34 pages • 1 hour read
Fiona HillA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
When the United Kingdom voted on Brexit—a compound word standing for “British exit,” or the departure of the UK from the European Union—many people who didn’t typically vote turned out for the referendum, thanks to many of the marginalized groups in areas like Bishop Auckland feeling motivated to vote. With 72% of the electorate participating, Brexit passed. Trump, who happened to be in the UK at the time and would soon after win the 2016 election, capitalized on this moment. The result of the vote was so shocking that there was speculation of Russian interference.
While this was never proven, Hill did notice a “Russian connection” (171): populism. Like champion of Brexit Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin had been a political outsider who positioned himself as being on the side of the common man, acknowledging the problems of regular people and promising simple answers to their hardships. Populist leaders have a strong leadership style with simple messaging directly to the people, bypassing formal political conventions to reach their target audience. By contrasting themselves with the hidden elites that made their lives miserable, these populist candidates activated a core base who wanted a scapegoat for their issues. Putin’s scapegoat was the West. For Farage and Trump, the scapegoat became immigrants.
After successfully using propaganda techniques in Russia, and having recognized the similarities between Russia and the US that Hill outlines, Putin capitalized on American disenfranchisement with the system to shape the outcome of the 2016 election. Putin’s cyber machine worked against Hillary Clinton, who would have restricted Russia’s advancement, to promote Trump’s cult of personality to people who felt marginalized and forgotten.
After a recommendation by Fox News host K.T. McFarland, a fellow member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Hill joined the Trump administration as Russia advisor. McFarland and National Security Advisor General Flynn encouraged Hill to help Trump navigate his relationship with Putin. Trump was fixated on finishing the nuclear arms deal Reagan had started in the 1980s. This appealed to Hill, who also had a fascination with the same issue.
However, Trump, a man obsessed with the women’s appearance and outward presentation, was not receptive to Hill. The first time they met in the Oval Office, Hill accidentally wore sneakers because of a stressful week with her sick child, something Trump’s daughter Ivanka immediately noticed. The second time they met was far worse: Trump mistook Hill for a secretary, forgot her name, and expressed no interest in her thoughts on his call with Putin regarding the Syrian civil war. Hill, who had been focusing on Putin’s words, detected something sinister in Putin’s tone, but Trump, who thought the call went well, didn’t want to hear it.
McFarland offered Hill a crash course on Trump. For example, Trump didn’t like anyone who took notes because he suspected they’d try to write negative reports about him.
Though Trump and Putin have some alarming commonalities, differences in their backgrounds shaped different leadership styles. While Putin came from a poorer family in St. Petersburg and climbed to power through the system, Trump hailed from a wealthy family with few hardships, believing himself to be an outsider to the system. Putin appealed to the marginalized masses in Russia with a single unifying vision for Russian greatness. Trump also appealed to groups who felt forgotten, but he exploited divisions to gain a following under a message of returning to a mythically perfect past: “Make America Great Again,” which Hill argues was more about Trump’s ego than vision.
These differences in leadership styles and acumen were on full display at the Helsinki conference. Putin offered Trump a mutual interrogation agreement, allowing US intelligence agencies access to some of the most wanted Russian criminals, while also permitting American citizens to be extracted to Russia and subject to their interrogation tactics. Trump thought this was great, not thinking through the drawbacks of this kind of mutuality—something Hill calls a disaster. Hill argues that Trump’s earnest desire to close a nuclear weapons deal with Russia impeded his judgment in his communications with Putin. Hill sympathized with Trump’s desire to negotiate this arms deal—her Uncle Charlie’s question of Russian aggression during the Cold War had launched her own studies in Russia. However, Trump’s lack of knowledge about history, his blinkered trust of the Russian president, and his ignorance and incuriosity led him to make impulsive and naive comments and agreements that later had to be walked back. Trump’s fragile ego shaped many of the decisions that led to his first impeachment hearing involving US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.
Hill compares Trump’s psychology to the un-nuanced view of the world held by the Queen of Hearts from Lewis Carroll’s fairytale Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. Like the Queen, Trump immediately turned on anyone he perceived as undermining him, without first attempting to fully understand the situation. Officials who wanted to remove Ambassador Yovanovitch from her post for their own political gains told Trump that she was telling the Ukrainians that Trump would be impeached. Trump typically ignored women, especially those who were diplomats and public service, but it was easy to drag anyone into the line of fire by claiming they had insulted Trump. Yovanovitch and Trump were not close, so when Trump’s supporters took aim at her online and Alex Jones’s Infowars featured a conspiracy asserting Yovanovitch was a mole for George Soros, the ambassador became the target of Trump’s frustration. The Soros conspiracy theory, popular among Q-Anon supporters, is a manifestation of antisemitism. The Trump administration was all too happy to use fringe conspiracy theories like this one to create scapegoats.
At the same time, Hill was working on European requests through the State Department. When a much-desired meeting between Trump and Hungarian dictator Viktor Orban, hadn’t occurred, Hill was blamed. Right-wing lobbyist Connie Mack filed a Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) report on her, citing Hill’s studies in Moscow. Hill compares the political climate and conspiracies surrounding her to middle school nastiness but on a grand scale: She received thousands of online threats to harm her and her family. Being a woman didn’t help: The Trump administration was openly hostile toward women, with staffers making crude jokes that any sign of discontent meant a woman overly emotional and menstruating. In this climate, Hill wasn’t surprised when supposedly professional adult colleagues dubbed her “Russia bitch” (262).
2020 was a year marked by crises. Trump’s first impeachment hearing was followed by his second. Racial tensions exploded after the callous murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis by a police officer who kneeled on his neck. Most devastatingly, the novel coronavirus swept across the globe from Wuhan, China, and ushered in a new pandemic that would kill millions worldwide.
Rather than being united by a common foe (the virus), the United States was pulled apart because Trump downplayed the pandemic and disregarded science as the infection rates and death tolls rose. The pandemic laid bare the inequities of our economic systems and the failings of our social and political institutions, while further limiting opportunities for everyone, especially the most marginalized Americans. Trump, however, was still ruled by his ego. Instead of working with experts, he decided that the head of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Anthony Fauci, was an enemy because he didn’t agree with the rosy picture Trump portrayed—and because Trump worried Fauci’s reasoned and empathetic TV appearance were upstaging him.
Trump responded to his bad electoral chances by positing that the 2020 election would be rigged. After he lost, his supporters stormed the Capitol Building on January 6, 2021, to attempt a coup with his encouragement. Trump was falling back on autocratic tactics—like Putin, using supporters and cronies to do his dirty work. Although Trump didn’t have a death grip on the media the same way Putin does with his government-funded TV channels and radio stations, Trump did loom large by mastering social media, dismissing traditional news gatherers as purveyors of alternate facts, and sowing seeds of distrust in information. Hill warns that despite Biden’s electoral victory, American populism is still a threat until we all address its origins by finding pathways to opportunity for everyone.
Hill establishes the context for the rise of populism in the US through bleak depictions of the economic and social realities of many Americans. She draws parallels between Trump and Putin to warn about a possible path for the US, and also highlights differences that can be leveraged into a brighter US future.
Though she clearly had a contentious relationship with former President Trump, Hill makes a point to understand his psychology and even connect with his goals. Her proximity to this sometimes larger than life figure allows her to describe specific moments that readers can generalize into an overall portrait. Hill compares Trump to Lewis Carroll’s cartoonish Queen of Hearts when she reports Trump using mafia-inflected tough-guy phrases like having people “taken out” (241)—a display of bravado that is immediately belied by the fact that he relied on subordinates to do his dirty work. Trump set the tone for the rest of his administration, as Hill shows through small vignettes of a cast of unpleasant characters in high political offices. Trump surrounded himself with boorish misogynists: It is shocking to hear that ostensibly adult male officials derided their female colleagues as having their period, or that they would dub Hill “Russia bitch” for daring to have expertise.
Hill rises above this mud-slinging by trying to find rational motivations behind Trump’s hysterical reactions and decisions. Trump’s fear of nuclear conflict and preoccupation with mending the loose ends from the Cold War era comes off as understandable. By framing his actions with this earnest desire, Hill offers a more balanced view of Trump, which lends to her credibility. Since Hill argues that extreme partisanship is one of the major problems in the US, she avoids making ideological attacks in her writing, basing her analysis on her intellectual background and observations rather than politics. She trusts the reader to come to conclusions through the facts and descriptions she presents.
Books About Leadership
View Collection
Books on U.S. History
View Collection
Business & Economics
View Collection
Class
View Collection
Class
View Collection
Community
View Collection
Contemporary Books on Social Justice
View Collection
Education
View Collection
Inspiring Biographies
View Collection
Memoir
View Collection
Nation & Nationalism
View Collection
Political Science Texts
View Collection
Politics & Government
View Collection
Poverty & Homelessness
View Collection
The Best of "Best Book" Lists
View Collection