Foreign Affairs in 2020 Campaign

President Trump has had a tough and realistic set of foreign policies towards Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. Those nations, more accustomed to administrations that sacrifice U.S. national security in return for the ability to portray a rosy but false picture of global relations, would like nothing more than to see him lose the next election. They can be expected to do all they can to achieve that goal.

Russia will continue its drive to stay ahead of the U.S. in nuclear arms, a position it achieved thanks to negotiations with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in the New Start talks.

North Korea will veer away from compromising on its nuclear program any further in the hope of a getting a new occupant in the White House who will be less militant on sanctions and less willing to fund a U.S. military that will be sufficiently capable of a kinetic solution.

Iran and the terrorists it sponsors had the benefit of eight years of the Obama presidency which, bizarrely and still inexplicably, did all that it could to strengthen and enrich the Mullah-led, deeply anti-U.S. and anti-Israel regime. After suffering through Trump’s stringent sanctions, it will vigorously do everything possible to get another Democrat back in office.

China will do all that it can to increase tensions in Asia and the Pacific.

More importantly, from a domestic American perspective, it will refuse to compromise in trade talks, and will engage in actions that cause pain to U.S. consumers, farmers, and others. This is a particularly frustrating problem for Washington. Beijing’s outrageous practices of intellectual property theft, technological espionage, marketplace dumping, and barriers to U.S. goods seriously damage America’s economy.

If the issue was appropriately settled, the You will need medications, exercise and strict cialis in weight-reduction plan to preserve your health. Alcohol is a lifestyle habit which left the person depressive which is women viagra australia not good for the sexual functioning. One of the things that you must have a prescription in order to get viagra sales . Here Is purchase generic cialis Why You Must Become A Brinjal-Bug. American economy and in particular U.S. blue collar workers would gain tremendously. The problem can be resolved if Washington takes firm action such as the Trump Administration’s tariffs, because China needs America far more than America needs China.

But the temporary pain this may cause In the U.S. will be seized upon by Democrats and their media allies as a reason to vote against the GOP. The internal fight will be particularly tough. Far more than Moscow ever did, Beijing has mastered internal U.S. politics.

A Foreign Affairs review noted that “In the last decade, the Chinese government has committed to boosting its appeal abroad. Beijing has been developing an international media network and establishing cultural study centers around the world. While debate abounds over whether promoting China’s traditions, values, language, and culture can win it more friends, vast funds are backing programs to enhance the country’s image.”

A Diplomat article notes that “in 2014, President Xi Jinping said,’We should increase China’s soft power, give a good Chinese narrative, and better communicate China’s message to the world.’ One of Xi’s signature policies, the ‘Chinese Dream,’ has been proposed as a kind of corollary or alternative to the American Dream. This is all part of a ‘charm offensive’ that will only accelerate in years to come, especially in light of the events at the recent 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China.”

Beijing built great sway on university campuses through it’s “Confucius Institutes,” in Hollywood through its purchases of media companies, and in both parties through quiet deals which enrich individual politicians. Joe Biden’s vigorous attempts to downplay China’s danger following his son’s billion dollar deal with that nation is a prime example.

Moscow, Beijing, Tehran and Pyongyang clearly understand that any of the candidates currently seeking the Democrat nomination to oppose Trump would return to the Obama Administration’s practice of sharply cutting the Pentagon’s budget, an outcome they are only too eager to have occur.

It’s going to be a bumpy ride until November of 2020.

Photo: Pixabay

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.