Vultures Circling

We’ve watched how Russia has swooped down into the Middle East, embracing Iran, Syria and now Turkey. The United States is gone for all practical purposes, with its failing Arab surrogate, Saudi Arabia, playing a slowly losing hand in vain support of a collapsing Yemeni incumbency. After a decade and a half of Netanyahu’s right-wing rule, Trump’s best buddy until the polls and an indictment sent the Israel PM tumbling, ally Israel has never been more isolated.

The US (NATO) wars of attrition in the Middle East, much fought under false pretenses (remember the WMDs in Iraq), pushed Iraq dramatically into Iran’s sphere of influence and is witnessing the return or Taliban control in Afghanistan. Responding to our renewed sanctions, Iran’s nuclear program is on again. Our vestigial military forces in the area are marginal. Turkey, purportedly a NATO ally, has opted for a Russian-built air defense system, prompting our Congress to consider sanctions against that nation.

Unfortunately for us, the Middle East/Central Asia remains a hotbed for anti-Western (read: mostly the US) Islamic terrorists. Recruited and trained locally, reeling from the failed promises of a better life under a Western model, terrorists often begin by replacing unresponsive and highly corrupt regimes vis-à-vis local constituents who have been abandoned by their governments… and ultimately elevates to a “crusade” against the Western powers whose tentacles have reached deep into local politics for decades, amplified by oil, oil and oil.

Europe’s proximity to the Middle East has borne the brunt of impoverished refugees, fleeing de-certified farms and military assaults, seeking safety and hope. That migration has, likewise, seen a backlash in Europe against these mostly Muslim immigrées.

The reconfiguration of regional Middle Eastern alliances, however, has been driven by US isolationism as much as any other factor. That extremist groups, from a significant remaining ISIS and al Qaeda presence, to numerous regional Islamists with global revenge in their hearts have solidified… seems to have escaped notice by the Trump regime, that same cabal that has turned a blind eye to the rise of domestic terrorism.

Notably absent from this arena has been China. If anything, the Peoples’ Republic has been consumed with its own Islamic difficulties with Uighurs in its westernmost province, incarcerating masses of Muslims in what are politely referred to as “reeducation” camps. But China had steered clear of a more direct presence in the Middle East itself… until Trump opened the door for China.

“As President Trump eyes the exit in the Middle East, his critics have excoriated him for abdicating a strong U.S. role in the region and clearing a path for Russia’s dominance. Yet in their scramble to find new allies, regional states have also turned to a quieter but no less powerful U.S. rival: China.

“Syrian President Bashar Assad signaled China’s rising influence in the region this week when he announced plans to join the Belt and Road initiative, President Xi Jinping’s signature foreign policy enterprise. But even before that, China had planted its flag in practically every country in the Mideast.

“It now stands as the region’s largest investor and expects to cement that status with Belt and Road, a sprawling, $1-trillion infrastructure project meant to revive the ancient trading routes of the Silk Road — including those linking China to Central Asia and the Middle East (or West Asia, as Beijing calls it).

“Within the framework of that initiative, China has signed trade agreements with countries from Oman to Morocco, harnessing Arab capital for development projects to build up railroads, ports and electricity infrastructure across the region.

“All this comes against the backdrop of a rising U.S.-China rivalry, exemplified by a yearlong trade war, saber-rattling in the western Pacific and a race for influence in Latin America and Africa . Flying largely under the radar, Beijing has had great success in drawing Middle Eastern nations into its orbit at a time when President Trump is seen region-wide as a mercurial ally, if one at all.

“‘The United States has become consistently inconsistent.... Regional players, including friends of the United States, increasingly view Washington as an unreliable partner,’ said Anubhav Gupta, associate director of the Asia Society Policy Institute.

“‘They are forming stronger ties with other major powers because they sense both an uncertainty about U.S. commitment to the region as well as a lack of clarity as to what position the U.S. will take from one moment to the next.’

“By contrast, there has been little question of Beijing’s commitment… Chinese foreign direct investment has steadily increased over the last 10 years, with Beijing emerging as a major player in energy purchases, with the region meeting more than 40% of the Asian giant’s energy needs.

“‘Just buying oil, shifting the supplies of oil, would have huge impact on the economy of the gulf and the region,’ said Andrea Ghiselli, coordinator of ChinaMed, an Italian-Chinese research project focusing on China’s role in the Mediterranean region.

“China has also had success presenting itself as a pragmatic partner, one whose foreign policy is characterized by a self-avowed commitment to national sovereignty and non-interference in other countries’ domestic affairs. The attitude squares well with authoritarian governments in the region, which can do business with China without Beijing criticizing their human rights records or undemocratic systems.” Los Angeles Times, December 18^th.

 I wonder if whoever succeeds Donald Trump, particularly if it is a Democrat, might adopt a blue “Make America Great Again” hat as the American rallying cry of the future.

              I’m Peter Dekom, and decades-worth of American influence building has been eroded in the few short years of the Trump presidency… but it will take decades of reconstruction to restore our stature in the world… if that is even possible given the rise of China and the growing enmity of even our traditional allies.

Politically Born-Again Evangelicals

I’ve blogged about the immorality of a president who treats the admonitions in the Bible’s Ten Commandments as if they were options on a menu, from which he can pick and choose. I’ve wondered why rather dramatic violations of that most holy text, the core of Judeo-Christian values, are acceptable to so many evangelicals. And while they may have strong feelings about “right to life” vs “free choice” or “creationism” vs “evolution,” which is completely their First Amendment right, that they would choose as their leader a man, who may just be the worst example of Christian morality of any leader in the democratic world, has always shocked me.

One of Donald Trump’s most passionate supporters, the late Reverend Billy Graham’s evangelical crusade – which speaks to its followers via its Christianity Today magazine – took a fresh look at Mr. Trump, his impeachment, and his impending trial for removal in the United States Senate. The title of this December 19^th editorial in CT read: Trump Should Be Removed from Office. The editor-in-chief who penned the piece, Mark Galli, will retire in January.  I’d like to cite some of that editorial’s most salient passages:

“In our founding documents, Billy Graham explains that Christianity Today will help evangelical Christians interpret the news in a manner that reflects their faith. The impeachment of Donald Trump is a significant event in the story of our republic. It requires comment…

“Let’s grant this to the president: The Democrats have had it out for him from day one, and therefore nearly everything they do is under a cloud of partisan suspicion. This has led many to suspect not only motives but facts in these recent impeachment hearings. And, no, Mr. Trump did not have a serious opportunity to offer his side of the story in the House hearings on impeachment.

“But the facts in this instance are unambiguous: The president of the United States attempted to use his political power to coerce a foreign leader to harass and discredit one of the president’s political opponents. That is not only a violation of the Constitution; more importantly, it is profoundly immoral.

“The reason many are not shocked about this is that this president has dumbed down the idea of morality in his administration. He has hired and fired a number of people who are now convicted criminals. He himself has admitted to immoral actions in business and his relationship with women, about which he remains proud. His Twitter feed alone—with its habitual string of mischaracterizations, lies, and slanders—is a near perfect example of a human being who is morally lost and confused.

“Trump’s evangelical supporters have pointed to his Supreme Court nominees, his defense of religious liberty, and his stewardship of the economy, among other things, as achievements that justify their support of the president. We believe the impeachment hearings have made it absolutely clear, in a way the Mueller investigation did not, that President Trump has abused his authority for personal gain and betrayed his constitutional oath. The impeachment hearings have illuminated the president’s moral deficiencies for all to see. This damages the institution of the presidency, damages the reputation of our country, and damages both the spirit and the future of our people. None of the president’s positives can balance the moral and political danger we face under a leader of such grossly immoral character.

“This concern for the character of our national leader is not new in CT. In 1998, we wrote this:

“The President's failure to tell the truth—even when cornered—rips at the fabric of the nation. This is not a private affair. For above all, social intercourse is built on a presumption of trust: trust that the milk your grocer sells you is wholesome and pure; trust that the money you put in your bank can be taken out of the bank; trust that your babysitter, firefighters, clergy, and ambulance drivers will all do their best. And while politicians are notorious for breaking campaign promises, while in office they have a fundamental obligation to uphold our trust in them and to live by the law.

“And this:

“Unsavory dealings and immoral acts by the President and those close to him have rendered this administration morally unable to lead.

“Unfortunately, the words that we applied to Mr. Clinton 20 years ago apply almost perfectly to our current president. Whether Mr. Trump should be removed from office by the Senate or by popular vote next election—that is a matter of prudential judgment. That he should be removed, we believe, is not a matter of partisan loyalties but loyalty to the Creator of the Ten Commandments.

“To the many evangelicals who continue to support Mr. Trump in spite of his blackened moral record, we might say this: Remember who you are and whom you serve. Consider how your justification of Mr. Trump influences your witness to your Lord and Savior. Consider what an unbelieving world will say if you continue to brush off Mr. Trump’s immoral words and behavior in the cause of political expediency. If we don’t reverse course now, will anyone take anything we say about justice and righteousness with any seriousness for decades to come? Can we say with a straight face that abortion is a great evil that cannot be tolerated and, with the same straight face, say that the bent and broken character of our nation’s leader doesn’t really matter in the end?

“We have reserved judgment on Mr. Trump for years now. Some have criticized us for our reserve. But when it comes to condemning the behavior of another, patient charity must come first. So we have done our best to give evangelical Trump supporters their due, to try to understand their point of view, to see the prudential nature of so many political decisions they have made regarding Mr. Trump. To use an old cliché, it’s time to call a spade a spade, to say that no matter how many hands we win in this political poker game, we are playing with a stacked deck of gross immorality and ethical incompetence. And just when we think it’s time to push all our chips to the center of the table, that’s when the whole game will come crashing down. It will crash down on the reputation of evangelical religion and on the world’s understanding of the gospel. And it will come crashing down on a nation of men and women whose welfare is also our concern.” (emphasis added)

The President responded “that Christianity Today was a ‘far left magazine’ and claimed it has been ‘doing poorly’ after it published an editorial a day earlier that described his conduct as ‘profoundly immoral.’

“The magazine ‘would rather have a Radical Left nonbeliever, who wants to take your religion & your guns, than Donald Trump as your President. No President has done more for the Evangelical community, and it’s not even close. You’ll not get anything from those Dems on stage,’ Trump tweeted, adding that he would not be reading the magazine again.” Washington Examiner, December 20^th. “Far left,” huh? You mean like the Reverend Billy Graham?

It is interesting that most of the GOP-party-loyal attacks against the investigation and impeachment efforts noted above have been about the process, have produced generic statements that no crimes have been alleged (they most certainly have), and have included personal attacks against anyone (even Republicans and clearly neutral parties) who testified with facts and/or attempted to divert attention to find culpable parties elsewhere. What they have not presented, even though subpoenaed to make their case, is a body of meaningful and objective facts that would exculpate the President. Will the above editorial make a difference? I can only hope. Take a good look at the six Trump associates pictured above convicted of a felony since the President took office. See a pattern in all of this?

              I’m Peter Dekom, and when a criminal defendant hollers “witch hunt” and “hoax,” only attacks witnesses, does not present facts and attempts to obstruct getting facts, well it’s almost impossible to believe in that criminal defendant’s innocence.

The Sorry Story Comes to Pass

Brexit will be done, it will be over…  The sorry story of the last 3½ years will be at an end.and we will be able to move forward together… This is a time when we move on and discard the old labels of ‘leave’ and ‘remain’… Now is the time to act together as one reinvigorated nation. 

UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson on December 20^th.

Vladimir Putin celebrates two decades as Russia’s ambitious, mega-wealthy and totally authoritarian strongman. America’s populist rabble-rousing President will forever be remembered as the third American president to be impeached (with one resigning under threat of impeachment). Violent protests mark local resistance to nationalism and/or authoritarian rule in Iraq, Hong Kong and India. Israel faces the demise of its indicted and soon-to-be-former-prime minister and that chaos of yet another election. But if you live in Europe, there’s one story that consumes the headlines. Brexit.

On Friday, December 20^th, fresh from a Conservative parliamentary victory, UK PM Boris Johnson got the vote he has dreamed of: “The House of Commons voted 358 to 234 on Friday for the Withdrawal Agreement Bill. It will receive more scrutiny and possible amendment next month, and also has to be approved by Parliament’s upper chamber, the House of Lords.” Associated Press, December 21^st. With a clear parliamentary majority, Brexit is on. The above bill paved the way for implementation.

Many Americans believe that the recent UK parliamentary election gave Johnson a huge popular vote. Not exactly. The British election process, like the US version, is definitely not a straight-up popular vote. It would be more reflective of popular sentiments if the UK were a two-party system, but in each parliamentary district with a multi-party system, the leading vote-getter wins, even if the overall sentiment of the combined balance of the election slate is of the opposite persuasion. But the ultimate impact is unequivocal: Boris and his Conservatives rule.

Scotland is fuming, already pressing for another referendum for independence. Northern Ireland is terrified. Wales knows its fate is sealed. But like it or not, Brexit has arrived. On January 31, 2020, the UK will leave the European Union. The economic realities will not shift yet; the UK and the EU have a year to sort out their trade and border agreements. The ability further to delay the inevitable “face the music” economic separation has, however, been carefully removed from the relevant legislation. If 2021 comes without a closed UK-EU trade deal, effecting a very problematical hard Brexit, that possibility sends shudders through the UK business community. A “no deal” result is widely believed to cause a severe recession in the UK with lesser but still nasty results for continental Europe as well. 

There is a lot for Brexit worriers have to fear. “Johnson said Friday that passing the bill would end the ‘acrimony and anguish’ that has consumed the country since it voted in 2016 to leave the EU. Opponents argue that leaving will only trigger more uncertainty over Britain’s future trade relations with the bloc…

“For all Johnson’s talk of ‘getting Brexit done’ on Jan. 31, details of Britain’s negotiating stance — and even who will lead the trade talks — remain unknown… Armed with his 80-seat majority in the 650-seat House of Commons, Johnson has stripped out parts of the Brexit bill that gave lawmakers a role in negotiating a future trade deal with the EU and required ministers to provide regular updates to Parliament. The clauses were added earlier in the year in an attempt to win opposition lawmakers’ support for the Brexit bill — backing that Johnson no longer needs.

“A promise that workers’ rights will not be eroded after Brexit has also been removed from the bill, although the Conservative government says it will enshrine employment rights in separate legislation.” AP. Free-trade? What happens to EU residents from other countries who wish to remain in the UK, and vice-versa? Will the UK maintain a separate identity to allow a special trade agreement with the United States, stoking local fears that a Trump-led country will force an agreement that will erode some of Britain’s most cherished structures, like its universal healthcare cost structure? What happens at the Northern Irish border with Ireland?

Americans need to ask what’s the likely impact here? The world has been teetering on the brink of a downturn that, so far, has not materialized. Will Brexit push that economic decline over the edge? Is it simply time for markets to correct? Is general global instability the driver? A survey for business leaders (the Impact Council) by Fast Company reflects the instability that is still hovering: “About 4 in 10 respondents told us they expect the global economy in 2020 to perform about the same. But remarkably, nearly 45% predicted that the next 12 months would be worse for business. Only 16% said that the global economy would be better.

“Impact Council members were more like-minded about the timing of the next downturn. While 21% predicted a recession would hit in 2020, the majority (54%) said it would likely arrive in 2021, after the next presidential election. About 15% responded that the next recession would come in 2022. Only 1 in 10 said the economy would continue to grow until 2023 or later.” FastCompany.com, December 20^th. So, a hard Brexit could trigger that recession or, if it is already underway, make it much worse for us all. Sigh!

              I’m Peter Dekom, and the thigh bone is connected to the hip bone… and no matter how isolationist Donald Trump may want the United States to be, we are absolutely and totally connected to major global economic reality.

Another One Bites the Dust

It seems that discriminatory nationalism is becoming a global epidemic. The white nationalism and anti-immigrant vectors – in a nation built on immigration – that we see in the United States are hardly uniquely American. The circling the wagons, often laced with racial and ethnic animus, is everywhere. From the Rohingya fleeing genocide in Myanmar and slipping unwelcomed into Bangladesh, Sunnis fleeing barrel bombs and desertification in the Middle East finding their way into an unwelcoming Europe, Uyghurs facing massive “reeducation camps” in Western China, in a nation with large Muslim population where Israel declares the entire country to be a “Jewish state” to the UK reaction to the “free movement of workers” within the European Union, which was a prime motivation for Brexit, and the rapidly-acceleration of anti-Muslim legislation in mostly Hindu India, which is my focus today.

What is going on? Exploding populations fighting for exhausted and dwindling resources due to climate change? Migration from local conflicts? A major realignment of major global powers as China rises and the United States chooses withdrawal from most of its international commitments? Nations have to pick sides all over again. The rise of religion and religious justification as explanations and coping mechanisms for excessive change and hard-to-comprehend economic realities? Massive social realignment from social media and the proliferation of “fake news” and conspiracy theories? A search for scapegoats to explain why what was isn’t anymore and never will be? Watching parallel movements in other countries? All of the above?

India and Pakistan were formed in 1947 when a proposed “Indian state,” given independence from the UK, exploded into sectarian violence. Instead of a single unified country, as Pakistan established a Muslim nation to the north, exceptionally bloody anti-Muslim violence in the main body of India drove a vast horde of Muslims into that newly formed Pakistan (East and West, but one nation). Hindus living in the north found parallel violence there against Hindus. A mass exodus followed. India became a mostly Hindu nation (80% today), and complex negotiation made most of Kashmir (primarily Muslim) part of India. After further violence in 1971, Pakistan itself fractured East and West Pakistan, respectively, into Bangladesh and, simply, Pakistan. Kashmiri separatists, often with Pakistani backing, have waged insurrection in that northern state for years. Pakistan and India have also fought several wars.

For most of its history, India was ruled by the Congress Party (Nehru’s creation), until 1998, when decades of declining quality of life and legendary corruption, loosened Congress’ control over the Indian Parliament and political leadership. Waiting in the wings was powerful Hindu-dominated Bharatiya Janata Party (Indian People’s Party or BJP), but its hold on India did not take solid root until the 2014 elections, when Narendra Modi (pictured above) became that nation’s 14^th prime minister. Modi had been an outspoken pro-Hindu politician (reflecting his party’s Hindu nationalist platform), sending fear into the hearts of the nearly 15% of India’s population that was Muslim. Today well over 200 million people practice Islam in India, making it the third largest Muslim nation on earth.

As India’s total population is on the verge of overtaking that of China, the friction between Indian Muslims and Hindus has intensified. Terrorist attacks, heightened tensions with Pakistan, conspiracy theories against “cow eating” Muslims (Hindus hold cows to be scared animals) and associated violence have concretized the Hindu-versus-Muslim schism in India. Lynchings. Murders. Arrests and trials based on false charges.

India edges closer to being Hindu nation with statistics that mirror the majority/minority composition of Israel (74% Jewish, 21% Arab). If Israel could declare itself a “Jewish state,” the BJP was equally and decreasingly deferential to India’s substantial Muslim minority. Their underlying platform was that India was a Hindu state, not the pluralistic nation it claimed to be. Anti-Muslim sentiments came out of the closet. Explosively. The BJP was prepared to make a rather dramatic anti-Muslim statement, beginning with the recently passed “Citizenship Amendment Act.” Peaceful protests against the law turned violent. Tear gas and shootings followed.

“The Citizenship Amendment Act sounds anodyne at first. It offers a path to Indian citizenship for refugees from three conflict-ridden neighbors — Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan — who currently live as migrants in the country illegally… All three countries have overwhelming Muslim majorities. But the law offers only followers of six faiths — Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Christians, Parsis and Jains — access to this fast-track process. Muslims are excluded.

“Modi’s government argues that because the law applies to refugees from Islamic countries, India need not offer special protection to Muslims. ‘This act illustrates India’s centuries-old culture of acceptance, harmony, compassion and brotherhood,’ Modi tweeted. Yet that compassion doesn’t extend to minority Muslim sects that face persecution, such as the Hazara and Ahmadi communities of Pakistan, and Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh — leading critics to label the law anti-Muslim…

“‘There is absolute political consensus within the BJP that India is culturally a Hindu country,’ said Milan Vaishnav, director of the South Asia program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace… Within the party, Vaishnav said, ‘the debate is really over how far the country should shift from the secular tradition, not whether it should in the first instance.’

“Since Modi took power in 2014, BJP-led governments have rewritten textbooks to remove references to the Mughals, Muslims who ruled in pre-colonial times, and renamed cities that held Mughal or Muslim names… They have passed laws banning the slaughter of cows — an animal revered by conservative Hindus — that have emboldened Hindu vigilantes and BJP supporters to attack suspected cattle smugglers. Dozens of people have been killed in lynchings, many of them Muslims. After winning reelection resoundingly in May, Modi fulfilled a long-standing BJP goal by canceling the statehood of the volatile, disputed majority-Muslim border territory of Kashmir, bringing it under the direct control of the federal government.

“Last month [November] the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Hindu groups that have fought to build a temple on a disputed site where a mosque once stood in the northern city of Ayodhya. The mosque was torn down by Hindu mobs in 1992, sparking one of the worst periods of Hindu-Muslim violence since independence…

“The law follows a controversial citizens registry implemented this year in Assam, a state bordering Bangladesh that has a sizable migrant population. Nearly 2 million people, mostly Muslims, were judged to lack sufficient evidence of citizenship, forcing them to file legal appeals or risk becoming stateless.

“As authorities in Assam erect detention centers for those who are declared foreigners, Modi’s top lieutenant, Amit Shah, who has described India as awash in migrants there illegally, has promised to roll out the registration process nationwide… In a country where 1 in 5 births still goes undocumented, many worry they could be omitted because of a lack of paperwork. Some could rely on the new citizenship law to gain status — but not Muslims.

“Those fears fueled protests that began last week in Assam, where five people were fatally shot by police, and spread on Sunday [12/15] to Jamia Millia Islamia, a historically Muslim university in New Delhi. The harsh police crackdown there sparked demonstrations at nearly 50 campuses nationwide…

“More protests are planned across the country… but the government shows no sign of backing down. India’s Supreme Court on Wednesday [12/18] postponed hearing arguments challenging the constitutionality of the citizenship law until late January.

“There is yet more that BJP supporters hope to change. The party has long demanded a uniform civil code that would erase separate Islamic laws governing marriage and divorce. Senior leaders back national legislation that would make it tougher to convert from Hinduism to Christianity or Islam, despite constitutional guarantees of religious freedom.

“‘In theory the backlash to the citizenship bill could give the government pause,’ [Sadanand Dhume , a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington] said… ‘But it’s just as possible that they decide to double down and achieve as much of their cultural agenda as possible while Modi remains largely popular among most Indians.’” Los Angeles Times, December 19^th. Does this rhetoric sound terrifyingly familiar?

              I’m Peter Dekom, and as populist nationalism expands, humanity, empathy and kindness seem to be leaving buildings everywhere… in droves.