Bedtime Stories #3

Got the old shack up for sale … years ago, back in…

Charities, Unions and Social Welfare Groups Call For…

By Loz Lawrey  Throughout the current Coalition government's term in office, social activist…

The Yeezy Effect: Kanye West Joins the Presidential…

“Because when we win, it’s everybody’s birthday.” Kanye West, Forbes, July 8,…

Coronavirus/climate computer modelling failures

By John Woodrow  In The Australian (18/6/2020) Adam Creighton, Economics Editor, wrote: “Coronavirus:…

Happiness - and despair

The only psychology I have studied formally was a unit on the…

Spiteful Authority: Malaysia Goes for the Journalists

Malaysia’s record on letting journalists be is a blotted one. This month,…

JAGGED #5

Follows on from JAGGED #4Chapter 15: The Rocky Horror Picture Show. Not…

Bye bye, Mathias. Is Spud next?

By Grumpy Geezer  Senator Mathias Pubert Cormann has chucked his car keys into the…

«
»
Facebook

Trump at West Point: Un-Policing the World

Donald Trump claims to be the law-and-order president of the United States. There does not seem much sign of this as the stitching of the Republic gets undone. Protestors have been given a considerable roughing up across several states; police forces are in retreat before proposals of defunding while protocols for arrests are being changed. Police chiefs are resigning and, in the rarest of cases, officers are being charged for police brutality.

What, then, of the empire’s own policing capabilities overseas? Here, the Trump message is a treat of confusion. He wishes to be armed for unilateralism. No more needless policing endeavours in the international arena. No unnecessary use of US armed forces to intervene in the murky, squalid affairs of international relations.

The interventionist, policing streak in foreign policy reached its height with the 2005 declaration by President George W. Bush in his second inaugural address that it was “the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.” This was ambitiously dangerous, foolhardy and a promise of a global US chokehold to be applied to any regime suspect of not sighing to the sirens of liberty. (Well, at least the US variant of it.) “The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.”

President Barack Obama was not much of an improvement on this doctrine of permanent revolution: the US had to continue remaining the sheriff of exceptionalism, a protector of “dignity”. In a speech to West Pointers at a military academy commencement ceremony in May 2014 he acknowledged the old warning of George Washington “against foreign entanglements that do not touch directly on our security or economic wellbeing” and the interventionists’ assertion “that we ignore these conflicts at our own peril.” He preferred a middle way hardly different from his predecessors. The US could not be isolationist; history had imposed upon the Republic solemn burdens. There was “a real stake, an abiding self-interest, in making sure our children and our grandchildren grow up in a world where schoolgirls are not kidnapped and where individuals are not slaughtered because of tribe or faith or political belief.”

Trump’s language, at least on the subject of meddling in the name of liberty, or policing a form of international morality, seem unsentimental and alien to this strand of thought. On June 13, in an address to the US Military Academy at a West Point graduation ceremony, he proclaimed, or more appropriately reiterated, his task of “ending the era of endless wars.” He preferred “a renewed, clear-eyed focus on defending America’s vital interests.” The ears of traditional isolationists would have pricked up in interest: “It is not the duty of US troops to solve ancient conflicts in faraway lands that many people have never heard of. We are not the policemen of the world.”

The address was filled with the usual fripperies. “To the 1,107 who today become the newest officers in the most exceptional Army ever to take the field of battle, I am here to offer America’s salute. Thank you for answering your nation’s call.” But the reining in of US military forces has not fallen well on an obese establishment with a permanent eye to larger budgets and deeper troughs. Despite that, Trump did still throw them a vast bone, speaking of “a colossal rebuilding of the American Armed Forces, a record like no other.” Over $2 trillion had been put into a program of “new ships, bombers, jet fighters, and helicopters by the hundreds; new tanks, military satellites, rockets, and missiles.” And that fabulous hypersonic missile.

Of interest is how such a speech stirs the critics of Trump. Peter Bergen, using his CNN pulpit as national security analyst, spent little to no time examining the contents of what was said. He preferred to focus on the shallow optics of it all, “the growing disconnect between [Trump] and the US military.” The clumsy exercise of involving the military, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley, in a photo op after walking from the Rose Garden at the White House to St. John’s Church, seemed to be of more interest. Protestors had been violently dispersed for a caricatured still of power: the commander-in-chief, clumsily sporting a Bible, military officialdom nearby. Defense Secretary Mike Esper’s reluctance to share in the show was also noted. Suddenly, the military had hopped on the “peace is our business” train, including four former chairmen of the joint chiefs stretching back to the administration of President George H. W. Bush.

Bergen’s refusal to engage the content of the speech conforms to a syndrome across a press corps and commentariat fixated by form and pantomime. This is one of Trump’s remarkable, though not commendable achievements: to convert his critics into one vast persona of his own shallowness, a projection of vulgarity taken with baubles and the show. The result of this transformation is one of Twitter-sized relevance. Best focus on the distracting asides: the way, for instance, the president walked down the stairs after his address.

The president’s bodily movement transfixed Yale University psychiatrist Bandy X. Lee, who claims to be uninvolved in politics until it “invades my area of expertise.” That, evidently, did not involve scouring the contents of a speech suggesting the sparing of lives US or otherwise in futile and dangerous adventurism. Far better to focus on Trump’s neurological disposition. “The uneven gait is something I have remarked at least since his fall visit to Walter Reed, and a forward-leaning posture is associated with the difficulty holding a cup. Note that there has not been an annual report on his health this year.”

There was even room for Lee to bellyache about treatment (or lack of) from the New York Times “citing only the reporter’s own speculations, and quoting just the president and his former doctor – for a field that arguably needs the MOST expertise.”

The military and Trump might not see eye-to-eye on points, but this is a needlessly flogged horse. When it comes to matters of shredding international security pillars as the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, he has had support. At its core, the imperium breeds consensus. “Treaties stand in the way of freedom of action,” noted Michael Krepon. It is exactly that sort of freedom the US military chiefs, and the commander-in-chief, crave.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

9 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Michael Taylor

    Everything Trump did, said, or meant at West Point flew out the window with that childishly pathetic tweet.

    Fancy the Commander-in-Chief being a sooky little baby.

  2. New England Cocky

    “This is one of Trump’s remarkable, though not commendable achievements: to convert his critics into one vast persona of his own shallowness, a projection of vulgarity taken with baubles and the show.”

    Another word for this condition is TRUMPERY; n, Showy but worthless. (COD).

  3. Josephus

    One of my favourite geopolitical maps dates from the mid 1950s, where pro Western seas are marked Free Seas. Other maps of the period show Eastern Europe as black.

  4. Josephus

    PS Trump’s speech writer has obviously lazily rephrased British PM Neville Chamberlain’s famous radio address of 27 September 1938 justifying Hitler’s invasion of Czechoslovakia, ” a quarrel in a faraway land between people of which we know nothing.”

  5. Michael Taylor

    Josephus, Melania got away with plagiarising Michelle Obama, so I guess her dopey husband thought it’d be OK.

  6. wam

    trump cannot understand his predicament
    he is used to coping by. uprooting or building a wall or turning his back.
    He is showing amazing resilience despite not coping with the job.
    In 2016 I was confident the worst american vice president in my life, pence, would be president.
    There, at the sight of his walk, may still be time?
    ps
    this will scare the dutton into you.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qivI9ubZL88

  7. mark delmege

    and the comments section here is no better than the liberal msm

  8. wam

    It is In the eye of the be older mark and you have been holding it too long and you;ve gone blind.

  9. mark delmege

    I was thinking Trump derangement syndrome wam. As the author of this piece suggests hatred and mockery of Trump is the only thing that seems to matter these days. Never mind that the speech outlined a different rationale for the American military than that of his predecessors ie one that reduces the US military global footprint. What a meaty subject to discuss? Aaagh if only he could make it so- maybe just maybe thats part of the reason he tries so hard to curry favour with the top brass who till now have bloated corrupt unaccountable budgets with all the black holes you can imagine and all the wars they can possible fight and all the advanced training grounds (wars) for its fighters and weapons systems it can possibly use – of course they wont let him just as they never let him exit Syria and probably won’t let him leave Afghanistan or Iraq. Buy hey who needs meat and veges when you’ve got chips? Lets just have the Democrats back in the big chair. They love their wars more than anyone and who but a black man could revive the slave trade in Africa better than Obama?
    (For the simple minded this is not an endorsement of Trump or the Democrats)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Return to home page
Scroll Up
%d bloggers like this: