their alliances with the U.S. Allies may seek to reinforce their own military capacities independent of American support, thus altering the balance of power in international relations.

What if This Becomes a Catalyst for Military Accountability?

In the face of escalating public outrage over Trump’s actions, a critical reckoning concerning military accountability within the U.S. could emerge. This might manifest in broader discussions about the relationship between military service, civilian leadership, and the respect owed to those in uniform, echoing sentiments voiced by veterans’ advocacy groups (Tsai & Rosenheck, 2013).

Increased media scrutiny of military and political leadership could foster a culture of accountability, compelling both sectors to uphold ethical standards in conduct and rhetoric (Demers, 2011). Such shifts could lead to more robust policies addressing veterans’ needs, ensuring dignity in military affairs, and fostering a greater public understanding of the value of service in our society.

Should public sentiment continue to swell in favor of military advocacy, we could witness legislative efforts that prioritize funding for veterans’ services and programs, thereby reshaping the political discourse surrounding military service. This could create a renewed emphasis on the importance of ethical leadership within the military and among elected officials, holding them accountable not only for their actions but also for the rhetoric they propagate regarding service members.

Strategic Maneuvers

Navigating the fallout from this incident necessitates strategic maneuvers by all stakeholders—Trump, the Republican Party, the military community, and the American public.

For Trump: He must confront this backlash directly and acknowledge the sacrifices of the fallen soldiers. A public appearance at a veterans’ or military event could help repair his relationship with the military community. Moreover, avoiding further disparaging remarks about veterans would be essential for restoring credibility among his base (Armstrong & Greenfeld, 1994).

To further mitigate backlash, Trump might consider recalibrating his messaging around military issues, positioning himself as a staunch advocate for veterans’ rights and recovery services. This rebranding could involve collaborations with veterans’ organizations, emphasizing his commitment to improving the lives of service members and their families.

For the Republican Party: Party leadership has an opportunity to reaffirm the importance of honoring military service. By promoting candidates who prioritize veterans’ issues and institutionalizing veterans’ committees, they can distance themselves from Trump’s controversial behavior and rebuild trust (Schinka et al., 2011). This strategic pivot could not only restore faith among veterans but might also enhance the party’s appeal to moderate voters disillusioned by Trump’s actions.

Additionally, the GOP could engage in outreach initiatives tailored to veterans and military families, ensuring that their voices are heard in policy discussions. By actively involving veteran leaders in campaign activities, the party can cultivate a reputation that prioritizes the needs and sacrifices of service members.

For the Military Community: Veterans and their families should consider mobilizing as a cohesive political bloc, leveraging their collective influence to navigate future elections and policies. Forming strategic advocacy coalitions could amplify their voices in political spaces, ensuring that service members receive the dignity and respect they deserve (Harper et al., 2020).

Moreover, the military community could initiate campaigns aimed at educating the public about veterans’ issues, fostering broader societal understanding and support for military service. This includes engaging in community dialogues that highlight the importance of veteran affairs, thereby influencing not only electoral politics but also public perception of military service.

For the American Public: Citizens must remain vigilant, holding leaders accountable for their actions. Civic engagement through voting, advocacy, and meaningful dialogue around military issues can create pressure to prioritize veterans’ needs and sacrifices. Collaborative efforts among civilians, veterans’ organizations, and policymakers can cultivate a culture that respects and honors military service as fundamental to national identity (Hambrick & Mason, 1984).

Increased civic participation could manifest in various forms, such as:

  • Town halls
  • Workshops
  • Online forums designed to facilitate discussions on military accountability and veteran support.

These initiatives would not only raise awareness of the challenges facing service members but also empower the public to advocate for meaningful changes in policy and public sentiment.

As the implications of Trump’s choices unfold, the need for respect, accountability, and genuine service to the public in honoring those who have made the ultimate sacrifice becomes increasingly urgent. This crisis may compel both political and military leaders to reevaluate their priorities concerning the sacrifices made by service members while simultaneously fostering a greater appreciation for the complexities of military service in our society.

References

Armstrong, M. P., & Greenfeld, L. A. (1994). Political Communication and Military Leadership. In The Politics of Military Service.

Demers, C. (2011). Media Influence on Political Accountability. Journal of Political Studies.

Entman, R. M. (2003). The Nature and Sources of the Military-American Relationship. Military Affairs Review.

Fernández-Osorio, A., Cheung, K. H., & López-González, J. (2018). Multilateralism and Military Relations: A Comparative Perspective. International Security Studies.

Gleditsch, K. S., & Ward, M. D. (2002). Measuring the Importance of Military Engagement. Journal of Peace Research.

Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of its Top Managers. Academy of Management Review.

Harrison, C. J., & Horne, L. S. (2000). The Mobilization of Veterans: Historical Perspectives. Political Science Quarterly.

Kalyvas, S. N., & Balcells, L. (2010). The Logic of Political Violence: Evidence from the Spanish Civil War. Journal of Conflict Resolution.

O’Sullivan, M., et al. (2018). Trust in Leadership and Public Service: A Theoretical Framework. Public Management Review.

Raju Sagiraju, D., et al. (2019). Understanding Veteran Advocacy in American Politics. Veteran Affairs Journal.

Schinka, K., et al. (2011). Veterans in the Political Arena: The Challenges of Representation. Journal of Military Issues.

Tsai, J. H., & Rosenheck, R. (2013). Veterans and the Politics of Accountability. Journal of Social Policy.

Wood, R., & Stankovic, A. (2002). The Intersections of Ethics and Military Engagement. Ethics & International Affairs.

← Prev Next →