“Brussels worse than China, only smaller.” A threat to Ukraine. It fell from Trump

--

survey

Is Andrej Babiš harming the Czech Republic?

voted: 22833 people

The Economist notes, that Donald Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton says of his former boss that he “has no consistent principles” in foreign policy, while Fred Fleitz from the America First Policy Institute think tank recalls that the world looked completely different when Trump was in office than today. “There have been no major wars, four peace accords between Israel and Arab states, successful NAFTA negotiations with Canada and Mexico, and a partial trade deal with China — not to mention low inflation and a less permeable southern border,” he said.

The paper points out that in order to understand what Trump could do in the event of defending the second presidency in the world, it is therefore worth looking at the ideologies of his advisers, who are supposed to be divided into three layers.

The first of them are supposed to be the Republicans, who describe themselves as the heirs of Ronald Reagan and want to preserve America’s global hegemony. Bolton’s successor Robert C. O’Brien or Trump’s Secretary of State Mike Pompeo or US senators Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton are to be included in these “Reaganites”.

Supporters of American isolationism are supposed to stand against Reagan’s policy, according to which America should not worry about problems in the world, but primarily solve its own. One of the proponents of this trend is Vivek Ramaswamy, who ran for the Republican presidential nomination.

And between the two currents stand supporters of the opinion that America should not get too involved in foreign policy in Europe and the Middle East, where both of the most visible conflicts for Americans are currently taking place, and focus more on Asia, where the US would primarily face China. This view is held, for example, by the former US Deputy Secretary of Defense for Strategy and Force Development, Elbridge Colby.

At the same time, it is this group that not only disagrees with the Republicans, but also the Democrats, as the Biden administration also wants to “shine more light” on China, according to their claims. “Skeptics question whether the emphasis on China is really isolationism in disguise. Would those who do not want to even indirectly confront Russia in Ukraine really be ready to wage war with China over Taiwan?”, however, The Economist points out this position.

Trump is supposed to orientate himself in all three directions and win over supporters of different currents, and while he shares the desire to reduce military commitments, he also respects Reagan’s policy of “peace through strength.” The British weekly reminds that Trump took a hard approach to China during his presidency and did not hesitate to use force in Syria or against Russia’s current ally – Iran, when he ordered the killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

The Economist adds that Trump has made no secret that he is annoyed by American allies who take advantage of American security guarantees and save on defense. “The world is laughing at us,” Trump was supposed to comment.

What effect will Trump’s victory have on the development of the war in Ukraine? According to YouGov polls, the majority of Trump’s hard-line supporters are in favor of America’s isolationist policy towards Europe. And while Republicans in the US Senate support more military aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, the House of Representatives prefers to address the domestic issue of migration.

survey

Which of the top leaders do you have the most confidence in?

voted: 40480 people

General Keith Kellogg, who served for several years as the US vice president’s national security adviser and is being talked about as a possible national security adviser to Trump, is said to be promoting a hard-line view that would force Ukraine to negotiate with Russia and announcing that he would lose American support if he did not. According to his strategy, Russia would then be warned that if it refused to negotiate with the Ukrainians, the US would not cancel Kiev’s support, but would increase and supply Ukraine with much more and better weapons.

In addition to Ukraine, Trump should also focus on NATO allies who do not fulfill their obligations and instead of giving at least 2% of their GDP to defense, they only “ride” in this defense pact and rely on America’s help. Kellogg points out that such countries violate Article 3 of the NATO Treaty and thus should not expect help to come to them if they need to use Article 5 of the alliance. There are even voices calling for the Americans to leave Europe, and the newspaper notes that although it is not clear where Trump will go in this regard, it seems that “upheavals for NATO are inevitable.”

On the other hand, what the Republican supporters of Trump are supposed to agree on is the support of Israel in its fight against the terrorists from Hamas. There are opinions that there could be a conclusion of the agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia or a slowdown for the United Nations, which sends money to the Palestinians. However, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has a bias towards the American ex-president, as he sided with Joe Biden after the 2020 elections and Trump he tried to distance himself.

There is supposed to be a “broad consensus” that China is a threat to America, but what differs are opinions on how to deal with Beijing. While some expect Trump to impose import tariffs of up to 10 percent on all imports from China, die-hard Trump supporters are even said to directly refer to China as the “enemy” and there are calls for as much as possible from a group that would like to prioritize Asia at the expense of Europe and the Middle East arming Taiwan. The Economist summarizes that “the former president prefers trade wars to shooting wars” and thus one can expect “bombardment of enemies” through higher tariffs.

The weekly also adds that insiders to Trump say that the ex-president still hasn’t given up on the possibility of negotiating an “attractive deal” with Beijing. In addition to negotiations with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, he would like to enter into negotiations on the terms of cooperation with the European Union. Negotiations with Brussels are said to be nothing that Trump would look forward to. The American ex-president is supposed to speak not very nicely about the European Union, saying that it is “worse than China, only smaller”.

Did you like this article?


You can support the independence of our editorial office with a monetary donation of any amount by bank transfer to the following account:

131-981500247/0100

The QR code contains payment information, determine the amount yourself.


Are you a politician? Post whatever you want without editing. Register HERE.

Are you a reader and want to communicate with your representatives? Register HERE.


advertisement

Ukraine (War in Ukraine)

Reports from the battlefield are difficult to verify in real time, regardless of whether they come from any side of the conflict. Both warring parties, for understandable reasons, may release completely or partially false (misleading) information.

PL editorial content discussing this conflict can be found on this page.

war in Ukraine

Reports from the battlefield are difficult to verify in real time, regardless of whether they come from any side of the conflict. Both warring parties, for understandable reasons, may release completely or partially false (misleading) information.

You can find brief information regarding this conflict updated by ČTK several times an hour on this page. PL editorial content discussing this conflict can be found on this page.

author: Radek Kotas


The article is in Czech

Tags: Brussels worse China smaller threat Ukraine fell Trump

-

PREV We will do this. Zelensky spoke about weapons in a new way
NEXT Warm winters can temporarily attract dangerous tropical insects to us as well