April 15, 2017--America First?

Whatever became of America First? Donald Trump's nationalistic view that we have spent too much time worrying about what is going on in the world and not enough on America's needs? The need for more well-paying jobs, the restoration of manufacturing and extraction industries, infrastructure repairs, and sealed borders?

This was expressed legislatively and though the wielding of executive orders to contain immigration, lower taxes, reduce regulations, and of course "fix" the healthcare system.

But now we have Trump reversing himself in many regards very much including turning considerable attention to foreign affairs.

Most dramatically, he had President Xi of China spend two days bonding with him at Mar-a-Lago, sent Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to the G-7 foreign ministers' summit and then on to Moscow for meetings with his Russian counterpart and a two-hour encounter with President Putin. And there was the missile strike against Syria.

And now North Korea appears to be occupying him. He is attempting to get China to "take care of the problem," all the while moving an aircraft carrier and its armada close to North Korean waters.

Usually it is not until their second terms in office that presidents turn their attention to international issues. To polish their legacies. Unless, like Johnson and Nixon they inherit a war. That by definition gets them involved with other countries.

I suspect Trump has shifted his focus off shore because he has come to realize that to concentrate on domestic issues means having to deal day-by-day with Congress. And we know what that means--a nightmare. Even with a Republican majority in both Houses we still have gridlock. At the moment not a bad thing. That's what happened to the campaign promise to "repeal and replace" Obamacare. With this effort collapsing he came to realize that with the domestic agenda there is very little "winning."

So Trump is pivoting, not from one domestic issue to another or compromising about the details of what might (or might not) replace Obamacare or be included in a tax reform package, but he is now shifting his attention from the U.S. to NATO,  China, Russia, North Korea,  and Syria.

It is in the international realm as commander in chief that he can exert virtually unchecked power. In other words, in world affairs he can behave as a CEO. Which is how he regards himself. And it is there, equally important to him, that he can reap the praise of even Democrats and the mainstream media.

He castigates the media, claiming it deals in fake news; but, let's be honest, would he prefer to hear positive things from Fox News or the New York Times?  The answer is a no-brainer.

February 20, 2015--Jeb & A-Rod: Mistakes Were Made

In a speech in Chicago Wednesday, presidential-aspirant, former Florida governor, brother of one president, and son of another, to establish himself in foreign policy terms as his "own man" (to quote him), Jeb Bush said--

Look, just for the record, one more time, I love my brother, I love my dad, I actually love my mother as well, hope that's OK. And I admire their service to the nation and the difficult decisions they had to make, but I am my own man, and my views are shaped by my own thinking and my own experiences.

Then, about his brother's decision to preemptively invade Iraq, he torturously added--

There were mistakes made in Iraq for sure. Using the intelligence capability that everyone embraced about weapons of mass destruction turns out not to be accurate.

He did not say that his brother made a mistake by pressing the CIA to "sex up" the intelligence to justify an otherwise illegal war and then waged war based on that cooked information.

What Jeb had to say represents a little progress from what brother George W said after he left the presidency, as part of his efforts to promote his memoir, Decision Points, when he reluctantly acknowledged, in the very passive voice, that "mistakes were made."

On the same day as Jeb Bush's speech, in his own handwriting, Yankee third baseman Alex Rodriguez wrote--

To the Fans

I take full responsibility for the mistakes that led to my suspension for the 2014 season. I regret that my actions made the situation worse than it needed to be. To Major League Baseball, the Yankees, the Steinbrenner family, the Players Association and you the fans, I can only say I'm sorry.

Who knows how sincere this is but at least he fessed up.

August 14, 2014--Hillary's Presidential Checklist

Here's how you can know for sure that Hillary Clinton is actively running for president. Check out her checklist--

Over the weekend, in an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg, a writer for The Atlantic, she caused a stir by creating some distance between herself and Barack Obama. On foreign policy.

Recall, she was Secretary of State during his first term.

She said that a president (are you listening, a president) needs to provide the nation with "organizing principles" when it comes to our relations with the world, that it's not enough to, as Obama put it, just to not "do the silly stuff." He said that about silly stuff in a major speech at West Point as part of his comprehensive overview of the principles that organize his approach to foreign affairs.

Disagree with Obama as one well might (and "silly stuff" is silly)--including that Clinton is not required to agree with him about everything even though she served in his administration (actually, the opposite, to dissent is the best way to serve)--it is more than a coincidence that just as the midterm elections are heating up and the scramble for the presidency two years hence is accelerating that Hillary, after her memoirs failed to interest anyone, would be creating this opportunity to tell us that she should not be perceived as coupled to Obama's foreign policy initiatives, especially when they are feeling feckless and inept.

Anyone with an interest in the American presidency knows that Richard Nixon in 1960, when he ran for the presidency, lost in part because he did not sufficiently distance himself from President Eisenhower; and poor Hubert Humphrey in 1968 lost to Nixon in large part because he was seen to be Lyndon Johnson's policy lapdog.

The Humphrey example is the operative one now--Hubert, with only a few weeks to go before Election Day, finally expressed some tepid criticism of LBJ's Vietnam policy and, as a result, almost fully closed the gap in the polls, losing to Nixon by less than one percentage point.

Hillary does not want to make that mistake. So a full two years in advance she is acting to distinguish herself from the increasingly-unpopular Obama. She does not want to be the Nixon of 1960 nor the Humphrey of 1968.

This distancing shows her in the middle of her presidential checklist--

(1) Serve as Secretary of State for only four years to give herself time to run away from her foreign policy blunders ("resetting" relations with Russia, Benghazi, etc.) and even to physically separate herself from the State Department and the president she served.

(2) Take a month off to get some rest and, who knows, maybe do some Botox.

(3) Strike a $8.0 million book deal and get help writing a bland, no-drama 635-page tome.

(4) Hit the talk show circuit to pitch the book and remind people she's still around.

(5) Just as midterms approach, find someone gentle to interview her about foreign policy and give her the chance to do a little subtle and not-so-subtle Obama dissing.

(6) See where the chips fall in November and keep an eye on Elizabeth Warren and any others who might step forward to stand in the way of her march to the nomination. (I predict she will have some significant challengers from the left.)

Based on the numbers, or who steps forward, continue to act as the incumbent or, if necessary, announce sooner than currently planned and hit the campaign trail to test her messages and hone her debating skills. And, of course, put down her opposition.

(7A) About a year from now, since Obamcare will probably still be widely unpopular, have Jeffery Goldberg interview her about domestic issues and take that opportunity to take a few pot shots at the Affordable Care Act. If somehow by then it is more popular than at present, take credit for it--claiming that it's the very same healthcare program she came up with as First Lady.

(7B) And if Obama is able to strike a deal with Iran to give up their nuclear weapons program, take credit for that too. No one will remember that she voted for the war in Iraq and was pretty much in agreement with John McCain when it came to wanting to bomb, bomb, bomb . . . bomb Iran.

(8) And perhaps most important, raise money, raise money, raise money.

I mean for the campaign. The Clintons by now have more than enough for themselves, Chelsea, and the soon-to-be-born grandchild.

May 1, 2014--The Obama (Small Ball) Doctrine

Stung by mounting criticism of his foreign policy--especially snipping on the Sunday talk show circuit by John McCain and other Republicans--finally, at a press conference in Manila, Obama snapped.

The New York Times described him as "visibly frustrated."

In addition to the collapse of the U.S.-sponsored Middle East peace talks, Russian maneuvers in Ukraine, Syria still festering, Egypt about to execute 682 members of the Muslim Brotherhood, Iraq close to unravelling, and with who knows what will happen next in Afghanistan, Obama's recent Asia trip ran up against resistance (in Japan about new trade policies), skepticism in the Philippines, and downright rejection in Korea. Only Malaysia seemed inclined to want to rebuild relations with the United States.

And, of course, China, feeling ignored (Obama, to make a geopolitical point, opted not to visit), emphasized its own version of the the new Russian imperialism, declaring that China, or Greater China includes a host of islands in the East China Sea claimed either by Japan or Taiwan.

To rub it in, North Korea could be added to the list--they appear to be ready to explode another nuclear device and have plans to ramp up their capacity to produce more as well as miniaturize them so they can be fitted to their long-range missiles, missiles that soon may have the capacity to reach the U.S. west coast.

Partisanship aside, the case can be made that Obama's foreign policy--seemingly full of potential when he took office--has indeed, with a few exceptions, been disappointing. And I'm being kind.

But at his Manila new conference, Obama made the case--not-so-fast. Though McCain for more than a decade has advocated we "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" and more recently arm the Syrians and Ukrainians, there are direct talks underway with the Iranians that with some luck (all right, considerable luck and the continuing collapse of the Iranian economy) could lead to their agreeing to give up their dream to become a nuclear nation. And then I suppose there is Tunisia and Libya to point to as other half-successes.

The new Obama Doctrine, presented off-the-cuff in the Philippines, does merit careful consideration and may in fact be guided by practical wisdom derived from decades of frustrating experience.

A few quotes from President Obama--

Why is it that everybody is so eager to use military force after we've just gone through a decade of war at enormous cost to our troops and our budget. And what is it exactly that these critics think would have been accomplished?

The implication . . . is that each and every time a country violates [red lines that we might be tempted to draw] the United States should go to war, or stand prepared to engage militarily, and if it doesn't then somehow we're not serious about these norms. Well, that's not the case. 

Do people actually think that somehow sending some additional arms into Ukraine could potentially deter the Russian army? Or are we more likely to deter them by applying the sort of international pressure and economic pressure we're applying?

[Proceeding this way] may not be sexy and it doesn't make good argument on Sunday morning shows--but it avoids errors.

Continuing the baseball analogy, he said--

You hit singles, you hit doubles; every once in a while we may be able to hit a home run. But we steadily advance the interests of the American people and our partnership with folks around the world.

This small-ball approach to the way Obama has concluded we need to play in a world full of challenges and threats, considering the realities and the limits to our human and economic resources, may not satisfy our macho instincts, but it makes sense.

It doesn't work for or appeal to the McCains of the world who want America to carry and use its big stick in every situation where they see our interests or values threatened. The lessons from Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, though, should teach them and us otherwise.