Questions From Helsinki

by with No Comment FeaturedPolitics

President Trump’s enormous misstep in Helsinki, heaping praise onto Putin was a strange misstep that casts doubt on what had seemed like a brilliant few months of politicking.  While the President has been repeatedly vilified in the news, his string of accomplishments had been growing, and it seemed in many cases that he was almost goading many of his opponents into vilifying him while positive results continued to stack up.

Tax reform has produced the lowest unemployment in the history of unemployment tracking.  His general style of creating chaos merely to create a trading chit has proved largely effective as a bargaining chip, while serving to simultaneously rally his base.  The trade war with China may yet yield results, and the short-term negative economic effects are largely offsetting (and probably keeping inflation in check while the market absorbs the cash influx of reduced tax burdens).  While they continue to look (unsuccessfully) for opportunities to create chaos and flexibility, North Korea is moving faster and harder than they ever have toward denuclearization having already dismantled several sites.

Related: Korean Reunification Will Never Work, And Here’s Why

The political fallout from child separation was neutralized (and perhaps made a political win) when he capitulated, causing Democrats to move the goalposts from “stop separations” to “abolish ICE” – leading to the massive primary upset of Joe Crowley by an incredibly talented (but incredibly socialist) Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, which distracted the party and dragged them horribly out of the mainstream.  His press secretary’s (Sarah Sanders) ejection from a DC area restaurant prompted calls for harassment of his entire administration – shaking America’s confidence in one of the few reprieves they had to offer the American people – an end to all the unsettling chaos of our current political discourse.

SIGN UP TO READ MORE!

 

Subscribe for free to receive similar content. 

Iran: What Comes Next?

by with One Comment FeaturedGen ZGlobalInternational

On May 8, President Donald Trump took perhaps the most consequential foreign policy action of his presidency thus far and announced that the United States would be withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), more commonly known as the Iran Nuclear Deal. Despite the fact that Iran has verifiably been compliant with the terms of the agreement, President Trump has repeatedly characterized it as a “bad deal” and the promise to withdraw the United States from it was a central pillar of his campaign. Although it fulfills the President’s campaign promise, American withdrawal from the JCPOA is comprising international security, regional stability, and the United States’ role in the international arena.  

European allies including France and Germany had spent the past several months working to convince the administration to stay a part of the deal and have made their displeasure with this development clear, indicating that they will do what they can to save the deal without the United States. This is no small task and many European diplomats have admitted that it would be exceedingly difficult. The EU does have the option of imposing retaliatory sanctions to shield European businesses or having the European Central Bank invest directly in Iran, although given the strength and pervasiveness of the American financial system it is unlikely that this would be enough to maintain the deal’s benefits for Iran. Regardless a signal has been sent to our European partners that they cannot rely on the United States to display the international leadership they once did.

If and when it becomes clear that Iran will not achieve the economic benefits that the deal promised it is highly probable that they will resume their nuclear program. Hardliners within Iran will take this opportunity to make the case that diplomacy is futile and future agreements will become increasingly difficult. At the same time, the country’s more moderate President, Hassan Rouhani, will likely see his influence weakened. As the Iranian economy, which has already been suffering from unrelated US sanctions, continues to get worse, it is average Iranian citizens who will bear the brunt of the sanctions. This could lead to a degree of social unrest, although any protests are likely to get cracked down upon early and hard.

If Iran does reinstate its nuclear program it will be much harder to once again put together the international sanctions regime that brought Iran to the negotiating table to begin with. Sanctions against the Iranian regime were effective when the international community worked as a united front. Unilateral US sanctions are likely to have a substantially smaller impact on the regime’s actions. Many of the most effective US sanctions, known as “secondary sanctions” or sanctions, levied not on the Iranian regime directly but on parties doing business with Iran. The reimposition of these sanctions is likely to have the greatest impact as they will act as a significant deterrent to European businesses who were quick to begin doing business in the country after the sanctions were lifted. It will also impact American firms, such as Boeing which had a large deal in place to supply airplane parts to Iran’s civil airline.  

What will most likely happen?

The US sanctions will be enough to prevent Iran from getting the benefits of the nuclear deal, thereby causing the deal to fall apart, but not enough to curb its activities in the region.

Refusing to stick to the accords doesn’t just increase the likelihood that Iran will end up with a nuclear weapon in the near term, it also sets a bad precedent and undermines faith in the United States with regards to future international negotiations. This is especially pertinent considering the upcoming summit with North Korea. The deal that is reportedly being offered to Kim Jong-Un, economic relief in exchange for the cessation of the country’s nuclear program, is similar to the one that the Trump administration is now reneging on with Iran. If the US has proven itself unable to stick to a deal once agreed upon with Iran, why would the North Koreans expect to be treated any differently?

Regardless of what one thinks of the administration’s withdrawal from the deal, it happened. The question now is what’s next?

At the end of his speech announcing the American withdrawal, President Trump expressed a willingness to renegotiate the deal. There is however little indication of what the administration would hope to gain by doing so. In fact, the administration seems to have no clear strategy on the issue. The vague normative statements, half-truths, and political chest-thumping that have characterized the President’s comments on the issue are not enough. If regional and international security is to be maintained, it is essential that the administration has a clear strategy for how to handle Iran in both the near and long-term. 

Korean Reunification Will Never Work, and Here’s Why

by with No Comment FeaturedGlobal

In response to Trump Succeeds Where Obama Did Not

I have great hope for the upcoming talks with North Korea, and I agree that the tone and setting are different than they’ve ever been before.  That said, while there is a possibility of everyone getting what they want (and thus currently a sense of great optimism in the possibility by all sides, and a thrust of welcoming outreach as each party sets up for the talks), there remain quite a few conflicting, zero-sum core objectives that are likely to color the actual talks and their ultimate impact.

First among these is reunification itself.  While reunification is a North and South objective, “reunification” looks very different in the minds of the two heads of state.  These two nations remain at war because each of their governments is unwilling to not be the surviving entity.  Further, reunification is China’s worst outcome.  China is at times uncomfortable with the DPRK and sees a nuclear North as problematic, but ultimately, their needs are best met by having a divided Korea and a buffer state between China and US-aligned South Korea.  North Korea is unlikely to re-align with the West regardless of North/South relations, and is unlikely to open itself up much at all.

Northern power is based on their own narrative and control of information.  Strict adherence to this policy has given the Kim dynasty firm control over a starving population.  Family reunification on any meaningful scale is likely to provide an infection of truth that might well topple their hold on the hearts and minds of the North Korean people.  As such, hopes of reunification (even among families) seems hard to imagine.

Additionally, we have come to this place precisely because the DPRK is on the brink of developing a nuclear missile that can hit the US mainland.  This attention and recognition was precisely the DPRK’s objective in building this weapon, and when the talks are over and the DPRK improves its situation from desperately starving to abject poverty through foreign aid, they are likely to realize once again that their best alternative is to tear up any nuclear concessions and go back to threatening the world with nuclear weapons.

What worries me is the only end to this loop is a sub-optimal outcome nearly everyone in the region.  Imagine a world where the DPRK after successful agreements violates those concessions and returns to weapon production.  The US strikes a deal with China that the US will destroy the weapons sites with force, but will allow China (not South Korea) to enter.  South Korea bears the brunt of a conventional artillery barrage, but repels a DPRK advance – but at great loss of life.  North Korea becomes either part of China proper or a puppet vassal state, likely ending the prospect of Korean reunification for at least the next 100 years.  In order to gain China’s acquiescence, the US would likely have to agree to cede our heavy presence in the Pacific – greatly reducing the US footprint on land and water, and likely leaving South Korea, Taiwan, Australia and Japan to deal with China as the unequivocal regional hegemon.

And Trump may well like that deal.  It protects the US from a nuclear threat (America first), moves the US back from our global posture (which he has said from the start is among his objectives), and in exchange for the US conceding regional hegemony to China (which he and many others see as merely a realistic eventuality), he is likely to get strong trade concessions that will benefit US industry in the short term.  In the thousand year sense, China also likes that deal – with the US gone from the region, they return to their rightful place atop the Asian region- achieved through negotiations, money and Korean (not Chinese) blood.

So while all of that is good for the US and China, it may be a bit early to start handing out Nobel Prizes.  The Trump/Xi version of Realpolitik is more likely to look like it did in the Franco-Prussian era- like two great powers carving out their spheres of influence.  Perhaps I’m wrong.  But we will see…

Trump Succeeds Where Obama Did Not?

by with 4 Comments FeaturedInternationalPolitics

The North Korean state media hailed a meeting between its leader and South Korea’s president as a “new milestone.” Momentous decisions took place at this meeting, one of them is to end the Korean War formally, and another being to make the Korean peninsula nuclear-free. 

South Korean’s news agency Yonhap reported on Saturday that both Pyongyang and Seoul “affirm the common goal of realizing a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula through complete denuclearization.”

On the opposite side of the border, North Korea’s Central News Agency (KCNA) also said that the summit would mark the way for “a new era of peace and prosperity.”

To cement these substantial declarations, the leaders of the two Koreas signed a joint statement after a historic summit that saw Kim Jong-un become the first North Korean leader to step into South Korea since the end of the Korean War in 1953.

A day of choreographed talks and symbolic gestures gave way to some unscripted spontaneity when Kim asked his South Korean counterpart to reciprocate by briefly stepping into North Korea.

The signing of the declaration came after two rounds of discussions between the leaders, as well as a symbolic tree-planting ceremony to bring about peace and prosperity on the split peninsula.

What does this all mean?

North Korea and South Korea have had talks before, have made pledges before and have also committed to peace previously, and none of it lasted. What makes this time different?

Here is a brief look at the sanctions (see fig. 1) and the reasons behind them. This new agreement would help Kim Jong-un remove some if not most of these sanctions and benefit from if the deal between South Korea, United States, and China goes through. 

Sanctions Against North Korea 

Year Action Sanction
Dec – 1985 DPRK ratifies the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
Jan – 2003 DPRK withdraws from NPT
Oct – 2006 UN Security Council (UNSC) passes resolution 1718 condemning the country’s first nuclear test and imposing sanctions on DPRK, including the supply of heavy weaponry, missile technology, material, and select luxury goods.
June – 2008 DPRK declares its nuclear programs to China and commits to shutting down parts of its Yongbyon nuclear facilities
June – 2009 UNSC adopts Resolution 1874, which strengthens against DPRK after it conducted its second nuclear explosion test.
Dec – 2011 North Korean leader Kim Jong-il dies after seventeen years in power. His son Kim Jong-un takes over
Jan – 2013 UNSC passes Resolution 2087 condemning DPRK 2012 satellite launch and proliferation activities.
Mar – 2013 UNSC passes Resolution 2094 imposing harsher sanctions in response to DPRK’s third nuclear test in a month prior
March – 2016 UNSC adopts Resolution 2270 condemning DPRK’s fourth nuclear test and its 2015 submarine-launched missile test. Sanctions are enhanced, including banning states from supplying aviation fuel to DPRK.
Nov – 2016 UNSC passes Resolution 2321 expanding sanctions after DPRK’s fifth nuclear test, including a ban on mineral exports such as copper and nickel, and the selling of statues and helicopters.
Aug – 2017 UNSC adopts Resolution 2371 boosting sanctions after DPRK’s two intercontinental ballistic missile tests in July, including a ban on coal and iron exports.
Sept – 2017 UNSC unanimously passes Resolution 2375 to ratchet up sanctions following DPRK’s sixth and largest nuclear test.
Dec – 2017 UNSC passes Resolution 2397 imposing new restrictions on oil imports, as well as metal, agricultural, and labor exports.

(Figure 1. Chronology of International action against the rogue state Eleanor A. (2018). What to know about the sanctions on North Korea. Retrieved from https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-know-about-sanctions-north-korea.)

These sanctions have been crushing to the economic stability and prosperity of North Korea. So the reason to come to the table now and push to make these promises stick this time is actually quite simple. Kim Jong-un wants to improve North Korea, and mutually the leaders of both Korea’s realize that there is more strength in unity than there is to remain split apart and to have outside influences use the “divide and conquer strategy” to get what they want and foster distrust and hatred to continue the vicious cycle.

This summit is good news. Having a joint Korea (or something close to it), will help the North become stable and less aggressive to the world. It will also open up borders for trade and commerce to flow once again while allowing peace and security to reach all its neighbors without fear of turning back. For the South, it will allow families who have been split for decades to finally reunite and remove threats to their stability and growth.

All that remains now is to see how these talks will fare with Donald Trump when he meet’s with Kim later this year. South Korean President Moon Jae-in has suggested that Trump should receive the Nobel Peace Prize should the matters of their talks come to fruition. We have yet to see how all of these recent developments stand with our President, and if he wants to truly make a positive difference. One thing for sure, time will tell fast.

Denuclearization is a milestone worthy of applause… but who deserves the applause?

Want to read more international pieces from Independent Asian Inquisitor, subscribe for free by clicking here: LCR

2018: Fast & Furious Politics?

by with No Comment FeaturedPolitics

Happy New Year! 2018 is here, and 2017 closes out the first year of Trump, a devastating hurricane season, more mumble rap, and of course another installment of the “Fast and Furious” franchise. Using the “Fast and Furious” franchise as a reference serves multiple purposes. Not because I’m a fan or non-fan, or because I even think the “Fast and Furious” franchise is good. It’s because it’s a good reference when comparing highly predictable actions and others that are completely unnecessary. No “Fast and Furious” movies needed to be made after the very first one back in the ancient year of 2001. Given all “Fast and Furious” movies have the same reoccurring scene with a car flying and Vin Diesel jumping out of it, and not even getting a paper cut in the process, the “Fast and Furious” movies aren’t the most surprising and cerebral movies to watch.

Now back to Happy New Year celebratory feel goods.

2018, will be much like 2017. Don’t be fooled. You just saw “Fast and Furious” 6, don’t think “Fast and Furious” 7 is going to turn into “Saving Private Ryan.” It’ll be another year of a company introducing a new phone and trying to convince us that the phone we already have is worthless, another year of a blockbuster flop and a blockbuster surprise, more mumble rap, a good sports story, a bad sports story, and then there’s Trump. Trump will have a profound effect on the political world, and I when I write world, I mean actual world affairs.

Trump’s first year largely swirled around domestic issues, he couldn’t help himself from not doing anything international. Trump in careless remarks or actions did the following: opted the United States out of the international Paris climate change treaty, one that even North Korea is on board with; during a photo opt shoved world leaders out the way to get in the front row of the picture, and engaged in a Drake/Meek Mill twitter battle with Kim Jong-Un. 2018 Twitter fingers may turn into trigger fingers (to quote Drake), and only Trump will be to blame.

Just like in the “Fast and Furious” movies Vin Diesel and company will not only save the day and get the girl, but will do it in even more of an exaggerated fashion than the previous installment, Trump’s hostile words and eventual actions towards rouge state leaders is getting worse and will continue to get worse by the Tweet.

North Korea is really a sideshow beef for Trump. His true objective is the last truly anti-American state with actual power and influence, Iran. UN Ambassador Nikki Haley and Trump in the final weeks of 2017 quietly gave the “whole world is watching” spills regarding recent protests of the government in Iran. Also, remember Trump campaigned against the Iranian nuclear agreement made under the Obama administration as being a terrible deal. Trump probably doesn’t know where Iran is on a map, but he does know that not much American business is being conducted there and that’s a problem for him. The extreme right, which Trump is clearly a part of, will lead you to believe Iran is a threat to the American way of life and the world is in danger. Akin to fear-mongering and the drumming of danger portrayed by George Bush in 2002, Iran is as much of a danger to the United States as “Fast and Furious” 7 will be nominated for the academy award picture of the year.

Iran really is an energy superpower with geographical and cultural importance that stands in the way of a complete American influenced middle east. Since 1979, and the fall the American-British propped Shah monarchy, Iran has been circled for revenge. Iran has never been surrounded geographically by American favoring states like it is now. Also, Iran had a strong relationship with Russia, one in which could easily go away with an American led and Russian backed military option against them. This is where 2018 could go from terrible Tweets and tax deals to actual boots and blood on the ground. Any unprovoked military and/or sanctions against Iran from the actual United States is completely unnecessary and can be avoided, just as I avoided “Fast and Furious” 7 for the longest until I saw it on HBO. [It was free, so don’t blame me.

Luckily, the 2018 midterm elections might stop the momentum. The Dr. Dre beats drumming for war can easily go to Great Value headphones if war hawk support for actions against Iran is defeated in November. In the meanwhile, in 2018 enjoy a terrible Super Bowl halftime performance, a viral meme, a catchy mumble rap song, and of course plans for another “Fast and Furious” movie. Things won’t change in Washington, especially with Trump in office.

Is Tillerson Next?

by with One Comment FeaturedGen ZPolitics

Rex might be on the way out. On October 9, 2017, we published an article detailing his troubles with the State Department. Since then, rumors of his feud with Donald Trump have continued. Our initial article below might include some of the reasons for what seems to be his inevitable departure.

[Rex Tillerson’s War Against the State Department]

Rex Tillerson has had a less-than-illustrious tenure as Secretary of State so far. Perhaps it’s because he seems to be more focused on reorganizing the department than on, you know, diplomacy. His striking lack of success has lead many to call for his resignation and for him to be called the “most ineffectual secretary of state since 1898,” by respected Foreign Policy columnist Max Boot. 

The Trump administration has made it exceedingly clear that it does not consider diplomacy a priority. According to some metrics compiled by the New York Times, under Tillerson’s leadership, the department has had its lowest profile in nearly half a century. Democracy promotion has been erased from the State Department’s mission statement and the Trump Administration has made every effort to cut key foreign aid programs. 

Part of the reason the department has been so ineffective is because the administration has failed to fill an inexcusable amount of key positions. Only one Assistant Secretary of State has been confirmed and the vast majority do not even have nominees. (Here’s a list compiled by The Washington Post of unfilled positions.) To put this in perspective the United States is currently facing a nuclear standoff in North Korea without an Undersecretary (or Assistant Secretary for that matter) for Arms control. While the federal government’s hiring freeze has been rescinded it remains in effect at the State Department. Until recently, state department officials were not allowed to serve on the National Security Council omitting an essential perspective from national security decisions. 

Tillerson’s mismanagement of the State Department has caused many senior diplomats to leave, further weakening State’s ability to conduct diplomacy. At the same time, Tillerson has suspended the prestigious fellowship programs that allow bright young minds to enter the department. Some of these fellows have their salaries paid by outside institutions, so Tillerson is essentially rejecting free labor. On top of all these other issues, there is growing evidence that the Secretary of State is on the outs with his boss. According to several sources, Donald Trump has become increasingly frustrated with Secretary Tillerson.

Just like pretty much everybody else in the government, lawmakers on Capitol Hill also seem to be fed up with the Secretary. The Senate Appropriations Committee passed a bill that completely upended the administration’s plans to make significant cuts to foreign aid and diplomacy initiatives – providing $11 billion more than requested. Not only did they allocate more funds than Tillerson wanted, they also included management amendments in the bill that severely limit the Secretary’s ability to reorganize the department. For example, the bill limits the size of the Policy Planning Staff – something that Tillerson had been expanding and that career State Department officials felt was undermining their ability to influence policy.

Now to be sure not everything Secretary Tillerson does is awful. His willingness to distance himself from Donald Trump’s remarks on Charlottesville is admirable and some of his reorganization initiatives do make a lot of sense. But the State Department still needs to serve its primary function – namely advancing US diplomatic interests – something it has not been able to do effectively under Rex Tillerson’s leadership. The decline of America’s diplomatic arm can only lead to an increased reliance on hard (military) power. A Senate report sums up this issue pretty nicely: “The lessons learned since September 11, 2001, include the reality that defense alone does not provide for American strength and resolve abroad. Battlefield technology and firepower cannot replace diplomacy and development.” 

This article was originally published on 9 October 2017.

The Life And Times of Bowe Bergdahl

by with One Comment FeaturedGlobal

Bergdahl is going home. Getting to that answer has taken the Army more than three years – after the Obama administration traded him for five of the worst terrorists in Guantanamo. There’s a lot to unpack in this.

Working backward:

Bowe Bergdahl was a dumb kid who did dumb kid things. While that’s true, sometimes dumb kid things get you killed or land you in prison in awful places of the world – just ask Otto Warmbier who went to North Korea against all advice, was imprisoned for stealing a poster from his hotel hallway and was released by the DPRK after 17 months in his final days after what seems to have been massive brain damage from torture. Neither Bergdahl nor Warmbier deserved such consequences, but that’s beside the point – sometimes the costs of bad decisions are too much to bear. I don’t fault the military judge who decided five years in the awful place Bergdahl was locked away was enough. That military judge was making a decision based on facts and circumstances and American justice. I probably would have given prison time, but that isn’t the painful issue to me. The painful issue is that we traded to get Bergdahl back at all.

The decision to trade him back fits with President Obama’s core beliefs. They are beliefs I don’t demonize, but in this application, I deeply disagree. President Obama pardoned or commuted huge numbers of people whom he believed were US citizens who were in jail beyond the bounds of justice. This fits solidly with that tenet of justice he holds dear. It’s a good concept, and while I may not have made those commutations, the decision to do so is not outrageous and is consistent with much of his world view. The decision also fits with President Obama’s longstanding view that Guantanamo should be closed. Releasing five of the worst inmates in the entire place certainly seems to reduce the level of need on many of the other members. Again – his concept of American justice is not invalid, but in practice these people were there because short of murdering them, there seemed no other way to remove them from a world of free people those individuals were determined to kill and maim. They were not in prison to serve time, but to keep them away from those they would harm. In one stroke, the president moved closer to both of those objectives which were noble in concept, consistent with good values and extremely dangerous to the long term safety of Americans and the West.

Most of those prisoners in Guantanamo were captured at great risk to American lives. By all rights, they should have died on the battlefield in Afghanistan rather than being captured. That we went to such pains to take them alive was due to an over-arching need for information about the attacks they had just unleashed on the US and a sense of fear that they had more already in planning. In trying to learn what we could from them, we did a number of things America says it doesn’t believe in – including torture and indefinite extra-judicial detention. That was misguided and horribly unfortunate, but we are at much greater risk for their release.

Also at issue is the precedent we set by trading so many high profile people for such a marginalized soldier – captured by his own criminal act of desertion for reasons that still seem either frivolous or simply disingenuous. Such actions show that the way for terrorists to engineer further releases is through further capture of American citizens. In the coming years we will likely re-learn what the hostage negotiators of the 60s and 70s learned about negotiating with terrorists: it breeds more negotiation with more terrorists.

Bowe Bergdahl didn’t deserve another term in a US prison, but he did deserve to spend whatever time was due with the Taliban until a US force could find him and mount a real rescue operation that kept those evil men we had separated from society in a place where they could do no more harm. It wasn’t the prison Bergdahl deserved, but it was the right and rational consequence of his circumstances. The “Taliban Five” are already largely back plotting death and destruction to the West – and they are among the few free, living people alive who remain from the pre-9/11 days who are really, really good and experienced at doing just that.

Additionally, we’ve set the precedent that any American traveling abroad is a living, breathing ticket to release the worst terrorists ever to speak the words “Death to America.” President Obama did truly act in a manner that’s consistent with most of what we value as Americans in making what I’m sure was a hard choice. Unfortunately for us, I fear no good deed will go unpunished.

Hurricane Trump

by with No Comment Uncategorized
The last 10 months of the Trump Administration have been fraught with upheaval, uncertainty, and unpreparedness. It’s one thing to have a president who doesn’t know what he’s doing; it’s quite another to have a president who doesn’t know what he’s doing and sabotages the efforts of the people who do.
Trump is the enemy who doesn’t realize he is the enemy. Blustering his way around the White House, the country and the world, he seeks only his own glorification, and is oblivious to the damage he inflicts while doing so. His extreme self-centeredness is not unlike that of Kim Jong Un, another self-centered narcissist who just happens to be the leader of a country with nuclear capability. And he is not afraid to flaunt it.
Trump’s dismantling of the Paris Accord, the multiple efforts at dismantling the Affordable Care Act, the ham-fisted attempts at diplomacy and as “comforter-in-chief” – all of this pales in comparison to the very real threat he has become.
De-certifying the Iran nuclear deal takes the cards out of the hands of all of the countries supporting it, and into the hands of the Iranian government in one swipe. Sanctions will take its place, which will produce the opposite effect intended. Iran will find a way to work around those sanctions and step up its uranium production.
Ladies and gentlemen, we now have a trifecta of nukes. 
Playing one-upmanship games with North Korea, while his top diplomat is trying to calm the waters, is proof positive that the US president has no understanding of the world. He is crippling any attempt to prevent a conflict, merely because he wants to be right.
This childish chest-beating between Trump and Kim is likely to escalate now that the Iran deal is slotted for dismantling – because there will be a third player in this dangerous triad. John Kelly, brought in to try to rein in Trump’s disastrous behavior, is not likely to have much, if any, effect on how Trump plays his games. Believing that anyone can control such an uncontrollable force might as well try to stop a hurricane. 
Similar content from Registered Independent Voter: The Trump Train Wreck

The Accidental President

by with One Comment FeaturedPolitics

Six months later, amidst NFL tweets and a speech at the UN against Iran and North Korea, which sounded a bit like it was written by a speechwriter from Iran or North Korea, it still doesn’t feel quite like reality.

Even so, and although I’m not even sure it’s part of some brilliant plan anymore, there are two things that may have made this a time for a president that seems completely willing to descend into chaos: DACA and North Korea.  I understand that raises some eyebrows, but hear me out.

Despite what the President said over and over before the election on DACA, and as scary as it is to be on the train right now, I’m not certain he hasn’t done the dreamers a favor.  Press even Chuck Schumer or Dianne Feinstein to explain the legality of President Obama’s DACA program and they are hard pressed.  They know it’s not legal, and they know it’s their own Congress that’s being usurped by executive order.  They’re also extremely uncomfortable with letting the precedent of executive privilege sit with any president- but especially this one.  If these attorney generals took their case to this Supreme Court, defended by this solicitor general, DACA likely would be overturned.  Despite the rhetoric, the six-month delay to give Congress time to fix it (ie- demand they fix it) seems likely to have the votes it would need to clear, and if the President really is willing to sign it (looks very much like he is), this could be a constitutional crisis averted.  President Obama did DACA by executive order because he had to.  If Trump makes this law, it will be one point on the board for America as partial compensation for the pain of watching TV every day.

The other may be North Korea.  Now- I’m not certain that we won’t be engaged in armed conflict – possibly nuclear-armed conflict – with North Korea in the coming two years.  That said, for ten years they have been swearing that they will kill all of us in a sea of fire and building their nuclear arsenal and missile capability while president after president said “don’t do that or else…”  and they keep going, and there’s no “or else” that seems to matter.  It could well be that there was no way for this to end well for the US, that eventually this conflict was coming, and waiting for them to catch up to full nuclear capability would make it worse, not better.  If that’s true, maybe it’s prudent to end this 50-year standoff before the DPRK truly does bring a nuclear ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) system online.  And I’m not sure a traditional, prudent president in the mold of anyone since Eisenhower would have been willing to take the personal risk of a preemptive strike (which is likely to have horrible repercussions in the best of circumstances)- even though that same president may know it’s the most prudent course of action for the World.

I still can’t watch news live.  It hurts. But if in 2 years’ time, DACA is law and the DPRK is no longer a threat to the World, this president will have a legacy that might look better to history than it looks on Twitter.

Bannon’s Exit Was Expected? The LCR Responds…

by with One Comment Uncategorized

Steve Bannon’s addition as Chief Strategist to the administration might’ve been the most controversial of all the president’s picks. Many suggested that Bannon, the former Breitbart executive, wouldn’t be in the White House much longer after John Kelly replaced Reince Priebus as the new Chief of Staff, and they were right. We asked three of our contributor’s to weigh in regarding his sudden, yet expected, departure. Here’s what they had to say…

“With the ouster of Steve Bannon, the Trump Administration just started eating its own young. Trump’s ever-loyal base, consisting of the some of the worst humanity has to offer – so cleanly coined the “Alt Right” – is now beginning to fracture, collapsing under the weight of scandals that have rocked this administration from the very beginning. But this isn’t the beginning of the end; it’s merely the end of the beginning. We are only seeing the first part of a very long battle. It’s not over yet.” – Registered Independent Voter 

“This is a good step forward for the administration – the too slow professionalization of the West Wing. It was clear last week when the President was threatening involvement with the DPRK, Venezuela and Iran simultaneously that Bannon’s agenda was no longer the President’s. The next question is whether the President will operate with any vision at all, or whether he will simply react to World affairs.” – Right Army Veteran 

“Have you ever heard that quote “success is where preparation and opportunity meet”? It’s one of those cliche lines that actually makes sense and is a good reminder in times like Bannon being booted from the White House. The White House is crumbling. The presidents supporters are slowly but surely deserting him. Impeachment, once a far off possibility but now seems more like a prediction of our near future. What will happen when/if they move forward with the removal of #45? Are your thoughts and beliefs represented by the people who are left in power? It’s time to really think about that. When the time comes, are you prepared to be successful? We will have the time to vote again and let our voice be heard. Are you ready for that?”– Center Left HR

One of our contributor’s details Bannon’s exit: Sith Lords Run the White House

Want to read similar content from the Left, Center, Right? SUBSCRIBE for only $2/month.