No event is happening in a vacuum. It is critical to emphasize this basic point when evaluating the foreign policy of President Trump and his administration. There is a very well planned multidimensional construct within the sequencing of individual events which shows a policy thread weaving throughout.
The challenging aspect for most of the current U.S. electorate, and specifically those who follow politics closely, is the Trump administration’s position to not publicly espouse targeted and strategic policy objectives.
This deliberate yet not publicly promoted approach is a paradigm shift for those who reference modern diplomatic politics through the prism of past doctrines and their public advancement. The Trump foreign policy approach is a planned, deliberate, consequential, and intentionally quiet undertaking.
The Trumpian approach is becoming increasingly easier to see. However, it is not the typical approach customary amid politicians who use momentary events to elevate the appearance of their self-importance.
Quite the contrary, with the Trump team each action and participant provides visible dots, but the administration intentionally does not connect those dots for the media or the consuming public – or trumpet their importance.
The Administrations’ focus is on the ultimate outcome each individual event brings to the aggregate conclusion. ie. ‘the goal’; and not on the individual elements as they are assembled.
The background of the ‘Freedom Alliance’ stands as a baseline for understanding Trump’s mid-east policy goals –Review Here- And far below the media radar this quiet coalition approach continues: •Yesterday and today Defense Secretary James Mattis is in Saudi Arabia discussing U.S. regional policy intended toward the larger aspects of stability. •Yesterday the U.S. State Department released a JCPOA statement. •Earlier today, Secretary Tillerson spoke at a U.S. Saudi Economic Summit (remarks here).
Secretary of State Tillerson then delivers very deliberate remarks specifically focused on Iran, its ongoing nuclear program, sanctions and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
Small people, small pundits and disconnected MSM opposition to Trump, bite at these individual moments to frame a narrative that Trump policy seems like more of the same type of interventionism. However, the reality is 180° divergent.
The larger objectives of each element is toward an outcome where the U.S. does NOT intervene, does not exhaust military action, but rather manages a process of stability through maximum diplomatic and economic leverage.
It is really quite remarkable, and more importantly it’s working:
♦ The number of NATO countries now fulfilling their defense spending obligations has increased from 3 to 5, with all nations agreeing to reach the compliant 2% GDP spending within 12 months.
♦ NATO and EU countries now emboldened to stand up to Russia.
♦ Russia has become more isolated and somehow, f**king incredibly, President Trump has cut the cord connecting Russia and China.
♦ China abstained, and did not veto, a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Bashir Assad in Syria. Russia became isolated in their veto position and only Bolivia would concur.
♦ U.N. and international leadership praise Trump administration position of taking a hardline on chemical weapons attacks in Syria.
♦ Russian Vladimir Putin refused to meet Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, then abruptly did an about face after the G-7 meeting with T-Rex – because Russia’s influence was being further reduced and Putin felt threatened by diminishment.
♦ President Trump announces he will not label China as a currency manipulator. China has made no efforts to manipulate their currency since the Nov 8th, 2016, election.
♦ China turns back 12 North-Korean cargo ships laden with coal.
♦ China offsets N-Korean coal refusal with increased purchases of coking coal (steel-making) from the U.S.
♦ China halts direct air travel between Beijing and Pyongyang.
♦ China begins oil and fuel embargo of exports to North Korea.
♦ Stunningly, China announces their willingness to consider “Five Party Talks” about the denuclearization of North Korea without the government of Pyongyang at the table. (China, Russia, U.S., Japan and South Korea)
None of these outcomes are delivered through the continuance of Bush/Obama/Clinton foreign policy of interventionism. Each of these outcomes is occurring because of talks, leverage and alignment of economic influence on a larger scale than the individual interests of the countries involved.
[…] “I fully trust the capabilities of President Trump … he can succeed in so many fields that others cannot. I trust him wholeheartedly.”…
Pretty darned remarkable.