Tag: trump

Trump Policy

America First: The Trump Approach to U.S. Foreign Policy

Introduction

The Trump administration’s foreign policy is characterized by a distinct America First approach, which is neither isolationist nor driven by hubris. Instead, it is grounded in the principle of defending U.S. national interests. This philosophy draws from historical precedents, particularly the Cap Weinberger Doctrine, which established foundational rules for military engagement.

The Cap Weinberger Doctrine: Principles of Engagement

Former Secretary of Defense Cap Weinberger outlined six essential rules for U.S. military engagement:

  1. Forces should not be committed unless the action is vital to national interest.
  2. Forces should be committed wholeheartedly with the intention of winning, or not at all, there should be no half-hearted commitment.
  3. Commitment of forces must have clearly defined political and military objectives.
  4. The use of force should be a last resort, employed only after all diplomatic initiatives have been exhausted.
  5. The relationship between objectives and the forces committed should be continually reassessed and adjusted if necessary.
  6. There must be reasonable assurance of public support before committing forces abroad.

Weinberger introduced these principles in the post-Vietnam era, responding to national divisions and concerns about the management of the war. These guidelines remain relevant for political leaders today.

Historical Context: Lessons from Lebanon and Grenada

In 1983, two significant events shaped U.S. foreign policy: the loss of 240 Marines in Beirut due to a suicide bombing and the invasion of Grenada, where U.S. forces ousted a Marxist government backed by Cuban forces. The Beirut mission was criticized for its unclear objectives, leading President Reagan to withdraw U.S. troops, avoiding prolonged entanglement. In contrast, the Grenada operation was executed decisively, swiftly removing Cuban forces from the region.

Trump’s Application of Weinberger’s Principles

President Trump has exhibited caution in the use of military force, adhering to many of Weinberger’s principles. He has resisted placing American troops in harm’s way, such as in Ukraine, and has favored measured responses in the Middle East. For example, airstrikes against Iranian nuclear facilities were only undertaken after diplomatic efforts failed, supporting a broader strategy of stability. In these operations, Israel played a critical role by neutralizing Iranian air defenses, facilitating U.S. access to key targets.

Middle East Strategy and the Role of Alliances

Since October 7th, Israel has fought Iranian proxies, including Hezbollah and Hamas. Trump distinguished his approach from the Biden administration by granting Israel autonomy to address Iranian threats directly. His objective in bombing Iranian nuclear facilities was to delay Iran’s nuclear ambitions, after which he urged both sides to pursue a truce. Trump’s actions demonstrated an ability to escalate conflict strategically to deescalate and pursue peace, as seen in his involvement with Qatar and efforts to solidify alliances through the Abraham Accords, which aimed to unite Israel and Sunni Arab states against Iranian influence.

Opposition to Transnational Organizations

A central feature of Trump’s America First policy is skepticism toward transnational organizations. His rejection of the Paris Climate Accords in 2017 and after taking office was based on concerns that the agreement hindered American energy policy while favoring countries like China and India. Trump maintains that such accords disadvantage the United States. He has asserted that his own diplomatic initiatives have produced more tangible results than those of the United Nations.

Pragmatic Diplomacy and Cultural Realism

Trump’s foreign policy does not focus on spreading democracy, though he welcomes its growth. He has acknowledged cultural differences, notably when addressing Saudi Arabia’s domestic achievements without advocating for the imposition of democratic systems. His emphasis is on respecting national sovereignty, encouraging countries to avoid threatening their neighbors or the United States.

Immigration and Cultural Preservation

Trump has expressed concern about the erosion of Western civilization, attributed to open borders in the U.S. and Europe. He believes that unchecked immigration without assimilation undermines national identity, viewing secure borders as essential to preserving American culture. He has echoed the sentiment that immigration without assimilation amounts to conquest, reinforcing his commitment to border security and cultural integrity.

Energy Independence and Economic Strategy

Energy independence is a cornerstone of Trump’s foreign policy. He aims for the U.S. to lead global energy production, minimizing obstacles to development and leveraging energy exports to strengthen alliances. Trump warned European allies against reliance on Russian oil and gas, advocating for American energy as a more stable alternative. Promoting American energy exports not only benefits the U.S. economy but also solidifies strategic partnerships.

Modest Foreign Policy: Prioritizing American Interests

Trump’s approach is characterized by a modest foreign policy, placing American interests above all else. He recognizes the importance of alliances based on mutual benefit but resists arrangements that disadvantage the U.S., such as unfavorable tariffs. His negotiations aim to protect American workers, expand manufacturing, and encourage allied countries to adopt policies supportive of U.S. interests. Tariffs have also served as a tool to address border security and decouple manufacturing from China.

Strategic Objectives and Measurable Outcomes

Trump emphasizes the importance of clear strategic objectives and measurable outcomes before committing military or diplomatic resources. His foreign policy leverages economic tools and alliances to advance American interests, adapting previous administration principles to contemporary challenges. This pragmatic leadership seeks to position the United States as a decisive actor on the global stage.

Influences: Nixon and Reagan

In many respects, Trump combines the foreign policy approaches of Nixon and Reagan. He focuses on stabilizing the world through peace negotiations and strategic competition, particularly with China, while strengthening the American economy. Nixon’s legacy includes innovative diplomacy, such as leveraging China against the Soviet Union, while Reagan emphasized the importance of a strong economy as the foundation for effective foreign policy.

Review as of April 23rd

I remember when Reagan dealt with a serious economic crisis as he came into office along with a foreign policy that saw the Soviet Empire on the march and by the end of the first year, many Republicans called for a retreat of his supply side revolution.   The nuclear freeze movement was in full spring in the United States and Europe,  and Reagan was in the process of installing the Pershing missile to counter the Soviets SS-20.

Trump is facing similar pressure as the Courts are putting every obstacle into his deportation plans, his economic plan, in particular his tariff plan, is under siege and he attempting to end war in Europe while trying to see if he can stop Iran from getting the bomb.  He is browbeating the Feds and that is the one thing that Reagan didn’t do when he supported Feds effort to stop inflation.   What I will do is to work on three things, Trump war on the administrative and how out of control courts is undermining his agenda against the bureaucracy and deportation, his tariff policy and where is leading, and finally his foreign policy.

Let’s begin with his tariffs policy.  Both side on the tariffs debate need to understand the nuance of the debate. It is not a simple tariff bill but there are nuances that Trump is attempting to do, using tariffs to open up markets and get help in key areas like dealing with immigrations. 

For supporters of Tariffs who view McKinley tariffs as a model, two things that need to understand, tariffs were the principal way the federal government raised money and government spending was only 10 percent of the total economy. The depression of 1893 may have been caused by tight monetary policy and or possibly tariffs were higher as result of tariffs bill passed in the previous Republican administration. McKinley following the Spanish-American war was moving toward a reciprocal trade policy similar to what we may end up with Trump final negotiations.

In the 1920’s we had high tariffs but lower tax rates and reduced both the national debt and spending. Harding and Coolidge inherited high tax rates from the Wilson administration left over from World War I. Harding economic plan saved America from the 1920’s great depression. Hoover on the other hand after dealing with 1929 crash raised tariffs even higher, and increase spending, brow beat corporations into keeping salaries higher and then raised taxes on top of that. It didn’t help that the federal reserve saw circulation of money drop by a third.  Hoover did everything wrong and while many view Hoover as a conservative but at the time he was consider part of the moderate/progressive wing of the Republican parties and as President Coolidge observed, “Hoover gave me a lot of advice and most of it wrong.”   1950’s and 60’s saw United States move forward on economic and free trade  and Reagan revolution of lower tax rates aided in a boom that lasted a quarter of century.   While freer trade is good for the economy, it is not a panacea if followed by poor domestic policies and in the 1920’s, we saw good domestic policies even  with high tariffs and Reagan did use tariffs as a mean to bargain with other countries including allies just as Japan to open their markets. His supply side revolution led to a quarter of century of growth.

Trump will keep tariffs on China as part of slowing Chinese economy down and use tariffs negotiations with leading economic powers to isolate China and encourage companies to relocate here with Trump lower tax rates, reduce regulations and increase energy productions.   Some similarity with Coolidge except Trump may be working toward a reciprocal policy toward Europe, and Asia and this may result lower tariffs. Tariffs and Trump war with the Feds have caused turmoil in the market but there may be confusion about Trump plan and how it fits. Many of his critics are not looking at the whole plan and Trump has certainly added to the confusion with not explaining fully his plan.  Mention tariffs and we are thinking great depression but as  I noted, the Great Depression centered on the following, first adding higher tariffs to what was already passed in an economy in recession, second increase government spending and raising taxes later in his administration and we can’t not forget that we lost nearly a third of money circulating in the economy from1929 to 1932, so the Feds did their share in turning a recession into a great depression.

Tom Sowell noted that before the tariffs passed, unemployment dropped from 9 percent to 6 percent  from the crash into the summer of 1930’s, so if Hoover did nothing, the recession may have ended before 1932, and he would have had an economy in recovery.   Maybe the critics should wait to see how it all goes.

On foreign policy the one question “is Trump thinking a pulling a Nixon?” Nixon trip to China was his move to separate the China from Russia. My own view is that in the back of Trump’s mind, he is thinking along those lines. I won’t say if this is possible certainly not now but hear me out. Russia is now a junior partner in her relations with China and China does have many of Russian Eastern portion under their radar screen. Russia relation now is based on needs plus Putin hatred of the West, but his Ukraine war can’t be seen as a success and eventually Russia may find the price of China’s support too high. Russia and China are the real agents of chaos and for China, Russia war on Ukraine forces much of the West attention toward Russia and not on China. Russia is playing their own games, aiding North Korea to improve their arm forces and nuclear capacity and may even helping Iran. The Axis of evil at work. Is it possible or is the time, right? That is a good question or if it is possible, but Trump does understand a Russian-China collaboration over the long haul gives the Chinese the military advantages with resources including rare minerals and energy within its grasp.

With the Ukraine, there are three options. One simply gives Russia all of the Ukraine and that would be classified as a defeat. This is a point I made before, but the following two options will be a victory for the West since Russia will be denied a complete conquest of Ukraine. The first which is the most likely scenario, Russia keeps what they have, the Ukraine will still have most of its country and let not forget, they didn’t have all of their country including the Crimea to begin with. Ukraine won’t be part of Nato, but Europeans can figure out a way to continuing to arm the Ukraine. There will be no peacekeeping force for three reasons, one the United States won’t participate and second the Europeans in the end will have neither the will or the troops to do it and finally Russia won’t allow it. However, I have mention there are ways for the European to arm Ukraine and Russia have lost quite of bit of men and materials. The final option won’t happen because the United States will not provide material or engage in direct combat with the Russians and Europeans will not intervene to make this option a reality, that is remove Russia from all of the Ukraine including Crimea. Option two, the partial peace with Russia will be the option that becomes a reality. 

One important piece is the trade deal with India that is being negotiated and if succeed, this opens the door to other deals and help build India economically, ties the two biggest English-speaking countries and finally India is one of the BRICS nations that just last year was threatening to ditch the dollar and If India is working with the United States, this weakens the BRICS.

In foreign affairs, America first is not isolationism but more realistic foreign policy that measures American interest and calls on our allies to do more. Europe has a GNP ten times than Russia and should be easily defend themselves against Russia. The battle over tariffs may be a tactic to negotiate lower tariffs among major economic power and isolate China who will be stuck with higher tariffs. For Trump the real enemy is China. Trump is fighting on many fronts from taming the administrative state, foreign policy that is influx, closing our southern borders and reviving our economic strength.

On the legal side, Jon Turley made some good points about Alito scathing dissent on the recent Supreme Court decision stopping deportation. Alito point was centered about the following points: that court had no right to act and had no input from the government plus court declares a crisis and then decided to act. Jon Turley noted, “Yeah, what Justice Alito is objecting to is that this is becoming increasingly improvisational. I mean, you know, you’ve covered the supreme court for years as I have, and we rarely see this level of – or number of emergency cases going in front of the Supreme Court. And a lot of them are half-baked, in the sense they don’t have the normal details, the record that you have. And the justices are expressing their frustration.”

Turley added, “But in the same way, a lot of these challengers are bringing these cases fast and furious to the court. And what Justice Alito is saying is, “What are we basing our decision on? These things are coming to us with virtually no record…That is where the Supreme Court has a problem. Every single member of the nine-person body seems clearly frustrated with the bombardment of legal challenges all over the country. And even Elena Kagan can see the writing on the wall here: If liberal District Court judges act well outside of their bounds and it is tolerated, then conservative District Court judges will do the same, and the situation will only spiral.”

 There is a crisis with the judicial and the Supreme Court must act. The Biden administration allowed millions of illegal in unprecedented numbers and now Trump administration has to clean up the mess quickly and Alito concern is that the courts made a serious mistake and leaves us with the question, if in the end the Courts make the wrong unconstitutional decision, what is the recourse?

Trump and chaos often are one and the same. Trump is a man on a mission and at the age of 78, he is a man in a hurry. Trump inherited an economy that was slowly imploding, a world on fire with wars in Middle East and Europe with its most brutal war since World War two. Trump first objective is to secure the border and begin the deportation of many of the illegal beginning with the criminal element and used the 1798 alien act working on the theory that this was invasion and there may be evidence at least with the Venezuelan gangs are working with the Venezuela communist government.

There is a war on the administrative state that needs to be completed. The administrative state has become an unelected body independent of the constitution approved by the branch: legislative, judicial and the executive branch. We see out of control part of our government that passes 10 regulations with the power of law for every law passed by Congress, and you will be ten times more likely to be pursued by the administrative than a jury of your peer.

Another area that Trump team is telling the truth about the Covid. 

This  White House website on Covid details the origin of Covid, and this is important since what we saw was the abandonment of science and hiding the reality that this was most likely a virus released from the Wuhan lab. What was and still at stake was the credibility of science and failure to place responsibility on the Chinese government. This was one of the great attempts by Tony Fauci to hide the truth and hide the fact that Tony Fauci helped finance gain of function research conducted by the Chinese.

A friend of mine who worked with Bush administration on getting vaccines to the market met Fauci and told me that Fauci support of the lockdown and the subsequent policies was designed to hide his financing of the virus research. Let be blunt, Fauci knew the lethality of the virus as he originally wrote that virus lethality between .1 to 1 percent in February 2020, but within a month, Fauci declared the death rate of Covid would be ten times of a flu season which turned out to be false as the Covid death rate was .2 to .5 depending on which study. This was similar to a bad flu season.

His original goal was correct and there was no science to back his change of mind! Fauci had to know the origin of the virus and it should be pointed out that CDC director Robert Redfield believed the virus was human made. (Redfield co-authored Fauci piece that original study on lethality but he was shut out by Fauci about the origin study by Fauci.) Fauci not only covered up the origin of the virus but advice the President that this a natural event even though he was being told by scientists privately this was human made. Fauci allowed the Chinese to get away with this and prefer to side with a foreign government as opposed to the rest of the world and the American people. He had to know the source of virus and much of his advice on the origin along with Mask mandates, school closing and lockdowns was wrong, and I suspect he knew that much of the advice was wrong. His advice was not just wrong, but it was disastrous for our economy and for many students whose fall behind in education. And his cover up on the origin was not just bad but it covered up the failure of gain of function research. Which he helped finance with American taxpayer’s help.

Fauci is a cautionary tale of the need to deal with the administrative state and understand its danger to our liberties.  Fauci and Birks essentially lockdown an entire economy and many people lost their basic rights including to use a questionable vaccine without lost of jobs.   Churches were closed along with schools and business shut down plus millions of people out of work.  We are still dealing with the residual impact from this.   The importance of controlling our administrative state.