In just two weeks as president of the
United States, Donald Trump has given indications of how he intends to tackle
various international political situations. So far we have observed the
controversy over Iran, the events related to NATO, rapprochement with Russia,
escalation in Ukraine, silence on Syria, the US special-forces operation in
Yemen, verbal clashes with the EU, and the absence of further criticism of
China. This first article will focus on the US deep state’s possible sabotage
attempts of the Trump presidency.
Tensions continue to rise unabated in the
first two weeks of Donald Trump’s presidency, as more decisions come across
Trump’s table. While we have seen many executive orders and pieces of
legislation, most regard domestic politics, which is a core focus of the Trump
presidency. On the other hand, in foreign policy, Trump seems to be using the
common tactic of many politicians, which involves much talk and little action.
Since US foreign policy has been a mess for quite some time, militating against
common sense, taking little action can actually be a positive thing, the best
thing a US president has been able to do in almost thirty years! If there is
one thing that is clear to everyone about Trump’s way of doing things following
two weeks in office, it is that it is completely different from his
predecessor, especially in relation to the press and his willingness to engage
with it.
The use of executive orders looks more and
more like a weapon to flood the press and news agencies with talking points
concerning domestic policies, leaving little room for particular pressure on
foreign policy from the media establishment. It almost looks like a tactic of
guerrilla warfare to overwhelm the mainstream media. It could and probably is
also a PR stunt to show the American people he is doing what he promised. Stunt
or not, acknowledging the power of the media in creating a pretext for war, and
therefore putting a stop to the drums of war, is one of the first key marks of
his success.
The main problem continues to be the
ongoing war with the US deep state, something that will not be going away
anytime soon, and a campaign that may have entered a new stage against the
Trump presidency.
Sabotage or Incompetence?
The first two weeks of the new presidency
have already provided a few significant events. The operation that took place
in Yemen, conducted by the American special forces and directed against Al
Qaeda, has reprised the previous administration. Being a complex operation that
required thorough preparation, the new administration thereby had to
necessarily represent a continuation of the old one. Details are still vague, but looking at
the outcome, the mission failed as a result of incompetence. The American
special forces were spotted before arriving at al Qaeda’s supposed base. This
resulted in the shooting of anything that moved, causing more than 25 civilian
deaths.
The media that had been silent during the
Obama administration was rightfully quick to condemn the killing of innocent
people, and harsh criticism was directed at the administration for this
operation. It is entirely possible that the operation was set up to fail,
intended to delegitimize the operational capabilities of the new Trump team.
Given the links between al Qaeda, the Saudis, and the neoconservatives,
something historically proven, it is not unthinkable that the failure of the
operation was a consequence of an initial attempt at sabotaging Trump on a key
aspect of his presidency, namely the successful execution of counter-terrorist
efforts against Islamist terrorism.
Another structural component in the
attempts to undermine the Trump administration concern the deployment of NATO
and US troops on the western border of the Russian Federation. This attempt is
obvious and is one of the strategies aimed at preventing a rapprochement
between Washington and Moscow. The EU persists in its self-defeating policy,
focusing its attention on foreign policy instead of gaining strategic
independence thanks to the new presidency. It is now even more clear that
European Union leaders, and in particular the current political representatives
in Germany and France, have every intention of continuing in the direction set
by the Obama presidency, seeking a futile confrontation with the Russian
Federation instead of a sensible rapprochement.
Europe continues to insist on failed
economic and social policies that will lead to bankruptcy, using foreign-policy
issues as diversions and excuses. The consequences of these wrongheaded efforts
will inevitably favor the election of nationalist and populist parties, as seen
in the United States and other countries, which will end in the destruction of
the EU. For the US deep state and their long-term objectives, this tactic has a
dual effect: it prevents the proper functioning of the EU as well as
significantly halts any rapprochement between the EU and the Russian Federation.
The latter strategy looks more and more irreversible given the current European
Union elites. In this sense, the UK, thanks to Brexit, seems to have broken
free and started to slowly restructure its foreign- policy priorities, in close
alignment to Trump’s isolationism.
Finally, the most obvious attempt to
sabotage the administration can be seen in the events in Ukraine.
Unsurprisingly, Senators Graham and McCain, two of the deep state’s top
emissaries, visited Ukraine at the beginning of the year, prompting Ukrainian
troops to resume their destructive offensive against the Donbass. The
intentions are clear and assorted. First is the constant attempt to sabotage
any rapprochement between Moscow and Washington, hoping to engulf Trump in an
American/NATO escalation of events in Ukraine. Second, given the critical
situation in Europe, is the effort to push Berlin to assume the burden of
economically supporting the failing administration in Kiev. The third is the
increasing pressure applied to Russia and Putin, as was already seen in 2014,
in an effort to actively involve the Russian Federation in the Ukrainian
conflict so as to justify NATO’s direct involvement or even that of the United
States. The latter situation would be the dream of the neoconservatives,
setting Trump and Putin on a direct collision course.
The new American administration has thus
far suffered at least three sabotage attempts, and it is the attitude Trump
intends to have with the rest of the world that has spurred them. In an
interview with Bill O’Reilly on Fox News, Trump reiterated that his
primary focus is not governed by the doctrine of American exceptionalism, a
concept he does not subscribe to anyhow. The religion driving democratic
evangelization looks more likely to be replaced with a pragmatic, realist
geopolitical stance.
This is how one could sum up Trump’s words
to Bill O’Reilly:
«There are a lot of killers. We have a lot
of killers», Trump said. «Well, you think our
country is so innocent?»
What the deep state refuses to accept is
that they have lost the leading role in educating the rest of the world on
humanitarian issues related to the concept of democracy. The main actors of the
deep state clearly understand the negative implications for them personally in
economic and financial terms associated with the abandonment of the pursuit of
global hegemony. For over a hundred years, no US president has ever placed
their country on a par with others, has ever abandoned the concept of a nation
(the US) «chosen by God».
In an article a few weeks ago, I tried to lay
the foundations for a future US administration, placing a strong focus on
foreign policy and revealing a possible shift in US historic foreign relations.
In a passage I wrote:
«Donald Trump has emerged with in mind a
precise foreign policy strategy, forged by various political thinkers of the
realist world such as Waltz and Mearsheimer, trashing all recent
neoconservative and neoliberal policies of foreign intervention (R2P – Right to
Protect) and soft power campaigns in favor of human rights. No more UN
resolutions, subtly used to bomb nations (Libya). Trump doesn’t believe in the
central role of the UN and reaffirmed this repeatedly.
In general, the Trump administration
intends to end the policy of regime change, interference in foreign
governments, Arab springs and color revolutions. They just don’t work. They
cost too much in terms of political credibility, in Ukraine the US are allied
with supporters of Bandera (historical figure who collaborated with the Nazis)
and in Middle East they finance or indirectly support al Qaeda and al Nusra
front».
The recent meeting in Washington with
Theresa May, the first official encounter with a prominent US ally, revealed,
among other things, a possible dramatic change in US policy. The Prime Minister
of the United Kingdom expressed her desire to follow a new policy of
non-intervention, in line with the isolationist strategy Trump has spoken about
since running for office. In a joint press conference with the American
president, May said: «The era of military intervention is over. London and
Washington will not return to the failed policy in the past that has led to
intervention in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya».
During the election campaign, Trump made
his intentions clear in different contexts, but always coming from the
standpoint of non-interventionism inspired by the concept of isolationism. It
is becoming apparent that these intentions are being put into action, though
the rhetoric regarding Iran has become alarming. In typical Trump fashion
(which contrasts with the Iran issue), the situation in Syria is normalizing
and the initial threats directed at China appear to have been put aside. The
case of Iran is a different and complex story, requiring a deeper analysis that
deserves a separate article. What will gradually be important, as the
Presidency progresses, is understanding the necessity to distinguish between
words and actions, separating provocations from intentions.
Conclusions and future questions
There is a whole list of Trump statements
that are seen as threats to other countries, primarily Iran. The next article
will further explain the possible strategy to be employed by Donald Trump to
fight these attempts to sabotage his administration, a strategy that seems to
be based on silences, bluffs, and admissions to counter the perpetual attempts
to influence his presidency. If one wants to place weight on his words during
the election campaign, it should be taken into consideration that Trump won the
election thanks to the clear objectives of wanting to avoid a further spending
spree on destructive wars. This priority was made clear and expressed in every
possible way with the adoption of an America First policy, especially regarding
domestic policy.
The bottom line is always that Trump has the
ability and willingness to be resilient to the pressures of the deep state,
focusing on the needs of the average American citizen, rather than caving into
the interests of the deep state such as intelligence agencies, neocons, Israel
lobby, Saudi lobby, the military-industrial complex, and many more. It is only
in the next few months that we will come to understand if Trump will be willing
to continue the fight against war or bend the knee and pay the price.
Copyright © 2017 Strategic Culture Foundation |
Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture on-line journal www.strategic-culture.org.Views of the authors
do not necessarily reflect one's of the SCF Editorial
