May 3, 2017--Jack: One Smart Cookie

This time I called Jack.

I was so upset by President Trump's erratic behavior during the past 48 hours that I wanted to talk to a fervent supporter of his in the hope he could talk me down, get me to see things in a different light. Or, failing that, talking with him would give me the opportunity to vent. Irrationally, to hold him responsible for the Trump presidency.

Considering what was going on in Washington I knew Jack wouldn't be reaching out to me so I dialed him up. I got his answering machine and left a neutral-sounding message so as no to scare him off. He called back in less than half an hour.

"I know why you're calling."

"Really?" I tried not to sound aggressive or sarcastic.

"You never do. I mean, call.  So I assume it's not to talk about the weather, which by the way, is beautiful. Fifty-five and sunny."

"You're right, I'm calling to talk about your boy." So much for my trying to sound moderate.

"What is it about? North Korea?," he said in a mocking tone, "NAFTA? The Philippines? Andrew Jackson and the Civil War?"

"All of the above and then some. What's going on with him? It looks as if he's spinning out of control."

"It's Trump being The Donald. That's the two sides of him, Trump the serious person and The Donald, the adolescent."

"If you're feeling this way, considering that to you he can do no wrong, things must be worse than I imagined."

"Let's talk about North Korea," Jack said, sounding reasonable.

"Shoot. Sorry, not 'shoot,' I mean go on."

"You're all upset that he's willing to meet with Kim Jong-un?"

"No, in fact," I said, "under the right circumstances I'd be in favor of that. Maybe it could help calm things down. I mean Trump is talking about the possibility of 'a major, major conflict.' I don't think even supporters like you are eager to see that."

"Not eager, but if all else fails I'd rather see military action soon rather than after Kim has nuclear weapons and missiles that can reach the United States."

"I don't know what to say about that. I can't think my way to a solution. It could come to . . . I can't say the words."

"So," Jack asked, "are you all bent out of shape because you didn't like Trump calling Kim a 'smart cookie' and that he'd be 'honored' to meet with him?"

"That's closer to what's making me crazy."

"So let me try to help you out."

"I'm listening."

"If we want to avoid war, which could easily kill and maim millions, including thousands of Americans, and if China is not willing to fully pull the plug on the North Koreans, and if resuming the six-party talks we had during the Clinton and Bush administrations is a nonstarter, a one-on-one between Kim and Trump might be the last best hope before declaring war."

"You mean art-of-the-deal style?"

"Trump fancies himself the best negotiator ever and probably thinks, grandiosely, that he could strike a deal with Kim. I think he sees some of himself in Kim. Or Kim in himself. Someone very connected to his father, who, when his father died and Kim was only in his twenties, took control of the country and has seen it get stronger.

"There was a long article in your New York Times on Sunday about how the North Korean GDP is growing and small businesses are coming into being. Obviously I'm not seeing any of this as good, particularly the brutal ways in which Kim consolidated and maintains his power. But it is a version of the truth and is sort of similar to Trump's life. What you in one of your blogs called 'the daddy problem.' Again, no value judgements intended. I'm simply trying to be coldly objective."

"It's not easy to go along with this--Kim is a monster--but I'm not hanging up on you."

"Well, Stalin was a much bigger monster who killed tens of millions of his own people and your boy Roosevelt thought he could deal with him, again, one-on one. Didn't he at one of the conference among the wartime allies, near the end of the Second World War, didn't Roosevelt push Churchill aside so he could have direct access to Stalin? And they did make some deals, didn't they? Historians tend to feel Roosevelt wasn't at the top of his game--he died shortly thereafter--but this is still a potentially valid historical parallel."

"So Trump would be 'honored' to meet with him? That Kim is a 'smart cookie.'"

"I could do without that. It was a stupid way to put it, but that was The Donald speaking."

"He can't walk that one back. Even Republicans are going crazy about it."

"I also thought that was stupid and . . ."

"'Thought' or 'think'? What tense do you mean?"

"'Thought.' Past tense because I have a new view about it now."

"Which is?"

"Maybe, maybe underlined, it's Trump not just being crazy but crazy like a fox. He may be figuring that the best way to get to Kim is through a combination of credible threat and flattery. Again, like Trump himself who seems to be threatenable and desperate for flattery. If I'm right about this, Trump may be focussing on the big picture--more than anything else he wants to avoid a major war and make a deal. So he's willing to make himself seem weak or vulnerable while at the same time flexing military muscle."

"Not uninteresting. But that assumes he's a normal person. Trump, that is. And Kim for that matter. They may both be crazy."

"Could be," Jack said.

"What you're suggesting is that maybe Trump can put aside his own colossal ego for the sake of finding a way out of this seemingly hopeless situation."

"Now, you're talking," Jack said.

"This is very, very speculative and doesn't fit my image of Trump as being out of control. But I'm willing to suspend my disbelief for awhile to see if you're right."

"The Andrew Jackson business, however," Jack said, "Is crazy. And not like a fox.

April 10, 2017--Trumpology

In the old days of the Soviet Union, since it was a closed system impervious to Western snooping, one way to read the currents and countercurrents of Soviet leadership--who was in, who was rising, and who was about to be disappeared--was to analyze the pictures of the fur-hatted inner circle arrayed on the top of Lenin's tomb during May Day and other revolutionary celebrations.

Kremlinologists in Washington were tasked to figure this out and they did so by comparing from year to year who was moving into closer proximity to Lenin or Stalin and who was about to slide off the picture plane and soon thereafter into the literal abyss.

Where is the notorious Lavrentiy Beria, head of the fearsome KGB, this year? What about Molotov? Is he losing or gaining power and influence? And who is this upstart Nikita Khrushchev who's star seems to be rising--last year he was nowhere in sight; this year he's only four places from Stalin?

With the inner circle of the Trump White House in turmoil, with the Steve Bannon faction trying to oust son-in-law Jared Kushner and his allies, with Reince Priebus struggling to hold on as chief of staff, and with others close to Trump denying that anything of this sort is going on, with everyone spinning and lying, to get to the truth, as with the Russians, we are left with having to analyze images of the president's unruly team in action. We need to do a content analyst of them in much the same way that we used to try to figure out what was happening in Moscow.

Look carefully of the picture below. It is of the Mar-a-Lago situation room where Trump and his team retired Thursday afternoon to discuss the missile attack on a Syrian airbase.

Mar-a-Lago Situation Room

Seated at the adult table, of course, are Trump at its head and an assortment of Cabinet secretaries. To Trump's left is Rex Tillerson, the almost mute Secretary of State who up to now, nearly three months into the Trump presidency, has not spoken many more than 200 words in public. Across from him, at the president's right are fellow billionaires Wilber Ross, Secretary of Commerce and Steven Mnuchin, Secretary of the Treasury, who is not quite at the table. And then it gets interesting.

To Mnuchin's right, decidedly at the table is Jared Kushner and across from him, not at the table but leaning aggressively forward is Gary Cohn, Trump's favorite economic advisor and Kushner ally, who is being discussed as Reince Priebus' replacement. At the table, with the growing bald spot or tonsure is Priebus himself who appears to need to be careful because Cohn is eyeing him ominously and is about about to pounce on him and seize both his chair and job.

Most interesting to Trumpologists is where Steven Bannon is relegated. Earlier in the week he was unceremoniously dumped from his self-assigned seat on the "Principals Committee" of the National Security Council. Here, about as far away from the adult table at a small children's side table of his own, is the dramatically deflated Senior Strategist. And because of the nasty way in which the picture is framed it looks as if Bannon is wearing a lampshade on his head.

 Moscow, Palm Beach--a picture is worth at least a thousand words.

And, oh, my advice-don't bet against the son-in-law.

December 15, 2016--Am I Missing Something?

If I am, it wouldn't be the first time.

When newly-inaugurated president Obama and his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton called for the re-normalization of relations with Russia, in the person of Vladimir Putin, progressives supported that and even chuckled when Clinton brought an actual reset button with her as a present to Putin on her first official visit to Moscow.

Thankfully, we felt, we no longer had a president who proclaimed that he looked in "the man's eye and found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy." The "man" of course was Putin.

We know how that worked out. First with Bush and now with Obama, who not only can't exchange a civil word with Putin or look him int the eye but, more dangerously, we have Russia allied with the murderous Syrian regime, perpetrating a holocaust on opponents to the Assad government, while we stand by impudently doing nothing.

And now we know officially that Putin's people hacked their way into the middle of our recent election in an attempt to bring Clinton down and tip the election to Donald Trump. And once again, we are sitting around fulminating but doing nothing. What was it that the Chinese said about "paper tiger"?

Whatever shred of tiger still resides within us is now expressing itself as moral outrage that Trump's nominee to serve as Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, was too cozy with Russia and Putin during his tenure as CEO for Exxon Mobil.

Almost foaming at the mouth, John McCain, undoubtedly itching to get at the hated Donald Trump, has already declared that he will likely vote against Tillerson's nomination because his "friend" Putin is "a thug, a murderer, and a killer."

I wonder what McCain would have said about Stalin during the Second World War? Someone we disliked but depended upon to win against the Nazis. Historians have concluded that if it weren't for the Soviet involvement--defeating Hitler on the Second Front when he invaded Russia--we might very well have lost.

Stalin, this essential ally of ours, was more than a thug, murderer, or killer. He was a mass murderer the likes of which the world has thankfully rarely seen. He is reported to have slaughtered between 34 and 49 million of his own people. And yet, Roosevelt found ways to work with him.

And then later, President Nixon concluded it was expedient to reset relations with another mass murderer--Mao Zedong, who ordered the slaying of at least 45 million. This outreach to China was and is in our self-interest and therefore our leaders somehow found ways to overlook the flood of bloodshed and move on.

And now with Russia again challenging us, McCain and Paul and Rubio and a host of Democrats in the Senate are threatening to block Tillerson's confirmation.

If we could calm down about Tillerson in 2013 receiving the Order of Friendship medal from Putin, wouldn't we see his "friendly" relationship with Putin to be an asset rather than a killer virus to his confirmation? Or do we prefer the prospect of Secretary of State John Bolton? Or, help us, Rudy?

What would McCain and others have us do with regard to Putin and a resurgent Russia--bomb, bomb, bomb . . . bomb Moscow?

I'm just getting over the results of November's election and now I have to worry about World War III?

This is my 3,000th blog posting. The first was way back in August 2005. Thanks for taking the time to look in on these.

June 16, 2015--The New Cold War

This report from the New York Times isn't from 1955 but appeared yesterday--

In a significant move to deter possible Russian aggression in Europe, the Pentagon is drawing up plans to store battle tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and other heavy weapons for as many as 5,000 American troops in several Baltic and Eastern European countries, official say.

What happened to détente? What happened with the Obama administration's claim that it had successfully pressed the "reset button" in our relations with Russia?

This sounds to me like all too familiar sabre-rattling.

But there's more.

A few days earlier the Pentagon announced that a Russian jet fighter buzzed a U.S. reconnaissance plane flying well outside Soviet borders over the Black Sea. It came within 10 feet of the American plane and maintained its provocative position for 10-15 minutes before breaking off. Overnight, the Russians announced they would match the U.S. buildup in Eastern Europe.

This to me sounds like back to the future and is very scary.

We know that Obama and Vladimir Putin despise each other and can't stand to be in the same room.

Nixon managed to meet and talk with Nikita Khrushchev, Roosevelt and Truman sucked it up and met and negotiated with Stalin, so why can't the current U.S. and Russian presidents do the same thing?

They would probably claim it's because they disagree about Crimea, which Russia annexed a year and a half ago. Obama sees Putin threatening more incursions in other culturally Russian parts of Ukraine; Putin sees it as an inevitable part of Russia's national destiny. We in America above all should understand his version of Manifest Destiny.

But none of this requires Cold-War-style confrontations. If Putin and Obama had a civil working relationships it all could be resolved with a few phone calls.

"Vlad, what's going on with you guys? I mean in Crimea." 

"Well, Barack, it's a traditional part of Russia, the people there are of Russian descent, speak Russian, and want to be a part of Russia. So why not let things take their course?" 

"I see your point. But what we need to do, Vlad, is sell the idea to our own people and make the case that you let the Crimeans vote about affiliating with Russia. Which they did and overwhelmingly wanted to. I'll work on Poroshenko to convince him it's no big deal. He owes me one. Everyone knows Crimea has been largely autonomous for decades so we should be able to put a fig leaf on the situation. How does that sound?" 

"I think I can make that happen. In the meantime, send my best to Michele." 

"And mine to . . . Sorry, I forgot her name. The gymnast?" 

"Alina, Alina Kabaeva. Will do. Talk to you soon. Call any time. You know I don't sleep."

So now that their relationship is ruptured, there will be no conversations of this kind and as a result we have economic and diplomatic sanctions flying in both direction, Russia has been kicked out of the G-8 (which is now again the G-7), and there are not-so-veiled threats of more to come, including additional close encounters in the sky and at sea. All we need is for one jet fighter pilot to make a mistake and launch a missile and who knows what would happen next.

This is the way adolescents behave, not the leaders of the world's two most powerful nations, both still with hundreds of intercontinental missiles at the ready and thousands of nuclear warheads.

Where are the adults?