Displaying posts categorized under

FOREIGN POLICY

We Are Behaving Like a Silly People What’s really driving the hysterical response to the Helsinki summit. Bruce Thornton

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270800/we-are-behaving-silly-people-bruce-thornton

The hysterical reactions to Donald Trump’s comments in Helsinki show how we are becoming what David Lean’s T.E. Lawrence called the Arabs: “a little people, a silly people.” The difference is, we are the richest, most powerful, freest people in the history of the world, yet like children we are obsessing over words rather than paying attention to meaningful deeds.

Here from the Washington Post is one sample of the thousands of bipartisan complaints about Trump’s comments in Helsinki: “Trump was just compliant and submissive, nearly fawning over Putin. Without a doubt, Putin is more powerful now than he was before the summit and Trump is weaker.” Notice how the subjective adjectives in sentence one become objective facts in sentence two. In a world where language trumps reality, what you say is what you are, not what you do. This has been the central fallacy of most Trump criticism since he walked down that golden escalator.

Words have consequences, Trump’s critics warn. But they forget to add that words mean something when they are linked to deeds. Here’s an example: “This is my last election . . . After my election I have more flexibility,” especially on “missile defense.” In 2012 Barack Obama was caught asking Dimitri Medvedev to pass this message along to Putin in regard to missile installations planned for Poland and the Czech Republic. True to his word, Obama halted the programs, earning kudos from Medvedev, who called it a “responsible approach,” and Putin, who called it “correct and brave.”

And how was this appeasement of a geopolitical rival received? Very differently from Trump’s words. Republican John McCain said of Trump that he had “abased himself . . . abjectly before a tyrant,” and warned that “The damage inflicted by President Trump’s naiveté, egotism, false equivalence, and sympathy for autocrats is difficult to calculate.” Democrat Nancy Pelosi said of Trump that his “weakness in front of Putin was embarrassing, and proves that the Russians have something on the president, personally, financially or politically.” But Obama’s deeds that followed his abjectly appeasing words, from McCain earned a mild rebuke of “seriously misguided.” And Pelosi said Obama’s move that weakened our allies and strengthened our rival was “brilliant.”

Trump Makes Clear: Era of Appeasement Is Over The Iranians receive just the warning they were asking for. Joseph Klein

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270830/trump-makes-clear-era-appeasement-over-joseph-klein

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani warned on Sunday that “America should know that peace with Iran is the mother of all peace, and war with Iran is the mother of all wars.” Reacting to the prospect of U.S. actions aimed at cutting off all Iranian oil exports by this November, Rouhani said that Iran could respond by shutting down international oil shipments in the strategic Strait of Hormuz, a threat the Iranian regime has made in the past. “We have always guaranteed the security of this strait,” Rouhani said. “Do not play with the lion’s tail; you will regret it forever.”

President Trump was not impressed. He tweeted what amounts to an ultimatum in all caps. Stop the threats against the United States or suffer severe consequences:

“To Iranian President Rouhani: NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!”

President Trump’s tweet contained a none too subtle reference to the feckless Obama administration’s appeasement of the Iranian regime. There is now a different sheriff in charge who will brook no threats, lies or chicanery.

Former President Obama coddled the thugs running the Iranian regime to get his disastrous nuclear deal over the finish line, no matter what concessions he felt he had to make to secure his “legacy achievement.” Obama frontloaded relief from the onerous sanctions that had brought the Iranian regime to the negotiating table in the first place. And he threw in cash bonuses as well, including $1.7 billion in ransom payments to secure the release of five American hostages seized by the rogue regime even though several Americans are still detained and missing inside of Iran. In return, Obama got loophole-ridden temporary “commitments” from the Iranian regime to wind down its nuclear enrichment program. The final terms of the deal allowed Iran to claim its military sites off limits to international inspections and failed to bar Iran from developing and testing missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons.

Trump Doctrine vs. Rouhani Is Donald Trump Serious about Iran? You bet. Kenneth R. Timmerman

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270829/trump-doctrine-vs-rouhani-kenneth-r-timmerman

Is the President of the United States a mere “twitter warrior?” Or is he really serious about Iran? Here is his early morning, all-caps statement that is making heads explode in the Twittersphere:

“To Iranian President Rouhani: NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!”

The proximate cause for Trump’s tweet was a threat by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani the day before to close the Strait of Hormuz to international shipping traffic, where he warned Trump, “Do not play with the lion’s tail; you will regret it forever.”

Rouhani himself was responding to a momentous speech at the Reagan Library by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, where he outlined the new “Trump Doctrine” toward Iran.

“The mission set for our team is clear,” Pompeo said. “It’s to deny the Iranian leadership the resources, the wealth, the funds, the capacity to continue to foment terrorism around the world and to deny the people inside of Iran the freedoms that they so richly deserve.”

If you’re reading this page, you’ve probably already had your fill of the hysterics and bombast from the organized left in response to this latest Trump tweet, starting with Rachel Maddow, the Atlantic, and their fellow gutter-creatures.

Pompeo’s Iran Truth-Telling The President’s tweet distracts from a better speech.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/pompeos-iran-truth-telling-1532388462

Donald Trump’s all caps Twitter warning Sunday night to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani not to “THREATEN” the United States or suffer severe consequences gathered all the media attention on Monday. Which is too bad, because Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered a speech Sunday that deserved more notice for speaking the truth about Iran.

Mr. Pompeo explained at the Reagan Presidential Library how the Iranian regime’s zeal to spread Islamic revolution has led its leaders to direct funds to “terrorists, dictators and proxy militias” rather than to the welfare of ordinary Iranians, and he called out Tehran’s corruption by name and example.

Consider Interior Minister Sadeq Mahsouli’s “lucrative construction and oil trading contracts” with Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-linked (IRGC) companies. Or Grand Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi, the “Sultan of Sugar,” whose business has generated more than $100 million. Or Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s “own personal, off-the-books hedge fund called the Setad, worth $95 billion,” which is untaxed and serves as a “slush fund for the IRGC.”

Peter Beinart’s Amnesia By Victor Davis Hanson

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/peter-beinarts-forgets-nato-problems/NATO’s problems, Putin’s aggression, and American passivity predate Trump, who had my vote in 2016 — a vote I don’t regret.

Peter Beinart has posted a trademark incoherent rant, this time against Rich Lowry and me over our supposed laxity in criticizing Trumpian over-the-top rhetoric on NATO.

At various times, I have faulted Germany for much of NATO’s problems; I was delighted that we got out of the Iran deal and happier still that we pulled out of the empty Paris climate-change accord; and I agree that NAFTA needs changes. All that apparently for Beinart constitutes support for Trump’s sin of saying that the U.S. has “no obligation to meet America’s past commitments to other countries.”

Last time I looked, the Paris climate accord and the Iran deal (and its stealth “side” deals) were pushed through as quasi-executive orders and never submitted to Congress as treaties — largely because the Obama administration understood that both deals would have been summarily rejected and lacked support from most of Congress and also the American people, owing to the deal’s inherent flaws.

The U.S. may soon come closer to meeting carbon-emission-reduction goals than most of the signatories of the Paris farce. Following the Iran pullout, Iranians now seem more inclined to protest their theocratic government. They are confident in voicing their dissent in a way we have not seen since we ignored Iranian protesters during the Green Revolution of 2009. Incidents of Iranian harassment of U.S. ships in the Persian Gulf this year have mysteriously declined to almost zero.

The architects of NAFTA who in 1993 promised normalization and parity in North America through free trade and porous borders apparently did not envision something like the Andrés Manuel López Obrador presidency, which seems to think it exercises sovereignty over U.S. immigration policy, a cumulative influx of some 20 million foreign nationals illegally crossing the southern border over the last three decades, a current $71 billion Mexican trade surplus, $30 billion in remittances sent annually out of the U.S. to Mexico, record numbers of assassinations, and a nearly failed state as cartels virtually run affairs in some areas of Mexico. After all that, asking for clarifications of and likely modification to NAFTA is hardly breaking American commitments.

RICHARD BAEHR: TRUMP, PUTIN AND HELSINKI

” Neither I nor anyone else other than two translators, knows what went on when Trump met Putin yesterday. The press conference afterwords was not the President’s finest moment. Sometimes he seems eager to make already agitated political enemies and reporters (the latter a subset of the former) go completely insane with rage at statements that are really unnecessary unless he is merely goading them into an over-reaction. Presidents meet with leaders of countries who are adversaries all the time. American Presidents have met with Russian leaders throughout the Cold War.

I am not one who believes the recent Russian behavior or the current tensions between the two countries is anywhere near as heated or dangerous as in earlier periods- the Cuban missile crisis, the Berlin blockades, the 1980s. Of course most journalists writing today were born after these events and are ignorant of history . So Trump meeting Putin was fine.

Bibi Netanyahu has met repeatedly with Putin to make Israel’s red lines in Syria clear to the Russians. He seems to have made some progress. It is possible Russia will choose to stay in Syria and continue to support Assad, but rely less on Iran and push them away from a direct confrontation with Israel. The fact that Israel came up in the press conference suggests it came up in the meeting.

For me, this kind of substantive discussion matters more than whether Russia tried to interfere with our election . I believe they did, and they have done this before with US elections, and in other countries as well. Obama team members seem to have become concerned about this interference after the fact, but not before when they could have addressed it. And of course, the United States and other countries also interfere in other countries’ elections. .

Srdja Trifkovic: Trump in Helsinki-The Score

https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/trump-in-helsinki-the-score-i/

The hysterical media/establishment/Deep State reaction to President Trump’s comments in Helsinki is based on a lie. U.S. intelligence chiefs, current and former, fire back at Trump—a sample offering from the NPR—quotes Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats as saying the U.S. intelligence community has been “clear in our assessments of Russian meddling in the 2016 election.” Former CIA director John Brennan went many steps further: “Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of ‘high crimes & misdemeanors.’ It was nothing short of treasonous.” The Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee Richard Burr of North Carolina said his committee has no reason to doubt the (alleged) intelligence community’s “conclusion that President Putin ordered an influence campaign aimed at the 2016 elections.” Und so weiter, and so on, ad nauseam . . .

Let us clarify this key issue with the help of Jack Matlock, a career U.S. diplomat who “served on the front lines of American diplomacy during the Cold War” and was U.S. ambassador to the Soviet Union when the edifice collapsed. Did the U.S. “intelligence community,” asks he, really “judge that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election? Most commentators seem to think so. Every news report I have read . . . refers to ‘Russian interference’ as a fact.” In fact, Matlock points out—on the basis of freely available, unclassified evidence—that the “intelligence community” has done no such thing, ever. It has not been tasked to make a judgment, and its key members did not even participate in preparing the report which is routinely cited by Trump’s critics as proof of “Russian interference.” Unprecedentedly long quotes are in order because of the importance of this issue in making a judgment on what President Trump said on July 16.

An American President In London The real reason why the British establishment can’t handle Trump. Bruce Bawer

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270760/american-president-london-bruce-bawer

In the U.S. we’ve always prided ourselves on being a society without classes. Yes, we always had rich and poor, and back in the day we even had slaves and masters – and, yes, after that was over we had monstrous racism, plus no small amount of prejudice directed by natives toward newly arrived immigrant groups, not to mention tension among many of those groups. But however unpleasant those tensions, they were generally mild compared to the kind of tribal hatreds that could found almost everywhere else in the world. Moreover, these problems tended to fade rapidly, so that the grandchildren of people who had warred viciously with one another back in the Old Country could sit side by side in American classrooms without ever giving a thought to their respective family backgrounds.

Furthermore, America has always been overwhelmingly middle class, and has always been characterized by a remarkable degree of social mobility. The poor could become weathy. Foreigners could become Americans. Some of the most accomplished and esteemed Americans, indeed, first came to its shores as children of the wretched and tempest-tost. The genius of America was that you could re-create yourself, invent yourself. The classic American hero was always the self-made man – the rags-to-riches Horatio Alger protagonist. Nothing has ever been less American than condescending to a fellow who put in a hard day’s work, kept his nose clean, and took care of his family.

That universal American respect for the responsible solid citizen, however, has disappeared. Its demise was brought about by the rise of a politically lockstep American cultural elite – an elite made up of business, media, and high-culture types in New York, Internet magnates in Silicon Valley, show-business notables in Los Angeles, the great and powerful in Washington, and academics at universities across the country, all of whom share a deep and unprecedented contempt for millions of their fellow Americans. If we can’t let go of Hillary’s word “deplorables,” it’s because it perfectly sums up the profoundly un-American attitude toward ordinary working Americans that defines and unifies our cultural elite.

Trump and Putin Meet in Helsinki The dire importance of what our president is trying to achieve. Joseph Klein

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270767/trump-and-putin-meet-helsinki-joseph-klein

President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin held their first summit meeting Monday in Helsinki, Finland. The meeting took place just days after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had announced indictments against 12 Russian military intelligence officers for allegedly hacking the computer systems of the Democratic National Committee and of Hillary Clinton’s election campaign during the 2016 election campaign. Some Democrats and media pundits wanted President Trump to cancel the meeting in the wake of the indictments, or at least to place the election meddling issue front and center of their discussions before any other issue. Reporters’ questions at the joint press conference following the meeting focused primarily on the election meddling issue. Critical security threats to the world, such as Iran and Syria, Islamic terrorism, and nuclear proliferation, are evidently of much lesser concern to President Trump’s critics.

In his opening remarks before the one-on-one meeting, President Trump noted the deteriorating state of U.S.-Russian relations and emphasized the importance of dialogue between the two countries’ leaders. “I think we have great opportunities together as two countries that frankly we have not been getting along well for the last number of years,” President Trump said. “I really think the world wants to see us get along.” The Russian president said that “the time has come to have a thorough discussion on various international problems and sensitive issues. There are quite a few of them for us to pay attention to.” Both presidents ignored reporters’ shouted questions regarding the issue of Russian election meddling.

The private meeting between the two leaders lasted more than two hours, longer than originally scheduled, followed by a luncheon session that included top aides on both sides. Then President Trump and President Putin conducted a joint press conference.

Diplomacy 101 Versus Politics Writ Small By Angelo Codevilla

https://amgreatness.com/2018/07/17/diplomacy-101-vs-politics-writ

The high professional quality of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin’s performance at their Monday press conference in Helsinki contrasts sharply with the obloquy by which the bipartisan U.S. ruling class showcases its willful incompetence.

Though I voted for Trump, I’ve never been a fan of his and I am not one now. But, having taught diplomacy for many years, I would choose the Trump-Putin press conference as an exemplar of how these things should be done. Both spoke with the frankness and specificity of serious business. This performance rates an A+.

Both presidents started with the basic truth.

Putin: The Cold War is ancient history. Nobody in Russia (putting himself in this category) wants that kind of enmity again. It is best for Russia, for America, and for everybody else if the two find areas of agreement or forbearance.

Trump: Relations between the globe’s major nuclear powers have never been this bad—especially since some Americans are exacerbating existing international differences for domestic partisan gain. For the sake of peace and adjustment of differences where those exist and adjustment is possible, Trump is willing to pay a political cost to improve those relations (if, indeed further enraging his enemies is a cost rather than a benefit).

In short, this was a classic statement of diplomatic positions and a drawing of spheres of influence.

Flexibility and Inflexibility
As Putin listed his agenda, he showed that today’s Russia is a status quo power, whose primary objective is stability. Having come to power over a country diminished and dispirited, he sought to recover as much as possible of what Russia had lost in the Soviet break-up. He forcibly took back parts of Georgia and Ukraine. In doing so, he pushed against open doors.

Today, no other doors are open. Now being ahead, he wants to stop the game. He knows that this is possible because nobody is going to wage or even risk war against Russia to try disgorging Abkhazia and Crimea. He wants Trump to acknowledge that. Warning against extending NATO to Ukraine and Georgia, he signaled that all else is negotiable.