I think the bipartisan foreign policy establishment is mistaken in its boilerplate suggestions that Trump would be disadvantageous for Greece. It is hard to determine if they believe that, or, in a volatile 2020 election year, simply are offering talking points. More important is fact rather than supposition: We see already the outlines of a favorable Trump administration position for Greece during this current Eastern Mediterranean crisis. It may be understated, but it is far closer to the French (than the German) position, and I think it is growing stronger.
The conventional Washington bipartisan position has been paying lip service to the merits of the Greek case in light of chronic Turkish provocations while embracing the usual "realist" bromides: "Turkey is essential in protecting the NATO southern flank," "Erdogan is likely a mere passing phenomenon," "US basing interests in Turkey are critical for the Middle East" etc.
In truth, the world has changed, and with it foreign policy, and not just in Greece, but in the US too. What are these radical changes?
Cf. the evolution from a US dependency on Middle East oil to a liberated America as the world's largest exporter of gas and oil, the Trump administration's strong defense of Western civilization and its values during the current domestic culture wars, the slow rebuilding of US military strength in the Mediterranean, frustrations in the Pentagon with their Turkish military counterparts, and the growing bloc dichotomy of Turkey/Iran/Hezbollah/Hamas vs Israel and the moderate Sunni states –re all insidiously bringing the Trump administration closer to the Greek positions. And after all –reece enjoys, and has always enjoyed, the far stronger legal, moral and historical arguments.
Victor Davis Hanson is a Senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institute