FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Jul 17

U.S. Current Involvement In The Middle East Is Just Making Things Worst In The Region

by bcurry

As if the continuing supply of American weaponry to Israel isn’t destabilizing enough with respect to Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen and Iran, now the Trump administration has bombed Iranian nuclear facilities and Israel has undertaken further military actions in Syria.  Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling coalition now has received carte blanche from the U.S. to do whatever they believe is in their strategic interests, even if this means further threatening the political and economic stability in the region.  Iran is economically in a mess, and American military actions have simply caused greater consternation and outrage.  Indeed, according to the United Nations’ refugee agency, one of the immediate consequences is the fact that Iran has speeded up its deportation back to Afghanistan of Afghan refugees who number more than 1.4 million in the country.  It’s been reported that the mass expulsions threaten to push Afghanistan further toward the brink of economic collapse with the sudden cut off of vital remittance money to Afghan families from relatives in Iran.  In addition, the sudden influx of returnees piles on Afghanistan’s already grim unemployment, housing and health-care crises.  More than half of Afghanistan’s estimated population of 41 million already relies on humanitarian assistance.

In the case of Syria, Israel recently launched deadly airstrikes on Syria’s capital, damaging a compound housing the defence ministry and hitting an area near the presidential palace, according to the Israeli military and Syrian authorities. The bombardment in central Damascus followed days of bloody clashes involving Syrian government forces in the southern region of Sweida, the heartland of the country’s Druse minority and a strategically important province near Israel and Jordan.  Israeli officials have argued previously that they want to prevent any hostile forces in Syria from entrenching near their borders.  Syria of course has a new interim government following the overthrow of former dictator Bashar al-Assad in December 2024.  Syria’s new president Ahmed al-Shara has tried to stabilize the country since the change of regime and has also attempted to forge closer relations with the U.S.  However, Israeli military actions in Syria could damage these potential improved relations.  The Trump administration so far has been silent on the Israeli initiatives, except to state that they are “very concerned” over the Israeli strikes.

For an administration that claims it is against wars and the killing of civilians in particular, Trump appears to have taken a wait-and-watch position when it comes to Israel’s military actions in the region.  This position has given clear support to Netanyahu’s aggressive military initiatives, whether right or wrong.  This could lead to more awkward and contentious relations between the two administrations.  Even Israel’s apparent attempts to improve relations with other Arab regimes such as Saudi Arabia could be in jeopardy with the continuation of Israel’s attacks on its neighbouring states.  It’s becoming harder and harder to justify Israel’s military actions back home in the U.S. and in turn America’s continuing major involvement and military support.  The prospects of a more permanent cease fire with the Palestinians and Iranians is increasingly becoming that much more difficult under the circumstances.

In addition, Ehud Olmert, a former Israeli prime minister, said in an interview with the New York Times: “In Israel, Netanyahu is ready to sacrifice everything for his survival and we are closer to a civil war than people realize. In Gaza, we have returned to fighting — and for what?  And overseas, I never remember such hatred, such opposition, to the state of Israel.”  Opposition to the actions of the Netanyahu administration is growing among Western countries, including Great Britain, the European Union and Canada.  All in all, there is little doubt that the Middle East region is today more unstable than ever, and the Trump administration through it actions or lack thereof has greatly contributed the region’s instability.

Afghanistan Donald Trump Foreign Policy Iran Israel Israel Military Prowess The Middle East US

Leave a comment »
May 22

The Hypocrisy of Trump’s Foreign Policy Stance

by bcurry

This week, President Trump sat in a press conference and berated President Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa, a democratic state, with false claims about a genocide being committed against white Afrikaner farmers.  On the other hand, just a week ago President Trump had traveled to three Middle East countries ruled by repressive and non-democratic regimes and told them he would not lecture them about how they treat their own people.  The above meeting was subsequent to the administration’s fast tracking of the refugee status of dozens of white Afrikaans to the U.S. from South Africa, claiming that they were being persecuted by the government of that country and their lives and livelihood had been threatened.  No proof of the accusations was provided.

In contrast, one of Trump’s first actions on taking office in January 2025 was to issue an executive order suspending the Afghan resettlement program and leaving those eligible in legal limbo.  Approximately 180,000 Afghans had been admitted to the United States after August 2021.  Some were given special immigration visas (SIVs) that provided a path to permanent residency, while others were given humanitarian parole and granted temporary protected status (TPS) that allowed them to stay and to work in the U.S.  On April 11th, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced its decision to end TPS for more than 9,000 Afghans because Afghanistan “no longer continues to meet the statutory requirement for TPS.” Those targeted were given the option to self-deport before May 20, 2025.  Some of these Afghans had served with the American forces as interpreters and in other capacities, and any return to Afghanistan would most likely prove to be fatal to them and their families.

The encounter with President Ramaphosa in some ways echoed the previous February visit to the Oval Office by President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine.  Trump and Vice President JD Vance berated Zelensky in front of TV cameras, cutting short a visit meant to coordinate a plan for peace.  At one point, Trump even suggested that the Ukraine was responsible for starting the war with Russia which is completely false.  Since then, Trump has subsequently met with Zelensky and had a telephone conversation with Vladimir Putin in seeking to begin discussions for a permanent cease fire and resolution of the dispute.  However, most experts believe that Putin is simply stringing Trump along and has no intention of committing to fair and equitable negotiations with Zelensky.  Having failed to get both parties to the table, Trump now appears to have decided to concentrate only on economic talks with Ukraine, including those over that country’s rare minerals, and to forgo his intermediary status in the talks.

On May 6th, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and President Trump met at the White House and held a brief news event that focused on tariffs, trade and Trump’s repeated assertion that Canada should be the 51st state — a notion that Carney again clearly rejected.  While this meeting was somewhat more cordial in tone, the primary discussion of the existing Canada-U.S.-Mexico (CUSMA) didn’t really get addressed.  Instead, Trump simply restated that there wasn’t anything Carney could say to convince him to lift the existing tariffs.  However, Carney has called the CUSMA as “the basis for a broader negotiation.”  Remember, that it was under the previous Trump administration that the current trade agreement was signed, which has now been violated with Trump’s recent tariffs on both Canadian and Mexican imports to the U.S.

What we have to date is a weird collage of approaches to foreign policies under the Trump administration.  Where Trump believes there are positive economic returns to the U.S., such as in the Middle East, he is quite willing to enter into bilateral trade arrangements, despite having to deal with non-democratic and repressive regimes such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.  His administration has even alluded to possibly reducing or eliminating existing economic sanctions on Russia imposed after Putin’s past invasion of Crimea and the current armed invasion of Eastern Ukraine.  All of this contributes to the evident hypocrisy of Trump’s foreign policy stance.

Afghanistan Canada Donald Trump Foreign Policy Immigration NAFTA The Middle East Trade with U.S. Ukraine Ukraine US

Leave a comment »
Dec 19

Impact of Social Media on How We Perceive Foreign Wars

by bcurry

A very recent poll by the New York Times indicated that American youth are more inclined to oppose President Biden’s handling of the Israeli-Hamas conflict in Gaza.  For example, the poll noted that voters between 18 and 29 years old, traditionally a heavily Democratic demographic, jump out.  Nearly three quarters of them disapprove of the way Mr. Biden is handling the conflict in Gaza.  On the other hand, older voters were far more sympathetic to Biden’s efforts.  Fifty-two percent of registered voters 65 years and older approve of Biden’s actions on Israel, 12 percentage points more than those who disapprove.  Biden’s administration has refused to officially call for a cease fire, while pushing Israel to allow more humanitarian aid into Gaza.

In Canada, the governing Liberal Party under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has take a more moderate stance, now calling for a cease fire to allow more aid for Palestinians into the devastated region along with the release of the hostages held by Hamas.  In either case, there is no win-win scenario for President Biden or Prime Minister Trudeau.  Pro-Palestinian protests in both countries are continuing, with a good deal of growing support on university and college campuses.  One of the main factors influencing the youth in both countries is the daily rapid access to scenes in the war zone, especially violent imagery of civilian casualties and hospital bombings, often through social media such as TikTok and Instagram.  Young people who use social media primarily to get their news find such images as being horrific and merciless. 

The same result can be seen in the Ukraine-Russia conflict.  Besides mainstream media, social media is also being used by both sides to influence our opinions of the war.  In some cases, recorded events are most likely going to be used to support allegations of war crimes against the Russian forces.  News media tends to slip between both conflicts, reporting mainly on the most significant and often horrendous events involving loss of life and mass destruction.  Everyday, terrible scenes of innocent civilians fleeing the war zone are propelled across our television screens and onto our tablets and cellphones.  At no other time in history has so much instant coverage occurred, influencing viewers and policy makers alike.  The most affected of course are young people who did not live through 9/11 or the Iraq war.

As more time goes on, the initial causes behind conflicts are often forgotten and become less important than the most recent revelations of atrocities and humanitarian crisis.  The longer the conflicts continue, support for current foreign policy positions will take a hit.  We see this among European Union countries, most notably Hungary, where support for Ukraine may be waning and opposition growing.  The same can be said for the Israeli-Hamas conflict which increasingly is turning into a broader conflict with the Palestinian population, not only in Gaza but also in the West Bank.  Israel still retains healthy allegiances in the U.S.  However, as the above noted poll indicated, the future of such sentiments is unclear.  Among young voters, 46 percent sympathize more with the Palestinians, against 27 percent who favour Israel.

There is little doubt that the opposing parties will continue to use social media in order to win over support their causes.  Especially by young people, it’s 24/7 and it’s readily accessible and most often not authenticate or corroborated.  Whether or not you think that it’s a form of propaganda, the use of social media will continue to play a very important role.

Foreign Policy Israel Justin Trudeau Media Social Media The Middle East The News Media US

Leave a comment »
Oct 22

The Power of the American Military Industrial Complex Continues to Grow

by bcurry

Lester B. Pearson, a former Canadian Prime Minister, was quoted in 1955: “The grim fact is that we prepare for war like precocious giants, and for peace like retarded pygmies.”  As you may know or not know, as a diplomat Pearson was largely responsible for encouraging the formation of the League of Nations after World War II, which in turn became the United Nations.

Former U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned in 1953: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”  As a former general during World War II, Eisenhower clearly understood the power of the military industrial complex in the States, a power that has continued to grow from this day forward.

The U.S. is the world’s biggest arms exporter.  As of last year, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the U.S. controlled an estimated 45 percent of the world’s weapons exports.  This is nearly five times more than any other nation and its highest level since the years immediately following the collapse of the Soviet Union.  That is up from 30 percent a decade ago.

The current conflict between Israel and Hamas is just the latest impetus behind a boom in international arms sales that is bolstering profits and weapons-making capacity among American suppliers, especially with respect to Israel’s military.  The U.S. already provides Israel with more than $3 billion in military assistance every year, and Congress is now apparently being asked to increase funding to Israel to the tune of $10 billion in emergency aid due to the conflict.

Even before Israel responded to the deadly Hamas attack, the combination of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the perception of a rising threat from China was spurring a global rush to purchase fighter planes, missiles, tanks, artillery, munitions and other lethal equipment.  Other countries such as Turkey and South Korea are also increasing their military equipment exports, giving purchasers more options at a time when production shortfalls in the U.S. mean it can take years for orders to be filled.  During the Biden administration countries such as Poland, Saudi Arabia, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Australia, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea and Japan have signed military equipment deals with the U.S.  Even some small Pacific island nations have done the same. Taiwan alone has a backlog of American weapons orders worth as much as $19 billion.  Canada recently signed an agreement with Lockheed, the world’s largest military contractor, to purchase F-35 fighter jets worth billions of dollars.

Economically, there is little doubt that foreign-based wars can stimulate certain sectors of a country’s economy.  One only has to recall the impact of the Vietnam and Iraq wars to witness the role of American military hardware providers who benefited from the billions of dollars spent in support of American actions in both countries.  Unfortunately, thousands of American lives were loss and thousands more were injured in these two nebulous conflicts.  Military equipment is being sold to all sorts of regimes, several non-democratic, simply to garner support for American foreign policy initiatives in their respective region.

Sadly, there are those who note that the Pentagon and the State Department are continuing to work to find ways to accelerate approval of foreign military sales to keep up with the rising global demand.  The industry has declared that the main bottleneck remains manufacturing capacity, requiring an industrial base capable of meeting these requirements.  Yes, there will always be those that argue if the U.S. industry doesn’t fulfill such perceived needs, then other countries will simply step in to do so.  Regrettably, this appears to be a winnable argument in Congress, with the military industrial complex taking full advantage at the expense of American taxpayers since it is often combined with foreign aid and foreign policy.

Arms Trade Canada Defence Economy Foreign Policy Military Prowess The Middle East Ukraine US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Jun 5

Weapons Sales by Canada and the U.S. Complicit in Supporting War Crimes by Saudi Arabia

by bcurry

Saudi Arabia and its regional allies, mainly the United Arab Emirates, entered the Yemeni government’s war against the Houthi rebels in 2015, and began a wide-ranging aerial bombing campaign involving more than 150 airstrikes on civilian targets in Yemen.  The United Nations calls the situation in Yemen the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, as it is estimated that the war with Yemen has killed more than 230,000 people as a result of the fighting or its indirect consequences, such as hunger and outbreaks of disease.  The war has pushed the impoverished Yemen to the brink of famine.  During this nearly decade-long war, both the U.S. and Canada fournished weapons, including F-15S/SA planes and Canadian-made light armoured vehicles (LAVs), artillery systems, and heavy machine guns.

In 2021, the Biden administration in 2021 announced an end to U.S. military support for “offensive operations” carried out by the Saudi-led coalition and suspended some munition sales.  However, aircraft maintenance contracts fulfilled by both the U.S. military and U.S. companies to coalition squadrons carrying out offensive missions have continued.  Canada’s military exports to Saudi Arabia actually increased in 2021, making the Saudi kingdom Canada’s top export destination for such goods after the U.S. —  64 percent of the total value of non-US military exports that year.  In 2020, a review was undertaken by the Canadian government of weapons sales to Saudi Arabia, which concluded there was “no substantial risk” such transfers of military goods were “used to commit or facilitate violations of international human rights law, international humanitarian law, or gender-based violence”.  However, Amnesty International and Project Ploughshares have declared that the Canadian government’s review misinterpreted, or ignored, key pillars of the 2013 Arms Trade Treaty, an international agreement signed by Canada regulating the international trade in conventional arms.  Contrary to what the federal government has said, they believe that Canada continues to ignore its international obligations to the Arms Trade Treaty.  On the other hand, the U.S., under Donald Trump, dropped out of the Arms Trade Treaty in 2019 for obvious misplaced domestic reasons.

Despite the fact that both countries have supported the kingdom, there have recently been signs of discontent with Saudi actions in Yemen and human rights violations by the Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.  The murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Turkey in 2018 by the Saudis did not help.  Nevertheless, we now have a planned trip by President Biden to Saudi Arabia to discuss increasing their production of oil, thereby helping his administration to lower gasoline prices in the U.S.  Although the U.S. helped diplomatically to arrange for a truce in the conflict between the Houthi in Yemen and Saudi Arabia, the horrendous damage was already done in both civilian casualties and infrastructure, including homes, hospitals and communication towers in Yemen.  Since 2015, human rights groups investigating the airstrikes on Yemen have identified more than 300 that violated or appeared to violate international law.  Even as early as March 2015, Internal State Department documents noted that U.S. officials worried that coalition airstrikes may have violated the rules of war.

While the world is paying close attention to possible war crimes by the Russians in Ukraine, countries such as the U.S. and Canada have been probably aided, through the provision of weapons to the Saudis and their allies, similar atrocities in Yemen.  In addition, within the kingdom of Saudi Arabia there are a number of alleged human rights issues, including the imprisonment of political activists.  However, these concerns have not been enough for the U.S. and Canada to cease their military support to the country.  One has to believe it’s more about the oil than it’s about the revenue from exports of military weapons and maintenance contracts.  Alas, there are no comparable bans on the export of oil from the region compared to existing European, U.S. and Canadian bans on the import of oil and gas from Russia.  Despite unresolved diplomatic disputes between the Saudis and both our countries, access to oil reserves unfortunately continues to drive our immediate foreign policies in the region.

Arms Trade Arms Trade Treaty Canada Foreign Policy Oil and Gas Oil and Gas The Middle East US

Leave a comment »
Jan 13

American Assertions of Imminent Iranian Threat to Attack U.S. Embassies Appears to be Questionable

by bcurry

Trump’s claim made to justify the decision to kill Iranian general Qasem Soleimani that attacks were being planned to attack four U.S. embassies has not been verified by actual intelligence. Even his Defence Secretary Mark Esper stated that he ‘didn’t see’ evidence of an Iranian plot to attack four U.S. embassies. Kind of reminds you of another President’s rationale for invading and occupying Iraq after 9-11.

16 years ago on February 5, 2003, then Secretary of State Colin Powell delivered his infamous presentation at the United Nations making the case for war with Iraq. Remember that Powell insisted that the Iraqis, and in particular their dictator Saddam Hussein, were behind the attacks on 9-11 and had “weapons of mass destruction (WMD)”, including tons of the deadly nerve agent VX. This despite the fact that Iraqi insiders and American intelligence sources had confirmed that the Iraqi regime had secretly destroyed the nerve agent soon after the Gulf War in 1991. Indeed, legitimate sources concluded that all WMDs — biological, chemical, missiles, nuclear — were subsequently destroyed.  Following the occupation of Iraq and an extensive search, the Americans did not find any WMDs. The result was that over four thousand Americans and coalition troops died and almost 32,000 were wounded in action in the Iraq War.  In addition, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that about $1.9 trillion would be the long-term price tag for the war.

Unfortunately, Congress never investigated Powell’s use of the intelligence he was given. Furthermore, based on misinformation regarding the actual intelligence, most members of Congress supported the decision by President George W. Bush to invade Iraq. Now, history may have just repeated itself.  President Trump decided to kill a top Iranian commander without providing clear and unquestionable facts to justify the action.  On top of which, Congressional leaders were not consulted beforehand because Trump has accused some as being “corrupt”.  We have also now learned that Trump reportedly okayed assassinating Soleimani seven months ago.

Whether or not you agree that Soleimani should have been assassinated is not real question. Let’s face it, he will most likely be replaced by one of his underlings.  However, we now have increased the instability in the region and raised the risks to Iraqis, Iranians and foreigners.  This is unfortunately demonstrated by the tragic shooting down of the Ukraine International Airline flight 752 by an Iranian missile, resulting in the deaths of all 176 passengers and crew.  Hopefully, all sides will attempt to deescalate these new tensions and Congress will do a better job of overseeing the President’s actions then it did in the past.

Iran Iraq Today The Middle East US

Leave a comment »
Jun 16

Trump Administration Puts Us on the Brink of Another Middle East Conflict

by bcurry

The U.S. has blamed Iran for recent attacks on two oil tankers in the vital oil shipping route south of the Strait of Hormuz, a major transit route for oil from Saudi Arabia. However, exactly how and by whom the tankers were attacked has yet to be confirmed.  Iran’s administration denies any involvement, although such proclamations have to be taken with a grain of salt given past Iranian operations in the Middle East and the Gulf. Pending further independent investigation and clarification, we all need to take a deep breath.

The problem is that Trump’s actions employing sanctions on Iranian oil and his other economic pressure tactics has made it difficult for Iran to negotiate or back down by reducing its activities elsewhere in the region. Instead, Iran has responded with its own campaign of maximum pressure. It has threatened to start stockpiling low-level, nonweapons-grade uranium and to close off oil tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.  Iran is acting like a rattlesnake that is cornered with nowhere to go.  Unless one wants to get bit, one normally would back away slowly and allow the snake to peacefully go its way.

Unfortunately, some hawks in the Trump administration, including National Security Adviser John Bolton, appear to be itching for a military strike on Iran.  Big mistake!  Iran is no Iraq and is quite capable of defending itself militarily.  Sure, military action by the U.S. would be backed by Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.  However, other nations, including those in the European Union, have urged caution and called for restraint. Indeed, France and other European signatories to the nuclear deal with Iran have said they still want to save the accord despite the withdrawal of U.S. support.

The Trump administration’s “all-or-nothing” negotiating approach is rendering Iran more aggressive, not less — with Iran wanting American sanctions to be immediately lifted before proceeding with any negotiations. Trump’s approach to Iran is completely at odds with that taken with respect to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un who, unlike Iran, already has an arsenal of nuclear weapons.  The Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is depicted as the “devil” and the dictator Kim is described by Trump as being a “nice guy”.  Go figure?  Regardless, let’s hope that we’re not once again on the brink of another Middle East conflict!

Iran The Middle East US

Leave a comment »
Oct 22

The Global Arms Trade Will Always Overshadow Human Rights

by bcurry

There is a lot of international outrage over the killing by Saudi Arabian agents of the Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi. There has also been anger by human rights groups against the Saudis over atrocities committed against the people in Yemen, mainly with the use of Western supplied military equipment, ammunition and bombs.  To no one’s surprise, President Trump was slow to condemn the Saudis in the murder of Khashoggi, especially in light of over $8 billion in weapons purchases from the U.S.  In 2013, concerns had previously been raised about Canada’s decision to sell armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia, which reportedly used them to help crack down on protesters in neighbouring Bahrain during the 2011 Arab Spring. Given that the production of the light armoured vehicles comes from a plant in London, Ontario, the Canadian government today continues to supply them to Saudi Arabia on a contract worth between $13 and $15 billion, despite that country’s recent well documented human rights abuses. Unfortunately, the previous Conservative government under Prime Minister Harper used the sale as an initial start to transform Canada into a global arms dealer. Canada began looking to the Middle East and South America for potential contracts as the U.S., Britain and other traditional customers cut defence spending.

The global arms trade represents a multi-billion dollar industry, involving most advanced countries who are particularly interested in selling weapons to developing countries. This especially includes weapons sold from several key countries.  Russia, as a dominant power in the global arms market, saw orders for its weapons totaling over $11 billion in sales in 2015. Latin American nations, in particular Venezuela, had become a focus of marketing for Russian arms.  In the same year, China reached $6 billion in weapons sales, up from its 2014 total of over $3 billion.  Also, among arms manufacturers that are NATO allies, Germany has found success in marketing naval systems to the developing world.  Britain has done the same with warplanes, and France weapons deals increased by well over $9 billion. Other major global arms suppliers are Sweden, Italy, Turkey, and Israel. The U.S. ranked first in global weapons sales in 2015, signing deals for about $40 billion, or half of all agreements in the worldwide arms bazaar.

Canada remains the only member of NATO and the G7 that has not signed the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which aims to regulate the trade in armaments — from handguns to tanks.  In 2018, Canada’s Federal Government finally introduced proposed legislation to join the ATT. However, Parliamentary opposition argue the bill contains no assurances that the weapons could not then be transferred to countries that abuse human rights, including Saudi Arabia.

President Trump and Prime Minister Trudeau are typical of leaders who have no scruples about selling weapons to countries with poor human rights records. Is it enough to say that stopping the flow of arms to Saudi Arabia is not an option, since other countries will simply step in to fill the gap — thereby depriving both countries of manufacturing jobs and billions in contracts? Despite the ATT, this position is why the global arms trade will continue to overshadow human rights.

Arms Trade Arms Trade Treaty Canada The Middle East US

Leave a comment »
May 22

Is Trump Ready To Go To War With Iran and North Korea?

by bcurry

There appears to be a lot of saber-rattling in Washington nowadays! You have Secretary of State Mike Pompeo listing a set of demands aimed at Iran so that it would become everything but a puppet state of the U.S.  One has John Bolton, Trump’s new national security adviser, who is a well known hawk in and around the capital. A lot of the administration’s critics think that these two would rather skip with the diplomatic niceties and skip straight to military action.

Then we have the European allies, China and Russia who all signed on to the Iranian Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or the nuclear deal, in 2015. What Pompeo and Trump fail to understand is that the deal was aimed primarily at limiting Iran’s nuclear program by placing restrictions on it and having International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors set up a system that allows the U.N. watchdog to inspect nuclear-related sites in Iran. It was never intended to influence Iran’s general regional policy issues which would have to done through other separate foreign policy initiatives. Of course, Israel never liked the nuclear deal, which did not directly stop Iran from testing or firing ballistic missiles, and persuaded the Trump administration to go it alone. By scrapping the deal, the U.S. will reimpose U.S. sanctions, further hurting the average Iranian. Iran’s government is resolved to resist the American demands, even at the eventual expense of its economy. An anti-American stance can only help the radicals obtain more control of Iran’s politics.

As for North Korea, Kim Jong Un is playing Trump like a fiddle. Anyone who knows anything about his regime, understands that he is not willing to give up his nuclear arsenal.  Signing any peace treaty would require addressing issues regarding the U.S. military’s presence in South Korea, possibly with its transfer of wartime operational control to South Korea and United Nations forces in South Korea. Kim also now sees how the U.S. treated the nuclear deal with Iran and will not trust the Americans with any similar deal for North Korea. Kim is also using the current military exercises by the U.S. and its allies in the region as an excuse to potentially pull out of the planned June meeting with Trump. Trump is now caught in an awkward situation where political promises were made and expectations were raised as to some form of eventual deal in the region.  The ball is now in Kim’s court.

All of this signifies that American foreign policy is in a mess. Other than moving toward military actions, show me a strategy that makes sense.  The complexities of foreign policy development have been left to overly simplistic approaches and negotiating tactics.  Even the influence of the most powerful nation on earth won’t be enough to rescue this situation from the heap of manure on which it’s built.  I sure as hell wouldn’t want to be working in the State Department these days.

Donald Trump Foreign Policy The Middle East US

Leave a comment »
May 11

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

by bcurry

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.

Foreign Policy Iraq Today The Middle East US

Leave a comment »
Blog at WordPress.com.