DRAINING THE SWAMP OR LORDING OVER IT?
The political upheavals in Washington and how events are unfolding long after the Trump’s election, across partisan divide along with other powerful interests/lobby groups in the capital and indeed across the nation, such as the deep state, war hawks neo-liberals etc., and then reflecting back to the campaign and elections of 2016, with the supposed “unforeseen” emergence of the un-presidential candidate Donald Trump as president of the united states a lot is left to be desired from recent happenings and if we are juxtapose it with Trumps campaign rhetoric’s we are in for an unprecedented turn of events. Though I never had a vote in the US elections I wholeheartedly supported and advocated for a Trump presidency as did most in the alt-media. Arguing with my compatriots and any person who cared to listen especially Africans, that it was in Africa’s interest to have an American president who’s disposition towards the continent was utter disdain at best or hostile at the worst, because in the years before now, were we had occupants of the white house that spoke favorably about the African continent but only in words and turn out to pursue policies that harms vital socio-economic interests of Africa and Africans in the long-run a “change” even an “unfavorable” one was worth a try, I posited that with less handouts and “support” to some of Africa’s unenterprising leaders we might at last be forced to look inward and find a truly African solution to many of Africa’s problems and challenges that stare us in the face daily.
But my most important conviction for supporting the Trump train was that I envisaged a more stable global environment with a sharp departure from the minutes away from doomsday scenarios that have dominated the news that we have been witnessing since a spike in tensions from 2014. (I guess I have lost touch with my Christian roots, as the bible says in the latter days there will be great tribulations, wars and rumors of wars) but you can’t blame me for hoping for less crisis and uncertainty as an optimist, Trump promised reduced tensions with Russia, even a hint at coalition to eradicated radical Islamic terrorism (ISIS and co) that was reason enough to support Trump over Hilary, as the latter promised a confrontational approach if she wins (show strength as she puts it), or so I thought, wrong again, with Trump I saw stability (again apparently I didn’t reconnect again with my Christian teachings “woe unto he that trusts in man”) as opposed to Hillary who I summed up her presidency to be a “get prepared to choose a side on which you will fight a global war” scenario.
So expectedly I was jubilant with the outcome of the election, as I thought a Trump presidency will offer a de-escalation of the hair trigger situation from the Obama administration and Bush before him around the world that we have grown accustomed to, from Ukraine to the south China sea, the Balkans, and the middle east especially Syria. With the disposition of things today it is safe to say that I was over optimistic and nowhere was this even more so than in the Russian society and echelons of power of the Kremlin. After the cheers and champagne toasts by members of the Duma, and the end of the euphoria we now face a true reality, that America’s bellicose, intimidation, and born to dominate psyche is more about a national policy than one man’s personality to be friends and equal partners on some of the most pressing issues confronting the world.
President Trump a Panda hugger/Bear conservationist, or a dragon slayer/Bear for blood sport?
Trying to justify whether or not president Trump is a different stock from the Washington establishment who desires real change or a pawn in the grand design to preserve and advance the united states drive for global hegemony and control appears to be simpler today than on the 20th of Jan, 2017. A critical look at the president’s moves, actions and inactions may help shed some light into recent happenings and where we may be headed in the future.
In picking his cabinet president Trump settled for members that will form a “robust” cabinet for his administration is a radical departure from what was thought to be, depending on where one stands, a cabinet with the high number of billionaires, a considerable number of establishment bigshots, neocons and war hawks. That points to a Washington tradition that brings together the players that advance and carry through the United States most fundamental ideals that unifies all sections of the political divides in Washington, this has more to do with policy than convictions and trust in the “Trump revolution”. We have a Gen. Mattis that see’s Russia as a strategic adversary of the US in all spheres in charge of the pentagon, a Rex Tillerson an establishment CEO who has all his life worked to satisfy board members and shareholders in charge of state department, a Fiona Hill who is at her best, when it comes to formulating and analyzing how best to keep nations and leaders under American dominance is by criticizing any leader or country that can or does challenge the US “exceptionality” as the head of Russian affairs in the white house. With the exception of a very few who had very short stints that support only in parts the establishment propositions. Except Trump wanted to run a dictatorship but by surrounding himself with people who all their lives have advocated for ideals that stand in sharp contrast with the candidate that said “it wouldn’t be bad if we get along with Russia” and a radically different in foreign policy. It then begs the question did Trump really want a détente with Russia or was it a ploy to continue the United States “exceptionality” and values exporting with a different style?, could it be that in pursuing the former president Trump is playing a long game and will beat everyone inline and push through his promises?. In closing let me quote an African Proverb “A king over many is stronger than a king over strength”, quantity has a quality of its own.
Domestic tripwires and red tapes
A common mistake made across the divide during the campaign season was that somehow one man on a populist wave was able to change American foreign policy which is an enshrined doctrine of governance in Washington. These policies and doctrines is none partisan, Democrats or Republicans that is the path to follow and goals to be achieve is centered on policies such as the Wolfowitz doctrine, Zbigniew Brzezinski doctrine amongst a host of others designed and drafted in furtherance of American hegemonic hold on and total dominance of the world or parts of it with any dissenting voice or nation is marked as rival adversaries to be shut down by all means necessary just like an old American saying which states that “the nail that sticks up will be hammered down”, the only difference is how should that goal be pursued? while others believe it to be a project that will be taken in a whole and vigorously pursued, others favoured a more structured step by step approach as the projects should be taken on a piece meal like basis. To illustrate this two different camps approach, for instance President Bush representing the former withdrew from the ABM treaty, invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, and started the drone wars across the globe effectively taken on American “rivals” with a frontal attack on all fronts, the Russians and Chinese with the ABM treaty withdrawal and militarisms for “dictators” and “despots” for middle eastern countries that opposed Washington in any sphere in the oil rich region, the drone wars programme was to deal with threats and any enemy real or perceived anywhere he/she may have sort save a haven, effectively pointing a gun at all people and nations with differing views from Washington and clubbing them into line with a carrot and stick only now its more of the stick than carrot.
Washington is a very complicated and unforgiving political environment, with very thin lines separating personal, corporate and national interests as is evident by the current witch hunt of anything and all things Russian on capitol hill and in the general American liberal polity. The president appears arm strung moving forward on much of his campaign promises, in the bureaucracy of Washington, which should be expected especially as the democrats reel from a bitter defeat and didn’t hide the fact and will take that into the next four years of being in opposition and bringing it to a whole new level. Thus it was expected that the democrats will interfere, obstruct and stall the wheel of progress as much as possible. Knowing these facts as crystal clear as they appear even to the most political novice, one will think that the logical step was to create a stable platform and an environment for a cordial working relationship which is devoid of unnecessary rancor, providing for a harmonious enough polity to allow the executive arm of government to function, such a novice will know that first, unifying the republican party behind a republican president is the first priority and possibly picking a few from the democrats and independents camp to push through any agenda.
Here is where it gets interesting being surrounded by Washington insiders and seasoned political players it then begs the question why the president who apparently is a deal maker managed to widen the rift between congress, the presidency, the media and intelligence community with his venomous scorn of posts on twitter in his early days in office, and catapulting Russian collusion, involvement, and or interference in the US 2016 election to the top of the to do list of his detractors in congress and civil society. A series of poorly and hastily prepared executive orders only infuriated the liberal opposition’s line that Trump is a puppet advancing the Kremlin’s agenda. President Trump his advisers, above all else must have known the scared importance of decorum and secrecy in politics especially when you want to take on a formidable adversary as the establishment except of course he never wanted to drain the swamp but wanted to lord over it, by capitalizing and feeding on the public’s discontent and frustrations and riding on the populist train to climb to the top of the establishment pyramid or just to have a seat at the table.
The Trump foreign policy
The American foreign policy is a totalitarian one predicated on the illusion of American exceptionality, “a shining city on a hill”, in reality there is nothing further from what is projected. For a fact America is the biggest nation on earth, technologically advanced, with some of the brightest and innovative minds the world has ever produced that is not debatable, but to allure to that as exactly what it wishes for and expects of all its “friends” and “foes” undemocratic (“hostile, less developed” nations, individuals that are to be taught democracy, human rights etc.) alike is a gross and terrible miscalculation. As discussed earlier American policies are centered on doctrines that are entirely hostile to non-pliant state and non-state actors, and rewards allies with grandiose promises of liberty, freedom, and prosperity for total submission, thus America’s actions and inactions in the international arena promises rewards for adopting and following the American model which is more akin to instructions/orders than shared values, but delivers anything but, as the chaos in the middle east, parts of Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin Americas has shown, the crisis in Syria represents a push against some of these policies by groups of nations led by Russia, who is now perfect and most preferred demonization object, for riddle and disgust “an example of what should not be”.
More than any country Russia should know that America’s approach or relationship towards her and her allies is has gained a political consensus designed to achieve absolute superiority over mother Russia, than the desire of very few individuals and groups to objectively preserve international security by strict adherence to international law and respect for others national interests. If Russia or her allies thought and held hope for a new tension free and mutual respect in relation to America and her allies events of April 7th, is a crude reminder that America pursues her interests even if it leads her on a collision course with other nations. With the only language or approach understood and respected to be strength and strength only. There comes a time in the life of a mother in other to protect what’s dear to her, puts her life on the line to protect that which she cherishes, not because she is not afraid or suicidal but because she knows that, that which poses an existential there to what she holds dear places her very own existence at risk, she stands up to the threat arming herself with love and a firm believe in her courage to win. We are now at that point where we are forced to ask? Is Russia and all like her going to arm themselves with courage not in the love for confrontation but as a survival instinct to defend themselves by showing strength in the mist of adversity and condemnation of their courage in standing up to aggressors? The powers that be in Moscow military or political should know and make no mistake the battles for Moscow and the motherland have been plotted and the first skirmishes are being fought faraway in the countryside of Allepo, suburbs of Damascus, the deserts of Deir Ezzor, the industrial complexes of Donetsk, or the plains of Lugansk.
Trump or a million of his likes cannot stop the establishments war machine, (only God and the decent American people can), the honeymoon period is long over now, it’s time to act as in the words of Dmitri Medvedev “It took only three months for the establishment to break Trump” and thus advance the neocons long held ambition of total and full world dominance, give up, or shift grounds (give the establishment an inch they take a mile, 2011 no fly zone over Benghazi became the Launchpad for Gadhafi’s overthrow and death). It is in the documents of the pentagon, resolutions of neocon think tanks, that war or peace against any nation is decided, thus its bigger than Trump. To be forewarned is to be forearmed.