Trump v Rudd: who’d win, the master of the barb or the prince of persuasion?

We now know the next president of the United States will not be Joe Biden. The 81-year-old’s dramatic exit from the presidential race on Sunday has opened the door for a younger Democrat candidate – almost certainly Vice President Kamala Harris – to take on former president Donald Trump.

While Biden’s departure is a blow for US-Australian relations – he has a very strong personal friendship with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese – the prospect of a Harris presidency may increase focus on the Asia Pacific, given the vice president’s Indian heritage.

However, according to most pundits – and the bookies – Donald Trump remains the most likely candidate to occupy the Oval Office after the election in November, although a Reuters/Ipsos poll taken on Monday and Tuesday gives Harris a marginal lead over Trump, 44 to 42 per cent.

Diplomatically, waiting for Trump is Australia’s ambassador Kevin Rudd, and there is a concern that awkwardness at Rudd’s previous comments about Trump could mean exclusion from the administration, if not informal expulsion.

An indication of this trend was Rudd’s attendance at the Republican Convention where Trump became the official nominee. And Rudd’s soothing advice to “chill” – in other words, don’t become too distraught at the prospect of a second Trump presidency – was aimed not only at Europeans, but at Trump himself, for Rudd has some ground to make up with the brash billionaire.

The former president doesn’t welcome criticism, such as Rudd’s observations that Trump was “nuts”, “the most destructive president in history” and “a traitor to the West”.

All of this was publicly brought to Trump’s attention by Nigel Farage in an interview, where Farage goaded Trump about Rudd saying the “most horrible things” about Trump, and asking if Trump would take a phone call from Rudd, Australia’s ambassador.

Trump is a self-appointed master of the barb, and promptly labelled Rudd “not the brightest bulb”, “a little bit nasty”, and perhaps more cuttingly in Trump’s world, “I don’t know much about him”, before declaring that Rudd will probably have to go.

But displacing Rudd may be even harder for Trump than defeating the Democrats. Rudd is insightful, strategic and highly self-focused. Having seen him up close while I was a chief of staff in the Gillard and then Rudd governments, I have no doubt he has worked tirelessly, and effectively, to neutralise the impact of this issue from the very moment he took seriously his own idea, or the suggestion of another, that he become ambassador to the US. To think he has just started to deal with this issue is to misunderstand Rudd entirely.

For a start, Rudd has already ingratiated himself with Trump’s inner circle, including his running mate, J.D. Vance, the advisers who feed into Trump’s circle, and the people who are likely to fill senior positions in a Trump administration.

Rudd can be self-effacing, charming and impressive. Many people in the world around Trump are likely believers in Rudd’s narrative about his suitability and the importance of him being in Washington at this time of international uncertainty.

It is also unlikely that Rudd is embarrassed by his remarks. Rudd likes colourful language and the attention it may bring. Even negative attention is not necessarily bad for someone who courts the spotlight. Nonetheless, Rudd probably plays down those insults that he cannot credibly deny. Rudd may even suggest to some that Trump himself sometimes gets caught out. It just happens in public life. What he won’t do is apologise.

Rudd’s defence also benefits from the increasing importance of Australia in the US view of the security equation for Asia, and the future of the US role there. Australia’s stocks have gone up considerably, in parallel with US concerns about China. In this context, Australia’s support for US military engagements around the world is highly valued, as is Australia’s willingness to pauper itself to bolster the US defence industry through AUKUS.

Rudd has also left his US network in no doubt that Trump does not need another “Turnbull moment”, where Trump treated an Australian prime minister roughly, only to discover significant pushback from the US establishment, and within his own administration.

And of course, Rudd has lined up the Australian government behind him from before he took the job. Everyone knew this moment might come. Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong and others have the benefit of following a script written long ago.

We can know all of this because Rudd is a master at winning people over and even overcoming trenchant opposition. This was evident when he replaced Julia Gillard as prime minister. Since he had been deposed, Rudd worked to undermine the government and party he had so recently led. Some members of government believed Rudd was instrumental in the declining fortunes of Labor, and its prospects at the next election.

Not a few members of the government were angry and even bitter about Rudd, but that did not stop enough of them voting for Rudd. Not only had Rudd convinced them that he was an electoral asset, they also believed he would ruthlessly continue to wreck the government if he did not lead it. This sentiment was captured in the comment, “I don’t want to reward bad behaviour, but …” by some who voted for him.

Accordingly, Rudd will not be departing the Australian Embassy in Washington if Trump wins the election. Trump may have a strong record of getting rid of opponents and others who earn his ire, but in Rudd, Trump has met a skilled, cunning and hard-working target who will not be intimidated or easily dislodged.

There will, no doubt, be some entertainment value for observers if Trump again becomes president, and he meets with our “Mr Rudd” at a diplomatic function. Trump may puff up arrogantly, and could even call Rudd out for saying nasty things about him. But Rudd will have gamed this scenario over and over before it happens, and is unlikely to be flustered. Indeed, he may just tell Trump that he called the Chinese much worse, and Trump will be amused and becalmed when he finds out what that was.

David Livingstone is a former Australian diplomat and an international security and strategy specialist. He served as deputy head of mission in Iraq between 2011 and 2012.

The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform your own. Sign up here.