The Trump Doctrine: What Ukraine Says About Trump’s Foreign Policy

by with 5 Comments FeaturedGlobalPolitics

One of the biggest stories of 2019…  

In the latest episode of The D.C. Apprentice reality show, we unpeeled another layer of the onion that is the Trump Doctrine. Whether it’s Brexit, Afghanistan, Jamal Khashoggi, summits with North Korea, tariffs and trade deals, Putin, and now, Ukraine, we bear witness to a convoluted set of policies without specific details and a heavy emphasis on maximizing publicity and attention. Trump’s foreign policy is based on minimizing or eliminating long-term military engagements, renegotiating agreements that play into his deal-making reputation, and provoking diplomatic altercations that further establish Trump as the Commander-in-Chief of Red State America.

Trump vocally embraces the paleoconservative philosophy championed by Patrick Buchanan, Steve Bannon, Lou Dobbs, and numerous contributors to Fox News and Breitbart News. It embraces traditional social positions and nationalism while strongly opposing trade agreements, immigration, and international organizations. It also has a strong isolationist influence that opposes military interventions. Between the trade wars, ICE raids, border wall funding, immigration and asylum reductions, NATO criticisms, and troop withdrawals in Afghanistan, Trump is reliably committed to Paleoconservative orthodoxies. 

Trump’s reputation as a deal-making businessman from his real estate business in New York to his TV show to his book, ‘The Art of the Deal,’ is built on maximizing publicity by making grandiose, must-see-tv gestures that consumes all oxygen from other competitors. Whether it’s the summits with the North Korean dictator, renegotiating NAFTA, and imposing tariffs on trading partners like China, Trump uses each opportunity and/or manufactured diplomatic crisis to further burnish his perceived deal-making reputation. 

Perhaps most importantly, Trump’s foreign policy is dependent on cementing his status as the Commander-in-Chief of red-state America. The President has gone all-in on being the war-time commander in the new cold war between red and blue America. Withdrawing from the Paris climate treaty is the perfect example. The trade wars with Mexico and China appeals to the rural working-class voters in Midwest and Southern states who see their manufacturing tradition threatened by globalization. Trump’s coalition swapped out college-educated middle-class voters in suburban counties for working-class voters in rural areas. He relishes any attack from blue-state America because it further establishes his war-time credentials with red-state America. Therefore, the Ukraine news only solidifies his support from his fans. In the mind of his supporters, they are at war, and all is fair in love and war. That might seem drastic, but his supporters love that there is no line he won’t cross to defend them against their enemy. Trump has nearly 3 years of history proving himself to his supporters that he will fight every fight that they believe his predecessors were too weak to engage, and this is no different.

This article was originally published on 27 September 2019.

Ilhan Omar… Anti-Semitism or Islamophobia?

by with No Comment CultureFeatured

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s recent remarks about Israel’s involvement in US affairs has sparked outrage in our government. In one of her statements to Congress, she said, “I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.” Without ever attacking Jews or Judaism itself, she has been labelled as “anti-Semitic.” Pro-Israel lobbying groups quickly went up in arms to attack her, and multiple people have called for her to be removed from the Foreign Affairs Committee. President Trump even tweeted a response in which he called her comments reflective of a “dark day for Israel.” A picture of Omar has gone viral that depicts her in front of the burning buildings from 9/11.

Despite receiving an inordinate amount of criticism, Omar has not retracted her comments or stepped down from her position on the Foreign Affairs Committee. Plenty of Democrats have voiced their opinions against her, despite belonging to the same party. Several days after Omar’s remarks, a resolution was passed to denounce anti-Semitism and overall hate, which includes anti-Muslim rhetoric as well.

I recently spoke to someone who highlighted something I had never thought of before. When someone says something against Jews or Judaism, they are labelled as anti-Semitic. The use of the prefix “anti” indicates that the person who is committing the action is in the wrong. They are against something that they should not be against. When there is anti-Muslim rhetoric; however, it is most often labelled as Islamophobic. The suffix “phobia” implies that it is not necessarily wrong for someone to be against Islam. In fact, the use of this term categorizes Islam as something to be afraid of, like the dark or spiders. A person who is Islamophobic is seen as a good person who is rightly afraid of something, whereas an anti-Semite is a bad person who is against something good. The usage of these terms are not an accident, and it is clear that there are political associations with both words.

Ilhan Omar brought to light an important matter concerning our country’s undying loyalty to a foreign nation, yet she was attacked for doing so. The U.N. recently found that Israel intentionally shot children, journalists, and the disabled during protests in Gaza; yet, we see more outrage when someone questions our national loyalty than the murder of innocent people. It is clear that there is a major issue with the way that the US blindly supports Israel and its policies, and I hope that Ilhan Omar will not be the last one to call attention to this problem.

Similar Read: Ideas Make This Country Great

Syria, the Office Potluck of International Relations

by with One Comment Uncategorized

“When you’re invited to the holiday or general office potluck, there’s a natural reluctance to jump right in and grab a plate. The United States engagement with the Syrian Civil War is no different. The reluctance to intervene should be maintained for as long as possible.” 

There’s a wide range of opinions on the current Syrian Civil War. I can bet dollars to doughnuts, no one who isn’t in Syria or Syrian has a true clue on what they’re talking about. That goes from the President of the United States to the AmandaRyan Facebook page of your high school classmate and husband who post their very narrow suburbs of Atlanta point of view of the conflict. The Syrian conflict is much more layered than seeing awful video clips of children being rushed to hospitals, and the knee jerk reaction post of the AmandaRyan account, stating, “Why don’t we do something?!”

Speaking of AmandaRyan, one of them thought it would be a good idea, instead of getting catered food, for the office to have a potluck. Potlucks are a hairline above spaghetti night at vacation bible school. And no, I’m not a foodie or food snob, I just don’t like bad food and neither does my stomach. And potlucks produce nothing but questionable looking and even more questionable tasting food. Why? Cause people can’t cook, just that simple. Some people have no business dabbling in the world of cuisine for they don’t know what they’re doing. They prepare and cook based on what they think should go into a recipe, or worse based on how they think it should taste. The result is crockpots full of boiling goo that’s supposed to be jambalaya. No, thank you.

Back to Syria.

Syria is in a sense a potluck. For starters most don’t even know where Syria is, they don’t understand the variables involved in the Syrian war, and they don’t understand why. Yes, in a simplistic way the Syrian war is between the government of Bashar Al-Assad vs rebellious forces vs a group who calls itself the Islamic State. The group was said, by then candidate Trump, to have been co-founded by Hillary Clinton and President Obama. The denouncement Trump gave is equal to someone saying, by me not liking the Backstreet Boys, it led to the creation of One Direction, crazy! Anyway, there’s three legitimate groups fighting. None of them are factions in which the United States should side with. None have pure intentions in their actions – meaning neither of the factions are fighting to establish a wholesome, non-oppressive, democratic society. No, all sides are fighting to control Syria the way they see fit, and we simply don’t know enough to understand or decide which fit is best. Which is bad.

Potlucks are generally bad for their cuisines made to the liking of a specific individuals. Unlike restaurants or people who cooked something so good all types of people request it from them, the United States should never get involved in a foreign affair in which the clear purpose and clear reasons is not understood by both the United States and the people we’re supposed to help. Simply go down the list of every bad American intervention and I don’t have to explain myself.

For a potluck, the best plan of action to avoid eating and being labeled antisocial is to simply go into the break room to show you’re aware and your presence will be noted. However, at no point are you getting a plate. The United States has already made its presence known regarding the Syrian conflict, and there’s no need to do more. Syria may look like jambalaya and we know how to get down on some jambalaya, but in actuality it’s a cold and unseasoned minestrone soup. 

Change in the Air: The Protests in Iran

by with No Comment International

For a while now, the people of Iran have had two things to be angry about: the economy and the government.

Years of rising costs in real estate and the price of meat have put Iranians in an awkward position. Iranians expected more than what they got. Regional experts like to talk about how Iran is not as dangerous or oppressive as some of its neighbors, and the very fact that Iranians can complain proves this. But the country is still struggling, and if you lived there, you would feel it immediately.

Iran is a hard country, and the desire to separate the economic woes from the political mess might cause one to miss the point. Both issues are intertwined, more so when outcry is met with violent repression.

The protests you have been slowly hearing about started around Dec. 28. The Islamic Revolutionary guards corps and the clerical establishment under the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, are the enforcers of the repression in Iran, as well as the beneficiaries of a system that has performed poorly for everyone else. This fact is not lost on the demonstrators who have vehemently objected to the new budget by calling for an end to the current regime.

The people who are currently protesting are from the lower classes and are motivated by the lack of economic fairness and opportunities in the country. The nuclear deal, with its promise to end the sanctions that never really happened, did not appease the longstanding unemployment crisis. The 2018 budget released last month, revealed in harsh terms the regime’s desire to spend on religious institutions and foreign adventures, even though there have been cuts in cash dispersals and an increase in fuel prices, the threat of drought in the provinces, environmental degradation, and embezzlement have repeatedly incited the public.

Maybe all these issues are growing pains of a country trying to redefine its presence in a globally-minded world, or perhaps it isn’t. The truth for many Iranians is that their country has resources that their family and friends never see.

As of now, the protesters know that they won’t be able to effectively make a change to the current establishment. But what they are hoping is that their cry for change will be picked up and echoed by more and more people in the country and around the world to build enough pressure for the government to make positive changes.

The latest protests have no leaders to imprison or publicly humiliate. These demonstrations aren’t pitting the elites against one another, but everyday people against the state. If there is anything you should know as you read this article, it’s how little we know as Americans about what is happening in Iran. The current regime and its desire to censor everything, made sure of this. So the battle is a two-pronged war. One part is our foreign policy on Iran, and the other is Iran’s need to push everything under the rug.

Iran Wracked by Waves of Protests

by with No Comment FeaturedGen ZInternationalNews

Since December 28th tens of thousands of protesters have gathered all around Iran. The protests first began in the Northeastern city of Mashhad and constitute the largest outbreak of civil unrest in the country since the disputed 2009 presidential election and the wave of “Green Revolution” protests it caused. More than 20 people have died in the protests, which are still ongoing.

The demonstrations were initially sparked by concerns over the state of the country’s economy and the high prices of staple goods. After the lifting of sanctions under the nuclear deal, there was an expectation among Iranians that the economy would recover from its period of stunted growth, an outcome that has been slow to materialize. Youth unemploymenthas reached 40% and, not coincidentally, young people make up a large portion of the protesters. With all of these factors putting the country’s population on edge, the straw that broke the camel’s back and brought Iranians into the streets came in the form of a leaked draft budget which increased spending to the military and the clerical establishment while cutting subsidies for the poor.

Over the following week the protests developed from being focused on the state of the economy to being an open rebellion against the country’s repressive theocratic regime, with protesters chanting slogans such as “death to the dictator.” The country’s activist foreign policy has also become increasingly unpopular as many of its citizens struggle to make ends meet domestically. Iran has spent billions supporting proxies and allies in the region, such as the Syrian government, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and to a lesser extent the Houthis in Yemen.

The Iranian government has accused the protesters of being sponsored by foreign governments to create social unrest in the country and has cracked down pretty heavily on the protesters, using tear gas, water cannons, and other means in an effort to forcibly disperse them. According to human rights groups thousands of protesters have been rounded up and detained. Those arrested could potentially face brutal prison conditions or the death penalty, in a recent declaration made by the head of Iran’s Revolutionary Court. The regime has throttled internet access and blocked social media and messaging apps that had been used by the protesters to organize. As a result, the information coming out of the country began to slow leading to rumors of the protests dying out, but these turned out to be untrue. The government was also able to mobilize pro-government counter protests.

As of right now it is still too early to determine what will come of these protests. Some analysts are predicting the end of the regime while others expect the protests to fizzle out and amount to nothing. The protests seem to have no well-defined leadership, so it is unclear who, if anyone, would be able to lead a regime change. President Rouhani’s position has definitely been weakened and it is likely that the country’s security apparatus, especially the Revolutionary Guards will have seen their influence expanded asa result of their role in dealing with the protests.

Meanwhile, the US government has expressed support for the Iranian protesters. The Trump administration, which has already been openly hostile towards Iran and the Iranian government, has suggested the possibility of more sanctions depending on Iran’s reaction to the protest. The President has tweeted several times in support of the protests including tweeting that Iranians are finally “getting wise”. The United States requested an emergency session of the United Nation’s Security Council on the subject of Iran. The session was held on Friday and US Ambassador Nikki Haley took the opportunity to put Iran “on notice” that the US would not tolerate any human rights abuses. Other countries such as France and Russia voiced their dismay that the US was bringing what they viewed as an internal Iranian affair to the Security Council.

President Rouhani responded by saying that Donald Trump had no right to criticize Iran after calling them terrorists and preventing Iranians from entering the United States. Iranians don’t really care for President Trump and it’s unlikely that his tweets will have any effect on the protests. American sanctions as well as the United State’s wavering position on the nuclear deal are at least partially responsible for the economic stagnation that spurred the protests.