Unlike his short-lived predecessor, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, President Trump’s new national security adviser, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, has no history of openly associating with bigotry. In fact, McMaster has throughout his career emphasized the need to work constructively with foreign Muslim populations. But his presence only calls more attention to the dramatic divide among Trump’s top foreign policy advisers. On one side are career military personnel who understand that antagonizing Muslims is both offensive to American values and damaging to the country’s security. On the other side are inexperienced, radical ethno-nationalists who shrug off international norms and believe that peaceful coexistence with the world’s Muslims is unlikely and undesirable. The two views appear incompatible. But which group will emerge victorious is not at all clear. In fact, which group speaks for Trump at any given moment is not entirely clear either. Here are the key players:

Photo: Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

The Rationalists H.R. McMaster, Trump’s new national security adviser, is a three-star general, a PhD in history, and the author of a book on the high-level deceptions and errors that triggered the U.S. war in Vietnam. A seemingly incongruous partner for Trump, who has repeatedly advocated for torture and other harsh measures to fight terrorism, McMaster has been a vocal proponent of protecting civilians in war zones and avoiding the “clash of civilizations” approach favored by Trump and his top advisers. He presents a dramatic contrast to Flynn, who once tweeted that “fear of Muslims is RATIONAL” and during his brief tenure put Iran “on notice” in a threatening press conference that signaled the possibility of armed conflict with that country. In a speech at the Carnegie Council in 2014, McMaster said that the United States must partner with people in Muslim-majority countries to defeat groups like the Islamic State, describing them as “the people who are suffering the most” from terrorism. McMaster added that to win such conflicts,U.S. forces must understand the history and social dynamics of the countries it is fighting in, as well as have “empathy for the people among whom these wars are fought.” McMaster has also criticized agenda-driven D.C. think tanks and foreign policy seemingly driven by the weapons industry. In a 2015 speech at the University of South Florida, McMaster said that “the military-industrial complex may represent a greater threat to us than at any time in history.” Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis has been the anchor of the nonradical wing of the Trump administration. Mattis assured reporters during his recent meeting with Iraqi political and military leaders that, Trump’s frequent comments to the contrary, the United States would not try to seize Iraq’s oil. “I think all of us here in this room, all of us in America, have generally paid for our gas and oil all along, and I’m sure that we will continue to do that in the future,” he said. “We’re not in Iraq to seize anybody’s oil.” As the commander of the 1st Marine Division in Iraq, Mattis believed that treating Iraqis with respect was essential to American security. He investigated abuses of prisoners in Iraq and helped stop the use of torture at one prison where an Iraqi in U.S. detention had died after being beaten. On the campaign trail, Trump advocated for the return of waterboarding. A short meeting with Mattis during the transition period in November had Trump reconsidering his stance. The president-elect told reporters that he asked Mattis about waterboarding, and Mattis replied that he “never found it to be useful.” Instead, Mattis told Trump: “I’ve always found, give me a pack of cigarettes and a couple of beers and I do better with that than I do with torture.” Trump told reporters in January that he would defer to Mattis on the issue from now on. Unlike some in Trump’s inner circle, Mattis believes that Israel’s continued military occupation of the Palestinians threatens American security and could lead to an apartheid-style situation. Asked about conflict with Iran during a 2016 interview, he replied, “It would be bloody awful, it would be a catastrophe if we have to have another war in the Middle East like that.”

Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images