FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

American Foreign Policy Led to a No-Win Outcome in the Middle East

When in college in the early seventies, I did a paper on the role of the Arab League. Among my findings was the fact that the League’s members could not agree on very much, not even how best to jointly deal with Israel. The Arab countries continued to do more bickering among themselves than working together to mutually resolve regional concerns.  The problem is worst even today.  The Middle East shudders from instability that stretches from Syria to Iraq to Yemen, spawning terrorist threats as well as threats to the legacy of American intervention in Iraq and Saudi Arabia’s leadership role in the Arab world. After the so-called Arab spring, a number of regimes from Libya to Egypt are less stable than before the movement.

As for the U.S., the Iraq occupation and subsequent attempt at democracy have proven to be a costly failure.  President Obama’s failure to topple Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, his inability to apply pressure for an Israeli-Palestinian settlement, and the disappointing result of U.S.-led nuclear talks with Iran not leading to a rapprochement between the United States and Saudi Arabia’s main rival Iran, all continue to undermine the U.S. position in the Middle East.  Now, one has President Trump’s withdrawal from the multi-state nuclear agreement with Iran and the possible further destabilization of the region, and more potential Israel-Iran confrontations. Sure, it appears that the extremist Islamic State (ISIS) has been defeated in Iraq and Syria, but opposing radical Sunni and Shia forces continue to operate throughout the region.

Through all of this turmoil, except for Israel, no one is happy with American Middle Eastern policies. The Arab discontent has opened the door to increased Russian presence in the region and Turkey is unhappy with American military support to the Kurdish forces in northern Iraq. Moving the American embassy to Jerusalem didn’t help matters, as it again raised Israeli-Palestinian tensions. Worst, Lebanon is now facing greater influence by Iranian-backed Hezbollah. The strong showing by Hezbollah and its allies in recent Lebanese elections could jeopardize the country’s regional and international standing at a time when its leaders are counting on international support to prop up the economy, support the military and deal with the burden of nearly 1 million refugees from neighboring Syria.

Let’s face it, no one really believes that President Trump has a true understanding of Middle Eastern complexities. Instead, he will blindly follow Israel’s and Saudi Arabia’s lead on military and foreign policy matters. Unfortunately, the current mess will only get worst.  Starting with former President Obama, everyone agrees that the U.S. can’t unilaterally fix the Middle East. They’re going to need a lot of help from European and what few allies they have in the region.  We may be looking at a no-win outcome for some time to come.

Leave a comment »

Much Ado About Nothing and Today’s Absorb News Coverage

The phrase ‘much ado about nothing’ is of course from William Shakespeare’s play – Much Ado About Nothing.  It appears that this phrase greatly applies to the political and social issues of the day and their related news coverage.  Think about many of the headlines covering news stories today in North America and abroad. Journalists appear to be more interested in the on-going saga of the current American President and a well-known porn star, a rather irrelevant royal marriage in the U.K., the Canadian Prime Minister’s ridiculous sartorial choices while in India, and the usual absurdities displayed during the recent NRA’s national convention.   With so many other much more important issues dominating the international and national scenes, you’d think that news outlets would have much better things to do than sensationalize such negligible events.  Especially since these events don’t really change anything in a meaningful way.

If anything, such events simply provide good fodder for late night comics, talk-show hosts, the tabloids and bloggers. The problem is that the average North American relies on these outlets for the majority of their news — fake or otherwise.  The real important stuff is conveniently hidden away in the back pages of print media.  The problem is also that people selectively choose what they want to hear or read, particularly if it supports their views — referred to as ‘positive reaffirmation’ by psychologists.  Moreover, getting caught up in the banalities of insignificant current events is just another form of escapism and avoidance of the real issues.

Instead, we consciously allow our leaders — political, religious or otherwise — to tell us what we should believe. No questions asked.  Opposite positions and arguments are conveniently provided for us to regurgitate upon command.  As for many of the issues being debated, we’ve been over the same points time and time again.  Maybe this is why there is so much desire for distraction and comic relief in our societies.  Such is the bread and butter for T.V. and radio talk-show hosts.  Just try watching and listening to their ramblings and that of their faithful listeners and you’ll appreciate the points that I’m making.

Let’s not complicate matters. Just give us the simple explanations.  Even better, just entertain us.  After all, Rome’s emperor, the decadent and unpopular Nero, was said to have “fiddled while Rome burned”, although fiddles actually didn’t exist in that era.

Leave a comment »

Why Is It That We Still Can’t Understand The Limitations Of Governments To Do Things?

Recently, I read a number of articles in reputable sources blaming governments for all kinds of things. The complaints ranged from the decline in North American manufacturing jobs to proactive policies aimed at dealing with climate change and poverty.  The problem appears to be that the authors really don’t understand just what impact government policies and programs can have in reality.  Indeed, what is the ultimate role and purpose of governing?

Let’s put it in simpler terms. Governments are needed to ensure peace and good order in a society.  They do this by creating laws, administering and enforcing them for the good of all citizens.  Governments also strive to protect the individual rights of their citizens, constitutional or otherwise.  However, unlike a century ago, societal needs have become more complex and are influenced by many other factors — from new technologies, globalization, ideologies, oligopolies, world and domestic economic institutions, the environment, etc., etc. Most of these factors are outside the direct influence or control of governments.  If anything, the impact of other factors is felt more than that of government initiatives which tend to be more reactive than proactive.

Today, hundreds of lobbyists continuously work to influence government policies, often through financial support for politicians and parties. While governments attempt to be perceived as being independent, the reality is that the most influential interest groups get their fullest attention.  For example, one only has to look at recent tax reform initiatives in the U.S. and the influence of the National Rifle Association regarding the current gun control debate. Large business organizations run the economy, not government.  President Trump is witnessing their significant influence in the current debate over free trade versus his administration’s move to increased protectionism.

Except in the case of wars, governments rarely tackle issues in a speedy and drastic way, but rather do things in a deliberately slow and incremental approach. Sometimes, politicians just want to please as many interest groups as possible so as to get re-elected in the short-term.  It’s rare that governments attempt to move quickly to tackle those longer-term issues for fear of alienating their supporters, most of whom can’t see further than the end of their noses.  Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, critics ignore the realities of governing today’s complex societies.  Many of the issues we face today have emerged and evolved over decades of governments with varying political stripes.  In order to be re-elected, political parties are more or less forced to take “centrist” positions or face the countervailing influence of powerful interest groups.  It’s hard to govern effectively and with a longer-term perspective when the immediate primary objective is political survival.  Sorry to be so cynical, but it’s been a tough week!

Leave a comment »

Don’t Drink Too Much Alcohol, Although Drinking In Moderation Can Have Some Benefits?

Studies about risks or benefits to our health flow weekly from research about what we eat, drink or even inhale. In many cases, these studies tend to often contradict other studies, causing no shortage of confusion and inevitable concern.  Research on the consumption of alcohol is no different.  In 2011, the World Health Organization warned that alcohol causes nearly 4 percent of deaths worldwide, more than AIDS, tuberculosis or violence. On the other hand, University of California researchers found that moderate beer consumption may help fight osteoporosis, a disease of the skeletal system characterized by low bone mass and deterioration of bone tissue. However, the same researchers also found that even one glass of wine with dinner, if you’re 55 or older, may hit you hard enough to make you a dangerous driver. A 2010 study by British researchers concluded that heavy alcohol consumption is more harmful than illegal drugs like heroin and crack cocaine. Yet, other medical researchers have found that moderate consumption of red wine can actually improve heart health, although it may also put older adults with heart disease or diabetes at risk of developing a common form of arrhythmia.  However, it has been discovered that heavier drinkers were less likely to have a heart attack. Go figure!

Let’s face it, despite all the warnings about drinking too much alcohol, governments continue to make money on its distribution — much like tobacco. Indeed, today the U.S. government recommends no more than 14 drinks weekly for men and 7 drinks weekly for women. In Canada, it’s 15 drinks weekly for men and 10 drinks weekly for women. Some other European countries set even higher upper limits for men.  Considering myself to be a moderate drinker, I found these recommended limits to be somewhat high.  One might even suggest that at these rates of consumption there is a real danger of developing the condition referred to as alcoholic liver cirrhosis.  According to the American Liver Foundation, between 10 and 20 percent of heavy drinkers will develop such liver cirrhosis.

Now, North Americans have been drinking some form of alcoholic beverage for centuries. It’s a perfectly legal and acceptable pastime activity.  While there are legal restrictions and age limits, there is little doubt that people are introduced to alcohol in their early teens.  It’s only in the last few decades that societies have begun to actually examine the potential health and safety risks associated with drinking alcohol.  It’s only in recent years that legislators and law enforcement have tackled the self-evident dangers linked to drinking and driving.  Numerous campaigns — some fairly successful — have emerged addressing these dangers and their tragic consequences on our highways.

Given the history surrounding alcohol consumption and abuse in North American, I predict that we will see a similar pattern in how we treat recreational marijuana use. I’ve seen estimates that up to ninety percent of North American adults consume some form of alcohol, moderately or heavily.  While recreational marijuana use may not reach the same levels of usage, we will see more research emerging as to what are the benefits and the risks.  I also predict that, just as in case of alcohol studies, there will be results reflecting both the potential benefits and risks of marijuana use.  One can only hope that they are not as confusing as the past contradictory findings of studies on alcohol consumption.  Somehow, I’m not very optimistic.  Even with negative results, I suspect that alcohol and marijuana use will never be banned.  Instead, each individual will continue to have to weigh the benefits and risks for themselves.  As a result, do we really need any more studies?

Leave a comment »

Tragedy Strikes a Small Saskatchewan Town as a Result of a Highway Accident

On April 6, 2018, the Humboldt Broncos junior hockey squad was travelling in Saskatchewan by bus to a hockey game, just like many other junior hockey teams do annually across Canada and the U.S.  Unfortunately, the bus was involved in a horrific collision with a tractor trailer.  There were 29 people on the bus at the time of the collision, 15 of whom died with the remainder being sent to hospital suffering from a variety of serious injuries.  Needless-to-say, all of Canada was shocked and sent their prayers and thoughts to the families, friends and community members. A country is in grief, and well it should be.

However, while tragic, one has to understand that fatalities resulting from motor vehicle accidents are a fact of life on North American highways. Fortunately, the introduction of seat belts, air bags and other safety measures helped greatly in reducing fatalities and serious injuries in recent years. In Canada, the death toll went from 2 fatalities per 10,000 motor vehicles registered in 1996 to less than 1 fatality per 10,000 motor vehicles registered in 2015. In the U.S. according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), more than 32,000 people died on U.S. roads in 2013, roughly 90 fatalities a day. However, similar to Canada, the U.S. has seen a 31 percent reduction in its motor vehicle death rate per capita over the past 13 years.

Put in another perspective, gun deaths continue unabated. In 2014, gun deaths outpaced motor vehicle deaths in 21 American states and the District of Columbia. The CDC published recent data showing 38,658 gun deaths for 2016, including suicides — up from 33,563 gun deaths in 2012. Unlike motor vehicles, guns remain the only consumer products not regulated for health and safety in the United States and Canada.

While we are doing better with respect to highway and motor vehicle safety, much more needs to be done. The best thing that one can do to honor the victims of the Humboldt tragedy is to strive to continue to improve highway and motor vehicle safety. The best thing that one can do to honor the students killed in the mass shooting at Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School — which saw 17 people killed and several injured — is to improve gun safety and gun control laws. As societies, we owe it to both past and future victims.

Leave a comment »

March For Our Lives Is More Than Just A One Day Demonstration, It’s A Decade Long Campaign!

On March 24, 2018, hundreds of thousands of people demonstrated not only in Washington, D.C., but in hundreds of communities across the U.S., Canada, Europe and elsewhere. They demonstrated against a gun culture that threatens our lives and those of our children everyday.  None of us are immune to the violent use of guns.  In Ottawa where I live, there have already been dozens of shootings so far this year, with several people being injured or killed. As per Canadian authorities, guns are being smuggled into Canada from the U.S. on a regular basis. According to the Canada Border Services Agency, firearm seizures at the border are going up. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) has reported that guns are being sold illegally through the darknet, often to buyers who had no firearms licences.  At the same time, gun sales are occurring through more visible online vendors as well as internet forums.  Almost half the guns used in criminal activities have been stolen from the homes of legitimate gun owners.

Possession of handguns, favoured by most drug gangs and organized criminals, is closely regulated in Canada compared to the U.S.  Nevertheless, as a result of the illegal gun smuggling activities, there has been an increasing use of handguns in major Canadian cities.  From about 1991 on, the prevalence of handguns surpassed long-guns in Canadian homicide statistics. Fortunately, due to tighter gun control laws, there have been few shootings that have involved semi-automatic assault weapons.  The last major mass shooting using an assault rifle was on December 6, 1989, when Marc Lépine shot and tragically killed 14 women at Université de Montréal’s École Polytechnique. One result was the tightening up of long-gun control laws in Canada. However, make no mistake, there is a gun lobby in Canada and they are as active as the National Rifle Association (NRA) in the U.S.

The momentum gathered by anti-gun activists after the mass shooting at Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School — which saw 17 people killed and several injured — is remarkable. However, the future of this latest effort to cure America of its gun obsession will need gobs of money, time, commitment and political skill. Whether the students have the resolve to see it through will determine whether they have any more success than previous anti-gun uprisings.  The lack of that persistence has been the NRA’s greatest friend to date.  Are the Democrats more willing than Republicans to risk their careers by upsetting the NRA and its many apostles?

While the older generations can sit around crippled by pessimism, today’s younger generation has not only the option but a real need to tackle this issue. Real change takes time, resources and commitment.  Do not believe that the NRA and the gun industry will not devote all its political influence and employ nasty tactics to undermine this emerging movement.  Get ready for a long haul fight and numerous setbacks in the months and years ahead.  Nevertheless, we must applaud and support the movement’s efforts.  Please do so by signing on to their petition and/or sending your friends this link: https://marchforourlives.com/sign.

Leave a comment »

Why Haven’t All American States Banned Smoking From Public Places?

Like the gun lobby in the U.S., the tobacco industry has been a major lobbyist. In 2011, American tobacco companies were finally forced to concede that they lied to the American public about so-called light cigarettes and the addictiveness of nicotine. In addition, since the 1990s, the health effects of secondhand smoke have come to the forefront.  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported in 2011 that secondhand smoke exposure causes lung cancer and cardiovascular and respiratory diseases in nonsmoking adults and children, resulting in an estimated 46,000 heart disease deaths and 3,400 lung cancer deaths among U.S. nonsmoking adults each year. According to the CDC and the Heart Association, long-term exposure to secondhand smoke can raise heart disease rates in adult nonsmokers by 25 percent to 30 percent.

As a result, the CDC also reported in 2011 that the number of states (including the District of Columbia) with laws prohibiting smoking in indoor areas of worksites, restaurants, and bars had increased from zero in 2000 to 26 in 2010. Today, 32 states ban smoking in public places and workplaces, and many cities and other localities do too. However, regional disparities remain with several southern states not having adopted a smoke-free law that prohibits smoking in all three venues.

Federally in Canada, the Non-smokers’ Health Act came into force way back in 1988, covering all employers and workplaces governed by the federal jurisdiction.  Subsequently, smoking in Canada was banned in public indoor spaces and workplaces (including restaurants, bars and casinos) by all ten provinces and three territories.  Some municipalities in turn passed bylaws restricting smoking further than the applicable national/provincial/territorial legislation.

As of 2015, health authorities reported that about 13% of Canadians smoke. According to the CDC’s Office on Smoking and Health, the U.S. smoking rate has dropped every year since 1998 to about 20 percent. With fewer and fewer Americans and Canadians smoking tobacco, there is no good reason for governments at all levels not to ban smoking from public places and workplaces.  We know what the dangers of secondhand smoke are. We need to protect workers, the public and especially children from exposure to this danger.  It’s time that 100 percent of Americans and Canadians are protected from this danger to their health, especially when congregating in indoor public spaces and workplaces.

Leave a comment »

Yes, Donald Trump Is “Vindictive”. His Recent Actions Prove It.

The Oxford Dictionary defines “vindictive” as “having or showing a strong or unreasoning desire for revenge”. When I read that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had fired former FBI deputy director Andrew Mc­Cabe — a little more than 24 hours before Mr. McCabe was set to retire — the first word that came to mind was “vindictive”.  Mr. McCabe had spent more than 20 years at the FBI and was well respected by his colleagues and previous administrations. This firing comes days just after the President suddenly fired his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, using of all things a tweet to inform everyone.  Although not totally unexpected, Mr. Tillerson proved not to be the “yes man” desired by this President.  Again, the manner and speed in which his dismissal was carried out could be described as being “vindictive”.  After all, this was the same person that was rumored to have referred in private to Trump as being a “moron”, which I’m sure was never forgotten.

One again, following the earlier firing of former FBI Director James B. Comey, Mr. McCabe’s firing appears to be one more vindictive attack on the FBI. Remember that Trump’s administration has carried out an ongoing war with the FBI due to the agency’s work for special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia. The FBI has also been alleged by the administration of improprieties in the handling of the Clinton email case, despite a lack of evidence supporting the allegations.  Mr. Mc­Cabe’s attorney noted that the intervention by the White House in the Justice Department’s disciplinary process is unprecedented, deeply unfair, and even dangerous.  Moreover, Mr. McCabe was a frequent target of criticism from Trump.  In addition, it was asserted by his lawyer that Mr. McCabe had not been given an adequate chance to respond to the Justice Department’s allegations.  It definitely appears that this may be a good case for a “wrongful dismissal” suit, and if won will no doubt tarnish the President’s and Attorney General’s reputations.

What’s even more troubling in recent weeks is the ongoing loss of Whitehouse staff who have either resigned or been dismissed. As one Political Scientist noted, to date there has never been so much staff turnover and turmoil occurring so early in a first Presidential term.  Way back in February 2016 I published a blog about “Donald Trump and Extreme Narcissism”  (https://froliticks.wordpress.com/2016/02/29/donald-trump-and-extreme-narcissism/).  In it, I noted about extreme narcissists that: “If challenged, they often will bully and disparage those who would dare criticize them.” For the sake of all Americans, I sincerely wish that I had been wrong in my earlier prognosis!

Leave a comment »

Where Is Trump Going With His Foreign Policy — Especially When It Comes To North Korea?

Just learned from a release by the Associated Press that President Trump has dumped Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State. Wow!  It’s getting hard to know who is in his Cabinet without a numbered sweater.  What’s even more interesting is that Tillerson’s dismissal comes following Trump’s announcement that he plans to meet with the “little rocket man” — Kim Jong Un, North Korea’s Dictator. Just by sitting down with the President, Kim Jong Un will get what he craves the most: legitimacy.  Of course, this sudden move on the part of Trump most likely caught the former Secretary of State off guard.  Indeed, the entire State Department and foreign service were probably excluded from the decision-making process.  Instead, it appears that the South Korean administration is driving the agenda.  That leaves the Trump administration with few people with experience in dealing with North Korea, while those in the North Korean Foreign Ministry have been working on little else.

No one really knows Kim Jong Un all that while. He certainly has studied Donald Trump.  In the short-run, sanctions relief is definitely one of his goals.  In addition, there is little doubt that the planned May meeting is a ploy on the part of North Korea. Any unlikely peace treaty would require addressing issues regarding the U.S. military’s presence in South Korea and its transfer of wartime operational control to South Korea and United Nations forces in South Korea.

Trump is employing a very high-risk strategy which could backfire spectacularly. Kim Jong Un will never agree to so-called “denuclearization” without major unacceptable concessions by the U.S.  Any concessions will certainly strengthen his regime’s safety externally while ensuring his continuing internal control over the North Korean people.  As one expert on North Korea noted: “Kim wants to portray himself as the bold leader of a normal, peace-loving nuclear power who can meet an American president as equals.” For Kim, the associated propaganda will greatly benefit him on the home front where the current sanctions have had a detrimental impact on the day-to-day lives of North Koreans.  Expect more displays of affection for the regime.

The real danger here is that Trump may be all too willing to concede on a number of important policy matters in order to claim some sort of diplomatic triumph. Donald Trump may perceive himself as a “great negotiator”, but he is no match for the North Koreans.  I suspect that Rex Tillerson recognized this, warned Trump, and subsequently left following his voiced objections.  This is an all too familiar occurrence within Trump’s administration, and can only lead to greater White House problems and internal dissension.

Leave a comment »

Does Trump Not Understand Fundamental Principles Behind Multi-lateral Trade?

This past week, President Trump announced (tweet, tweet) that he plans to impose tariffs of 25 percent on imported steel and 10 percent on aluminum. Besides affecting trade with Europe and China, the proposed tariffs would particularly affect Canada and Mexico. Canada is the biggest supplier of steel and aluminum to the U.S., and Mexico is the fourth largest source of steel. Both countries have asked to be excluded, and both indicated that they would strike back if Trump includes them in the stiff duties.  Trump’s basis for imposing such tariffs is on the grounds of national security, arguing that the U.S. cannot rely on foreign imports for steel and aluminum. This rationale in and of itself is totally baseless given existing security arrangements among the three countries and the nature of their integrated economies.

Not only this, Trump’s announcement has thrown a wrench into current negotiations among the three countries respecting the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The Canadian and Mexican teams are absolutely furious, and rightly so.  The steel and aluminum tariff announcement may have just killed off any hopes of advancing on major sticking points at the NAFTA talks, including setting new rules for auto content in the region.  On top of which, Trump has implied that the two countries would not be excluded from the imposition of tariffs unless a new NAFTA deal is made which would benefit the U.S.  Some negotiating tactic!

The problem for the U.S. is that the Americans export as much steel and aluminum to Canada as they import from Canadian manufacturers. The North American market has nicely evolved over decades to allow both countries to develop more specialized sources of steel manufacturing, benefiting both countries.  This is why U.S. businesses and labour unions (e.g. United Steelworkers or USW) are arguing for an exemption from the planned tariffs. The USW, representing steel workers on both sides of the border, even went on record with the following:

Canada is not the problem. The United States and Canada have integrated manufacturing markets and our union represents trade-impacted workers in both nations. In addition, the defense and intelligence relationship between the countries is unique and integral to our security. Any solution must exempt Canadian production. At the same time, Canada must commit to robust enforcement and enhance its cooperation to address global overcapacity in steel and aluminum. …”

Once again, the Trump administration has demonstrated its complete lack of good economic policy, all in the name of political opportunism. We now have an integrated North American market, exemplified by the fact that Canada is the biggest trade partner with the U.S.  The major problem is that there appears to be a complete lack of understanding as to how multi-lateral trade arrangements work in today’s global markets.  Unfortunately, if Trump’s approach continues, then the NAFTA talks will falter much to the detriment of all three countries and to their respective economies.  Consumers will suffer as will workers.  Hopefully, growing American domestic opposition to Trump’s protectionist trade policies will prevail.  One can only hope!

Leave a comment »