You can pretty much dismiss diplomacy as a serious force in Donald Trump’s America. Over a third of US ambassadorial posts remain vacant, the Trump budget proposal for the Department of State represents a 37% reduction, the President constantly contradicts statements from his own Secretary of State (now lacking any credibility when he negotiates with his foreign counterparts), and the President adopts policies that appeal to his base but totally alienate just about every other nation in the world. From withdrawing from trade agreements, environmental treaties, pulling back on foreign aid commitments and taking controversial stands on sensitive issues (such as his move of the US Embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing that multi-religious city as Israel’s legitimate capital).
Senior diplomats and executives at the State Department have been let go or, more frequently, resigned in frustration during Donald Trump’s first year as president: “In a letter to Mr. Tillerson [in mid-November], Democratic members of the House Foreign Relations Committee, citing what they said was ‘the exodus of more than 100 senior Foreign Service officers from the State Department since January [2017],’ expressed concern about ‘what appears to be the intentional hollowing-out of our senior diplomatic ranks.’
“Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, and Senator Jeanne Shaheen, Democrat of New Hampshire, sent a similar letter, telling Mr. Tillerson that ‘America’s diplomatic power is being weakened internally as complex global crises are growing externally.’” New York Times, November 24th. That mass exodus of remaining senior (and even junior) professionals at State has since only accelerated. Only one State professional at the “Career Ambassador” level (the highest non-political diplomatic rank) remains.
Meanwhile, the President is demanding the end of ”The Sequester” that limited the federal budget for the military, calling for a trillion dollar, a long term upgrade to our nuclear arsenal and requesting additional massive expenditures for every branch of the military. US foreign policy has now been effectively relegated primarily to the military – trained to use a very different approach to global complexities with vastly higher risks and incredibly greater financial costs than a diplomatic path – as clearly reflected by the number of generals serving in cabinet posts. Simply, bully Trump prefers to deal from clear and discernible strength rather than from diplomatic exchanges. Trump’s “wall” may really be how he is isolating the United States from the rest of the world… as that world is rapidly reconfiguring a series of “work-arounds” that exclude the United States.
By way of one military example, Trump is escalating our commitment of soldiers to our 16-year failed effort in Afghanistan as if that is finally going to work (see my January 29th blog, Action and Reaction, the Real Afghan Hound). But for most Americans, and our exposed allies in the region, the real risk comes from a shift of governmental policies away from the sanction route, negotiations and pressures on major powers to contain North Korea’s nuclear program… towards a military solution. International experts, including many former leaders of our intelligence community, have made it painfully clear that Kim equates building his nuclear program as his only hope for survival. See my October 26th blog, So What’s the Worst that Can Happen?, for more details. We now absolutely know that Kim will not relinquish nukes under any possible current scenarios.
Make no mistake, North Korea has long dreamed of controlling the entire Korean Peninsula; he is never to be trusted. But we have managed to avoid nuclear confrontation with untrustworthy enemy states in the past – notably our Cold War foes (the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China) – and I suspect we can handle new threats from comparably anti-American states going forward. North Korea is no match for our military capacity, and Kim knows that, regardless of the rhetoric. We are technically still in a state of war with the North, only suspended under an armistice. For decades, North Korean leaders have threatened the United States and decried us as pure evil hell-bent on their annihilation. Kim Jong-un has continued that time-honored practice. But what is new is the addition of even harsher rhetoric from the President of the United States.
The President has combined personal insults to the North Korean leader – a “loser” and a “little rocket man” – with a litany of direct threats to destroy that nation, including these Trump statements made last summer/fall: “[Kim Jong-un] has been very threatening beyond a normal state, and as I said, they will be met with fire and fury, and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before.” or “The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea. Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself.” But what concerns the international community, and what should concern most Americans, is the mounting evidence that Donald J Trump might initiate a first strike against North Korea… a strike that may or may not be nuclear… or one that might provoke a nuclear reaction.
But there are several recent developments that suggest that as diplomatic options are de-prioritized, there is a rapidly growing pressure within the Trump administration either intentionally to provoke North Korea into any act that can be used to justify a military strike – perhaps even nuclear – against the North… or perhaps simply striking without such a manufactured provocation. New York Times Op-Ed contributor, Michelle Goldberg, listened to Trump’s January 30th State of the Union address within the context of recent events and explains (January 31st):
“A few hours before Donald Trump’s first State of the Union speech on Tuesday evening, the news broke that the White House was scrapping its choice for ambassador to South Korea, a position that remains unfilled a year into the administration.
“According to The Washington Post, the nomination of Victor D. Cha, a hawkish veteran of the George W. Bush administration, was very close to being sent to the Senate, but was derailed when Cha privately expressed reservations about a preventive American strike on North Korea. The Financial Times reported that Cha was asked if he was ‘prepared to help manage the evacuation of American citizens from South Korea,’ which would be necessary in the event of an American bombing. This is terrifying, because it suggests that Trump is serious about starting a war.
“Indeed, Cha himself seems frightened; just before the State of the Union started, he published an op-ed in The Washington Post arguing against a preventive attack. Apparently assuming that some readers would be indifferent to millions of potential Korean deaths, Cha emphasized that many Americans would also die in a military confrontation. ‘To be clear: The president would be putting at risk an American population the size of a medium-size U.S. city — Pittsburgh, say, or Cincinnati — on the assumption that a crazy and undeterrable dictator will be rationally cowed by a demonstration of U.S. kinetic power,’ he wrote.
“Cha’s warning made Trump’s State of the Union bellicosity toward North Korea particularly frightening. More than an hour into an interminable speech, Trump said, ‘North Korea’s reckless pursuit of nuclear missiles could very soon threaten our homeland.’ He added: ‘Past experience has taught us that complacency and concessions only invite aggression and provocation. I will not repeat the mistakes of past administrations that got us into this very dangerous position.’”
Let’s face it. Many Americans are on edge of this escalating tension between North Korea and Donald Trump, particularly states that are “more within range” of North Korean ballistic missiles. And that sensitivity, reading the above tea leaves and some further recent events, should be keeping a lot of Americans up at night.
“On January 13, 2018 at 8:07 a.m., Hawaiians were told the end was near. ‘BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAII. SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. THIS IS NOT A DRILL,’ proclaimed an alert sent through Hawaii’s Emergency Management Agency, which notifies residents of Hawaii through the internet, smartphones, radio, and television.
“By 8:10, the head of the Hawaiian Emergency Management Agency had confirmed with U.S. Pacific Command that the alert was false – but that didn’t stop it from remaining in place for an agonizing 38 minutes. In the interim before a follow-up correction alert was issued, Hawaii’s representatives took to social media to inform citizens…
“In Japan, users who had downloaded an app from public broadcaster NHK received an alert that North Korea had launched a ballistic missile and that they should seek shelter. Unlike the Hawaiian alert, the Japanese false alert was corrected within minutes.
“But two cases of false nuclear alerts in one week – after 47 years of none at all – raises disturbing questions. The false alerts arrived when the world is closer to nuclear war than at any point in human history, including, according to experts, during the Cold War. On January 25, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists moved their doomsday clock to two minutes to midnight, the most perilous position ever, due in part due to Trump’s enthusiasm for nuclear weapons and perceived openness to launch a preemptive strike as well as Kim Jong-Un’s nuclear ambitions…
“While no official has claimed that either the Hawaii or Japan false alert was due to a hack, one can imagine why a hostile actor would hack an alert system if causing chaos–or starting a war–was their goal. Trump’s documented enthusiasm for using nuclear weapons (‘If we have them, why not use them?’ he famously said) is matched by his disdain for expertise. Despite having skilled advisers at his beck and call, Trump largely takes his policy cues from Fox News–in particular the show, Fox and Friends – to the point that intelligence experts worry spies will manipulate him through the network.
“Trump also relies heavily on social media, where he has shown himself to be malleable, repeatedly posting conspiracy theories, retweeting a fake Fox and Friends account he believed was real. Trump’s Twitter account is, in many ways, a national security risk. Over the past week, two accounts that had the ability to send Trump direct messages – those of former Fox News anchors Greta van Susteren and Eric Bolling, whom he follows–were both hacked by a group claiming to be a Turkish cyber army, leaving the Twitter-loving president vulnerable to false information. (No investigation of the hacking has taken place.)
“Trump says that the main source he consults on foreign policy is his ‘ and that this brain is so powerful it took him only an hour and a half to learn everything he needed to know about nuclear weapons. If a false alert goes out, and Trump hears about it through Fox News, a Fox News imposter account, or another dishonest social media account, will he launch a retaliatory nuclear strike without further verifying the information with NORAD or consulting advisers? False nuclear strike alerts are terrifying for the population in their own right–the Hawaii alert caused one man to have a heart attack–but the greatest danger may be the combined effect of the president’s gullibility, impetuousness, and enthusiasm for war.
“As if this wasn’t troubling enough, last week [last week of January] the Pentagon raised new cause for alarm. After being criticized for not responding to last year’s spate of cyberattacks, it announced that their response to a massive cyberattack on infrastructure could be employing nuclear weapons–a radical new stance that former Assistant Defense Secretary Andrew C. Weber said would ‘make nuclear war a lot more likely.’
“The Hawaii and Japan false alarms should be considered a wake-up call as to the need for clear official communication, impenetrable alert systems, and sensitivity toward how respective leaders and populations will react should an alarm occur. Japanese citizens, who have to live with actual missile tests from North Korea, did not share the understandably panicked reaction of Hawaiians, for whom the experience was new.
“The frightened reaction of Americans was rooted not only in the terrifying unfamiliarity of receiving a missile alert, but in knowing that the administration has proposed using nuclear weapons on North Korea should they strike U.S. soil. Nuclear strikes are no longer a tactic of last resort, but perhaps a presidential preference. This marks a dangerous break from the past. With the missile alert system vulnerable to both human error and hacks, it is increasingly likely that fake news could launch a real war.” Sarah Kendzior writing for the February 1st FastCompany.com.
Even the military itself is concerned. “The White House has grown frustrated in recent weeks by what it considers the Pentagon’s reluctance to provide President Trump with options for a military strike against North Korea, according to officials, the latest sign of a deepening split in the administration over how to confront the nuclear-armed regime of Kim Jong-un.
“The national security adviser, Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, believes that for Mr. Trump’s warnings to North Korea to be credible, the United States must have well-developed military plans, according to those officials.
“But the Pentagon, they say, is worried that the White House is moving too hastily toward military action on the Korean Peninsula that could escalate catastrophically. Giving the president too many options, the officials said, could increase the odds that he will act.” New York Times, February 1st. The consequences of a military misstep, a seeming pattern in recent American history, seems to loom particularly large with a president with absolutely no prior political or government experience. We should be concerned, deeply concerned, at a president who values military over diplomatic solutions and mythology over scientific fact.
I’m Peter Dekom, and we all need to know how the Trump administration is changing who we are as a nation and how effectively we can deal with the rest of the world.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment