US politics

by

Partisan Thoughts

At the moment it is common to see the partisan state of its politics as a major problem for American democracy. A picture is painted of the Republican and the Democratic parties retreating behind increasingly high walls of partisan prejudice. Dialogue and debate being replaced with name calling and assertion. Both sides having blind faith in a revealed truth, impervious to criticism and reinforced in echo chambers of the like minded. In consequence there is a popular dismissal of of all political debate and a pervasive cynicism where the views of all politicians are dismissed as self serving bunkum.

Whilst there certainly is a more aggressive debate in America, and a very clear divide between the two major parties, a universal condemnation of partisanship is misplaced. It leads to an exasperated response of, “a plague on both your houses”. At the extreme a view that there is no such thing as truth, or no such thing as truth other than what my side thinks. This is dangerous.

This needs to be resisted. In the current political debates within the United States there is no comparison between the position on fundamental issues between the Republicans and the Democrats. One is just more right than the other, by a lot.

No one has a monopoly on truth. However, that does not mean truth does not exist. Real distinctions can be made between right and wrong when the wrong in question is egregious. Similarly, between science and fanciful, self serving propaganda. If we reject this then we are allowing a world where “alternative facts” are real. Where debate is pointless as there is no way to arbitrate between what is personal preference and what is true.

It is not partisan to believe there are scientific truths that exist independent of my beliefs. Partly because there are people who devote their lives to something called the experimental method which in area after area has demonstrated the truth and effectiveness of this fundamental belief.

It is not partisan to believe climate change is real. Nor that man, through CO2e emissions, is affecting it. To believe thousands of scientists across the globe, in dozens of different disciplines all providing evidence pointing in one direction are part of a massive conspiracy is not partisan, it is stupid.

To believe that Covid-19 is a non-partisan killer because medical experts and epidemiologists say so, … oh, and also because there are a lot of dead people, is not partisan. It is common sense supported by science and should not compared in any way with the views of those who believe they will not catch the virus because they are immunised by the blood of Christ. 

The first priority of a national leader is to protect their citizens. There are a host of ways in which this can be done. Suggesting it might make sense to ingest disinfectant is not one of them. That is not partisan thinking outside the box, it is not thinking. It betrays a lack of common sense, never mind scientific awareness, of breathtaking proportions.

Trump did not create the current pernicious divides in US politics. In truth they have been decades in the making. He is however their apotheosis. When you start down a road where you denigrate science in the interests of carbon extractive interests; where you try to tip the scales of justice in your favour by gaming the appointments system of justices; where you undermine the role of the state as a part of the problem not the solution; where you denigrate public service; where you use the law to persecute your opponents; where you blame foreigners for the problems besetting more and more of your fellow citizens, eventually you end up with a disaster like Trump.

This is not the unfortunate outcome of a mutually destructive partisanship. It is a result of a conscious process funded by an ultra wealthy elite. An elite which is growing in confidence as to what it can get away with. One which avoids, an already regressive taxation system, and prioritises economic growth over peoples lives, without compunction.

We laugh too much at President Trump. His outrageous stupidity is his best defence. Challenging and opposing him is not partisan politics it is a life and death struggle for the future of American democracy. At the moment the Republican party in the US is just wrong and the States are paying an awful price for this.

Being a partisan is about being a strong supporter of a party or cause. It is not about surrendering your capacity for critical thought. The Democrats are partisan however when you compare what they are attempting to do on a whole range of issues their partisan proposals make sense. They are in no way equivalent to what the Republicans are defending if not supporting. The Republicans are wrong not because they are partisans. They are wrong because they are wrong.

 

 

by

Foreign to Policy

As in everything he does President Trump brings to foreign policy a unique approach. One unweighed down by precedent, existing alliances, traditional enmities or common sense. I recently referred to a book “On Grand Strategy” written by JL Gaddis. He employs a distinction used by Isiah Berlin to categorise different types of leader. On the one hand there are those who know one big thing on the other those who know many small things. President Trump, again in a category of his own, knows nothing.

His foreign policy triumphs include haranguing NATO allies and threatening to pull out of the post-war bulwark against the Soviet Union and latterly Russia. Around the same time inviting the Russian ambassador into the oval office without US minders (no adults in the room) and sharing intelligence provided to the US by an ally. Keeping your adversaries confused is  the kind of mundane strategy the President eschews in favour of keeping his allies confused.

In the far east he has engaged in a costly and misguided tariff war with China in the belief that the tariffs he imposes will be paid by the Chinese.  He is currently having to bale out the US farming industry damaged by the consequential Chinese response.

His calming influence on the Korean peninsula has provided the pariah leader of the North with a boost to his legitimacy. Worse, the comparison between the ramblings of the dotard and the sharp responses of the rocket man, and their relative diplomatic success, has undermined the credibility of the leader of the free world. It really is only President Trump who could lose a shouting war with the leader of a failed state whose economy is ranked 204th in the world.

Unfortunately for the Middle East this has been an area that has benefited from a significant amount of Trump diplomacy. Red lines have been drawn with missile strikes on Syria following the use of chemical weapons. Unfortunately the Syrians and their Russian allies went around the red lines with the indiscriminate use of Barrel Bombs and traditional munitions to kill civilians and combatants alike in their destruction of ISIS and those within Syria opposed to Assad.

Early on the President, keen to demonstrate his grasp of the dynamics of the region and fresh from dancing with the Saudis, announced that Quatar was promoting terrorism. This is a state which is home to the largest US military base in the region with some 11,000 US military personnel. A place that mistakenly thought it was an ally of the US. To be fair a misapprehension the State Department was also under.

Not content to bring his own distinctive brand of incompetence to the area Trump has secured the services of his son in law, Jared Kushner to deliver the “ultimate deal” resolving the Israel-Palestinian conflict. This seems to be retreating into the long grass following the electoral problems of Benjamin Netanyahu and the “other” problems of Mohammed Bin Salman. These were the two key contacts for an honest broker deal which has shifted the American embassy to Jerusalem and stood by as more land has been taken by Israeli settlers. No doubt the Palestinians are waiting with bated breath for the revelation of the “ultimate deal”.

There is more, much more but the clowning achievement to date must be the tweet following his conversation with President Erdogan of Turkey, another great defender of democracy, giving the green light to an invasion of Syria. An invasion to exterminate the Kurdish fighters who had been fighting the US’s war against ISIS for them in Northern Syria and dying for that cause. How naive to believe that would qualify them as allies.

With his characteristic penchant for inconsistency however, as soon as preparations for invasion were announced President Trump Tweeted that “…if Turkey does anything that I in my great wisdom consider to be off limits I will totally destroy and obliterate the economy of Turkey…” So far his “great wisdom” has not judged indiscriminate shelling and air attacks, the creation of 100k refugees and the escape of ISIS sympathisers in the fog of war as off limits.

To date it seems, President Erdogan, Muhammad Bin Salman, Kim Jong Un, Xi Jin Ping, and most of all Vladimir Putin have run rings around the Wise One. His approach to foreign policy is straight out of the BSD school outlined in Liars Poker by Michael Lewis. Just about as crude and just about as beneficial.

The brilliant theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli did not suffer fools gladly. After reading a paper by a colleague he said “It is not even wrong.” The same criticism applies to Trump and his negotiation of relationships with foreign powers. It is a policy free, strategy free, tactic free, idea free zone. It is so bad that even the supine GOP is struggling to rationalise his actions much less support them.

We know that Trump is not up to the job and we know he doesn’t even understand that. The damage he is doing to the United States of America, politically, socially, economically, internationally just goes from bad to worse and the Republicans must be held to account for their collusion in this  process. We must pray in 2020 both he and they are.

 

 

by

Constitutional Crises

Two of the foundational democracies in the Western world, both ironically containing united in their name, the United States of America and the United Kingdom are in the midst of constitutional crises. Here, where we famously have an unwritten constitution, the Supreme Court has declared the Prime Ministers prorogation of Parliament void. In the US, the country with probably the most famous written constitution in the world, the House of Representatives has begun impeachment proceedings against the President. In truth they are both responses to a similar issue.

In both countries there are leaders in power who are happy to override or ignore constitutional conventions and practices in the interests of getting things done i.e. delivering Brexit, or getting my way building a wall.

Boris Johnson has decided the country has expressed a clear view it wants to leave the European Union and therefore he is justified to do “whatever it takes” to secure this. More than three years on from the referendum, one indecisive election, two Prime Ministerial resignations, one year of unedifying Parliamentary manoeuvring, including three unsuccessful votes on a withdrawal deal, it is not surprising Mr Johnson can tap into a national mood of frustration.

A decisive strategy for dealing with the impasse must surely be welcome. The problem is Mr Johnson has been more decisive than strategic.

Mr Johnson has not attempted to build a consensus, or even a majority, in either his own party or Parliament, or thought of attempting to lance the boil with another referendum. He has in effect said the Parliamentary system is not working and so I will circumvent it. I will ignore Parliamentary sovereignty in order to return sovereignty to Parliament. Taking at face value what Mr Johnson says about his earnest desire to avoid a no deal Brexit, whatever was in his mind, proroguing Parliament and removing the whip from 21 tory members who voted against him looked like a concerted attempt to circumvent the democratic process. The Supreme Court seems to have viewed the latter in that light. So far so bad

However, when the news of the Supreme Court’s decision provides a cheap opening laugh in a speech to Business leaders in NewYork and the PM uses the opportunity to say how profoundly he disagrees with the Judges decision you have to be worried it is not just hubris that’s the problem. This concern is reinforced when there is talk of a “Constitutional Coup” and Number 10 start briefing about an election fought on a “people against the establishment” ticket. An establishment composed of the members of the Supreme Court and Jeremy Corbyn. You only have to say it out loud!

Across the Atlantic, after two years of continuous challenge the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives has eventually moved to impeach the President. The straw that broke the resistance of the Democratic leadership arose out of a whistleblowers complaint which has still to be provided to the Chairman of House Intelligence Committee.

Despite its not having been provided there seems to be a clear picture emerging the issue revolves around a conversation between President Trump and the Leader of the Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky. It is alleged Mr Trump tried to pressure Mr Zalensky into providing political dirt on Joe Biden (current frontrunner in the Democratic primaries) and of his son. It is further alleged that military aid, approved by Congress, was used as a bargaining chip.

In truth, it is difficult to keep up with the “high crimes and misdemeanours” of the current President of the United States. Appointing a secret foreign agent to the post of National Security Advisor; using his office to secure financial advantage for himself and his family; lying about his business dealings in Russia; paying $280k in hush money to women he had affairs with; refusing to release his tax returns; lying daily about everything from the economy to the weather; denigrating the free press and the judiciary. This is just a brief list of some of his deplorable actions. They contain a mix of offences against the the constitution, the constitutional  separation of powers, the conventions of political behaviour, and black letter State and Federal laws.

Whether the impeachment action is successful will depend on whether the current whistleblowing issue gains traction with the public. If not the President could likely shoot someone on 5th Avenue and the Republican Senate would still back him.

Whatever the outcome of Brexit or impeachment, on both sides of the Atlantic we have leaders surrounded by small groups  of ideologues determined to get their way whatever the cost. They don’t just challenge those who disagree with them, whether press, politicians or judiciary, they denigrate them as anti-democratic traitors.  In doing this they are undermining the foundations of constitutional practices within which democracy has operated for over 100 years.

Whilst it is important leaders project confidence it is always a worry when they claim certainty. Here the Prime Minister claims he knows what the British people want based upon a referendum held three years ago. The President has a view that when he was elected he became boss of US Ltd. He thinks his authority runs across all arms of government including the judiciary and  legislature. They should accept what he says and do as they are told. That includes locking up his opponents e.g. “crooked Hilary”.

What is happening on either side of the Atlantic is similar and profoundly dangerous. When you mess with precedents as a politician your self interest might tell you what goes around comes around. If the precedents don’t constrain you then they may not constrain the opposition when they move into power, as they will at some point. But worse if you undermine conventions and ignore precedents you strike at the credibility of the rules of the game. If this undermines public faith you may create a wholly different scale of problem.

The Supreme Court has blown the referees whistle and cried fowl. A sensible leader in a democracy would treat this seriously and temper their behaviour. Politics with rules is very demanding, difficult and frustrating, without them it’s war.

by

Trumps Presidential State Visit

That Trump came on a state visit is not the problem. The problem is he was invited.

Some have argued it is only right he should be invited given the importance of the “special relationship” between the US and the UK. It is interesting, however, this relationship did not need such a visit during the 1950’s, 60′, 70′, 80’s, or 90’s. The first state visit of an American President under Queen Elizabeth II was President GW Bush in 2003. The only other was President Obama in 2011.

Those arguing against the visit point to both President Trump’s personal characteristics and his political actions. An inveterate liar, narcissist, misogynist, racist, bombast and bully… I could go on. These may be true, however there are a number of state visitors over the years who would not pass the smell test on at least some of these criteria, and it is a moot point about which is worse, someone who is not even aware of his awfulness as against someone who dissembles.

The second argument is that Trump is, at heart, an enemy of democracy. His attacks on the judiciary via tweets about judges who don’t do as he thinks they should and the blatant appointment of people he thinks more biddable; attacks on a free media; disregard for the constitutional principle of the separation of powers; failure to distinguish his personal interests from those of the office he holds. Another strong set of arguments but again the Queen has held banquets with many whose interest in democracy has been at best passing or indeed openly hostile.

Whilst it is very uncomfortable to sup with the devil you can understand why the UK government attempts to secure positive relationships with countries to further its economic and geo-political interests however odious the regime may be.

The key economic interest put forward as the reason for the current visit is a possible trade deal with the US. One can see that post Brexit such a deal would be an urgent priority. President Trump has responded to this, talking of what a fantastic deal that could be done once we throw off the “shackles” of the EU.

It was Lord Palmerston who set out the real politic of diplomatic guidelines, “We have no eternal allies and no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.” So we often have to treat with those we privately despise, and that includes using the soft power of pomp and royal access. So was Mrs May right to invite President Trump?

The answer is no. Not because of any liberal concern for his personal or political shortcomings. President Trump is unique.

Whatever the faults of the previous 110 heads of state they could be expected to act rationally even if that rationality was not in our interests. You could make sense of where they were coming from and going to, even if you did not like it. Further, they at least understood rational argument or had sufficient self awareness to listen to their advisors.

President Trump is special. All of his rationality is ex post facto. There is no point in trying to get close to him and secure a commitment. His commitments run nowhere near the length of his tie. There are a swath of staff in the White House whose job it is to make sense of ill informed tweets on major policy issues. In the middle of NAFTA trade negotiations President Trump, a la Homer Simpson, wakes up and tweets that he will be imposing tariffs on Mexican imports. Bemused advisors and spokes people try, with ever less success, to present this as part of a strategy of the President or as part of his instinctive deal making style. 

In two and a half years President Trump has normalised venal lunacy. There are a lot of very clever people trying to make what he does look like it is a radical shake up of a dated global order. Some have their own agenda and Trump is a useful battering ram for their alt right objectives. Some are no doubt patriotic Americans trying to limit the damage President Trump does to the nation’s reputation.

Mrs May’s proposal to the Queen was certainly embarrassing, but its ultimate sin is it was pointless. The only calculation President Trump will be making when the wheels of Air Force One leave the ground will be the impact pictures of him with the Queen will have on the 2020 election. Any thought of a trade deal will only be in the context of how such a prize may be used to expedite Brexit.

It is vital we do not lose sight of the base venality of the man. On his way back to the States he called off in Ireland for a meeting with the Taioseach, Leo Varadkar. The Irish government turned down the President’s proposal to meet at one of his golf complexes in Ireland! At the meeting in the VIP lounge at Shannon the President demonstrated his trademark depth of understanding and deft diplomatic sensitivity about borders and walls! Whilst you cannot help laughing at him this should not dilute a recognition of the danger he poses to democracy both in the States and around the world.

Mrs May’s invitation would have been valuable had it genuinely stood a chance of promoting the interests of the UK. It never did. It has only served to burnish the image of President Trump with his base and feed his voracious, narcissistic, self indulgence. The UK’s interests are best served by the departure of President Trump from the office he holds. Whilst the UK government should do nothing to actively promote this it is the hight of stupidity to do anything that might delay that happening.