The Inciter-in-Chief has outdone himself. In an interview with the Times of London and Germany's Bild published a few days ago, Donald Trump called NATO "obsolete," described the European Union as a German scheme to get the best of the United States, and suggested that he had as much faith in Vladimir Putin as in Angela Merkel. “Well, I start off trusting both—but let’s see how long that lasts," Trump said.

Roughly speaking, there are two ways to react to these sorts of utterances. The first—difficult to avoid sometimes—is to freak out. In the sixty-eight years since ten European states, the United States, and Canada signed the North Atlantic Treaty, no U.S. President, or President-elect, has used such language. Nicholas Burns, a veteran U.S. diplomat and former Ambassador to NATO, told the New York Times, rightly, that Trump's statements were "a direct assault on the liberal order we’ve built since 1945 and a repudiation of the idea that the United States should lead the West.” Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Germany's foreign minister, noted that Trump's comments had “caused astonishment and commotion" in Europe.

About the only one who didn't seem too disturbed was Merkel. Responding to Trump's comments, the German Chancellor said, on Monday, “I’m waiting for his Inauguration, as is proper. Then we’ll work with him on all levels. He has just stated his positions, which have been known for quite some time. My positions are also known."

Perhaps Merkel, who is standing for reëlection this year, was putting on a show of calm. But it's also possible that, as an experienced negotiator and stateswoman, she recognizes something others have missed. When it comes to bargaining and making deals, which is what Trump claims to be all about, talk is cheap—so cheap it sometimes fails to convey any real meaning. What matters are actions, and Trump hasn't taken any of those yet.

Game theorists have formalized this sort of reasoning. They use the term "cheap talk" to describe communications that don't directly affect the payoffs of a game. In situations in which players have conflicting interests (zero-sum games), the rational response to cheap talk is to ignore it and concentrate on what the other player actually does. Obviously, Merkel isn't a game theorist, but her low-key reaction to Trump's controversial statements seems to reflect a deep skepticism about anything he says and an eagerness to move on to concrete government-to-government dealings. "Once he’s in office . . . we’ll obviously coöperate with the new U.S. government and see what kind of agreement we can reach,” she said on Monday.

Let's hope Merkel is right, and that Trump is merely babbling. Even some of his own associates have said things that seem to support this idea. During confirmation hearings this month, James (Mad Dog) Mattis, Trump's nominee for Secretary of Defense, repeatedly reaffirmed his commitment to NATO, as did the former Exxon C.E.O. Rex Tillerson, Trump's pick for Secretary of State. Mattis also pointed out that previous Presidents have called on America's allies to pick up more of the financial costs of common defense policies, which was one of Trump's campaign demands. Rather than trying to undermine NATO, Mattis seemed to be suggesting, Trump is merely looking to boost his negotiating leverage.

At the World Economic Forum, in Davos, Switzerland, on Monday, Anthony Scaramucci, a hedge-fund manager who will serve as an adviser in Trump's White House, was asked about Trump’s latest interview. "NATO is working," Scaramucci said, before adding that there were also “possibly one or two things in there that, in the President-elect’s own words, are obsolete.” Scaramucci also told his audience not to be alarmed by Trump's tweets. He is "an effective communicator," Scaramucci told the gathering of business leaders and journalists. "He’s not necessarily communicating in a way that people in this community would love." (This wasn't the first time that Scaramucci had cautioned people not to take what Trump says at face value. In December, he remarked, "Don't take him literally; take him symbolically.")

It would be comforting, indeed, if we could discount much of what Trump says. No more waking up in the morning and shuddering at the prospect of his next interview. No more parsing every tweet lest it heralds the end of civilization. That sounds like a saner life—one in which we, like Merkel, could concentrate on Trump's substantive actions rather than his efforts to distract, obfuscate, and intimidate.

Unfortunately, though, there are also a couple of problems with dismissing Trump's provocations as just cheap talk. For one thing, some of his adversaries may interpret his bluster as actual policy proposals, with consequences that could be disastrous. Already, some elements of the Chinese government are bridling at the suggestion that U.S. acceptance of the "One China" policy regarding Taiwan may be up for review. "If Trump is determined to use this gambit in taking office, a period of fierce, damaging interactions will be unavoidable, as Beijing will have no choice but to take off the gloves," the English-language China Daily said in an editorial on Monday.

An even more worrying possibility is that Trump doesn't realize he is babbling. Given his toxic combination of ignorance and arrogance, it seems conceivable that he really believes that the E.U. is an anti-American plot, NATO is an anachronism, and the United States should throw in its lot with Putin and Russia. Or perhaps, like Mussolini, Trump doesn't believe in anything at all, except the nihilistic pursuit of power and self-glorification, and he views Putin as a role model.

If any of this is the case, history could be about to take a tragic turn. And, sadly, game theory can't provide much consolation.