There has been nonstop discussion about the Trump administration’s Signal chat leaks, in which Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and other national security advisers discussed plans for air strikes in a chat inadvertently containing a journalist. 

However, the actual contents of those messages haven’t been discussed much. Specifically, I’m talking about Vance’s words in the chat and what they tell us about his priorities in foreign policy debates. 

Vance’s concern over us “bailing Europe out again” shows where his priorities lie. It isn’t in what serves our country the best, but rather in what he can justify to his isolationist base of voters. He’s wrong.

JD Vance’s foreign policy priorities are misplaced and dangerous

Vance’s foreign policy outlook is very intertwined with the “America First” movement. The text messages reveal that his doctrine is less sincere and more focused on how he can sell it to his populist voter base. His voter base has significant apathy toward how our actions overseas benefit America, and like them, the vice president defaults to skepticism of their importance.

Need a break? Play the USA TODAY Daily Crossword Puzzle.

“I think we are making a mistake. 3 percent of U.S. trade runs through the (Suez Canal). 40 percent of European trade does,” Vance claimed in the Signal chat about U.S. bombing targets of the terrorist organization Houthi across Yemen. “There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as (President Donald Trump) said, to send a message.”

Opinion: Trump’s administration made a massive mistake. Lying about it makes it worse.

Securing international trade isn’t just a service we do for the rest of the world. It’s securing our interests as well. As much as Vance and other populists dream that everything we consume be made in America, that is not the reality of the world we live in, nor will it ever be. 

Vance’s chief concern in plotting these attacks wasn’t whether or not these strikes were in America’s interest, but rather whether he could sell the public on their importance. His prospective voters don’t care about Europe and even take joy in America refusing to aid them.

Vance is no different.

While it’s not uncommon for politicians to weigh electoral factors in their decision-making, it’s still surprising for the vice president to discuss it candidly in these chats. 

Vance wrote in response to Hegseth’s rationale for the strikes that “if you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.”

Vance prioritizes the optics over the importance of the strikes. He wants to punish Europe in favor of his isolationist stance. Even when it comes to killing terrorists, something the GOP used to rejoice over, Vance is squeamish about it if it helps Europe.

Vance is pushing Trump administration further into isolationism

Unfortunately for America, Vance is someone Trump seems to respect and whose opinion is valued, giving him an unrivaled ability to sway the president on foreign policy. 

Critics, including me, have noted for weeks that Vance seemed to be the person chiefly responsible for pushing Trump further down the path of isolationism in this new administration. These chats demonstrate just that.

Opinion: Why do I criticize Trump so much if I’m conservative? I expect better from GOP.

“I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now,” wrote Vance in an almost condescending tone. 

He sees his role as Trump’s vice president as an opportunity to push his brand of foreign policy, which is far more isolationist than the positions Trump took during his first term. 

Americans saw this play out when Vance took the lead in antagonizing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during their infamous Oval Office meeting. After mainly remaining quiet during the meeting, Vance made sure to get his digs in as their conference with Zelenskyy ended. Vance knew that if he pushed Zelenskyy to stand up for his country, he and Trump could berate him publicly and ruin Ukraine’s negotiating position.

That incident resulted in a catastrophic collapse of U.S. and Ukrainian civility, but it is precisely what Vance wanted. As tragic as the outcome was, it was a masterful pulling of the strings, opening the door for reducing U.S. support for Ukraine. 

In the case of the Signal leak, Vance’s considerations are becoming an influential part of the discussion. If Trump listens, it will distract from the more effective goals of American foreign policy and further push our European allies away, isolating America unlike any administration this century.

Dace Potas is an opinion columnist for USA TODAY and a graduate of DePaul University with a degree in political science.