Forum turned upside down?

[webfact]

Trump signals shift from Obama's focus on multilateralism

By JULIE PACE

 

For eight years, President Barack Obama's foreign policy doctrine has been rooted in a belief that while the United States can take action around the word on its own, it rarely should.

 

"Multilateralism regulates hubris," Obama declared.

 

His successor, President-elect Donald Trump, has derided some of the same international partnerships Obama and his recent predecessors have promoted, raising the prospect that the Republican's "America First" agenda might well mean an America more willing to act alone.

 

"The United Nations has such great potential but right now it is just a club for people to get together, talk and have a good time," Trump tweeted days after the UN Security Council approved a resolution condemning Israeli settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. Both Israel and Trump called on the U.S. to use its veto power to block the measure, but the Obama administration instead abstained.

 

Trump's criticism of the United Nations is shared by some in his party, including a handful of GOP lawmakers who have called for Congress to withhold funding for the body following the settlements vote.

 

Some of Trump's other positions have drawn swift rebuke from Republicans, particularly his criticism of NATO during the presidential campaign and his suggestion that the U.S. might not defend partners that don't fulfill financial obligations to the longstanding U.S.-European military alliance.

 

Trump has also challenged the necessity of multilateralism in his economic agenda, pledging to scrap the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership trade accord in favor of one-on-one agreements that he says will be more favorable to U.S. businesses and workers.

 

With Trump still about three weeks away from taking office, it's unclear how his campaign rhetoric will translate into action. Even as he has criticized the UN and NATO, he has vowed to "aggressively pursue joint and coalition military operations" with allies to take on the Islamic State militant group. What those military operations might entail is uncertain, given that Trump's views on national security have been both isolationist and muscular, including his recent call for expanding U.S. nuclear capabilities.

 

Richard Grenell, who served as U.S. spokesman at the United Nations during President George W. Bush's administration and has been working with Trump's transition team, downplayed the prospect that Trump will withdraw from or even disregard the UN and NATO once he takes office.

 

"Trump is talking about reforming these organizations so that they live up to their ideals, not about abandoning them," Grenell said in an interview.

 

Obama has also been critical of U.S. partners at times, telling The Atlantic magazine earlier this year that some U.S. allies were "free riders" eager for Washington to solve the world's problems. Obama also has pushed NATO partners to live up to an agreement that they spend at least 2 percent of their country's gross domestic product on defense, a guideline only a few members adhere to.

 

But the president's major foreign policy decisions have highlighted his belief that the U.S. is better served acting in concert with other nations — and that a lack of involvement from allies should be a warning sign to Washington. Both Republican Presidents George H.W. and George W. Bush were also proponents of coalition-building before taking drastic action overseas.

 

With the support of the UN Security Council and NATO allies, Obama joined the bombing campaign in Libya in 2011. He backed away from plans to launch airstrikes against Syria in 2013, spooked in part by the British Parliament's refusal to authorize its military to participate and scant willingness among other allies to join the effort.

 

On the diplomatic front, Obama's administration worked alongside five other nations to secure a landmark nuclear accord with Iran and partnered with the European Union to level economic sanctions against Russia for its provocations in Ukraine.

 

Like much of Obama's approach to foreign policy, his preference for acting as part of a coalition was shaped by lessons learned from the Iraq war he inherited from George W. Bush. While numerous other countries were part of the war at the start, the U.S. had by far the largest commitment and bore the brunt of the casualties and the financial burden. Responsibility for quelling the sectarian violence and instability that consumed Iraq after the 2003 invasion also fell predominantly to the U.S.

 

During a foreign policy address in 2014, Obama chastised those who criticized him for seeking to share burdens with other countries and who saw working through institutions such as the UN as a "sign of weakness."

 

When crises arise that do not directly threaten the U.S. but still demand action, Obama said, "We have to work with others because collective action in these circumstances is more likely to succeed, more likely to be sustained (and) less likely to lead to costly mistakes."

 

-- © Associated Press 2016-12-28

[jaidam]

America needs to focus on,and take care of, its own interests. The world will survive without this horrific nannying that Obama and his huge ego kept up for his double bill. Forced nannying that left the world a much more hostile and divided place. Trump's arrival heralds a desperately needed re-focus on America and Americans, the Syrians know more about their country than Obama did, as did the Libyans.... for heavens sake let them get on with it(oh yes, and close the borders so we don't have to care what goes on abroad).

 

[craigt3365]

22 minutes ago, jaidam said:

America needs to focus on,and take care of, its own interests. The world will survive without this horrific nannying that Obama and his huge ego kept up for his double bill. Forced nannying that left the world a much more hostile and divided place. Trump's arrival heralds a desperately needed re-focus on America and Americans, the Syrians know more about their country than Obama did, as did the Libyans.... for heavens sake let them get on with it(oh yes, and close the borders so we don't have to care what goes on abroad).

 

The US, like all other large countries, relies on international trade.  It's massively important to these economies.  To just look inward would be a huge mistake.  We live in a global economy now.  A global society.  Events in far off lands can have massive impacts on financial events at home.

 

Yes, there are some problems.  But it's not from "forced nannying".  LOL

 

[IAMHERE]

Trade is for trade, should not be used to control the internal politics of other countries.  America has paid way too much for its clout in the world, time to come home and take care of the Americas. The rest of the world can take care of itself without meddling by the USA.

[williamgeorgeallen]

america should learn from china. china is able to get its grubby little hands on many other countries resources without bombing the hell out of them.

[craigt3365]

23 minutes ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

america should learn from china. china is able to get its grubby little hands on many other countries resources without bombing the hell out of them.

Right.  Steal other countries resources, pollute their land, saddle them with massive amounts of debt, and don't forget, take over countries illegally.  Tibet.  Perhaps not the best role model.

[Mansell]

When Britain stepped back from policing the world after WWII it became the responsibility of the USA to step up and be the policeman.  Going back to isolationism is not in the best interest of the USA or the rest of the world. If we step back the bullies will step up because they know that the USA is only focussed on itself and will do nothing. In the long term this will be counterproductive, especially if China steps forward and assumes our role. Do you really want China or Russia to be the world's policeman? Do you really want N. Korea flexing their muscles led by a tinpot dictator? Do we really want to go to war with these countries? Give them an inch and they will demand a mile. The British standard for the Royal Navy around WWI, the preeminent navy at that time, was to be twice as big as any two countries navies. This was needed to keep the seaways a open for commerce. The United States needs to be at least the equivalent of any other nuclear country in the world. Stepping back into isolationism will end up in being self defeating for us and the free world.

[elgordo38]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

Republican's "America First" agenda might well mean an America more willing to act alone.

Hmm really Donald lets hope you never have to make a midnight call to other countries to form one of Ameria's "coalitions" of the willing. You may just get one big busy signal. 

[elgordo38]

The word shift can so easily be changed by just adding a "y"

[smotherb]

7 hours ago, jaidam said:

America needs to focus on,and take care of, its own interests. The world will survive without this horrific nannying that Obama and his huge ego kept up for his double bill. Forced nannying that left the world a much more hostile and divided place. Trump's arrival heralds a desperately needed re-focus on America and Americans, the Syrians know more about their country than Obama did, as did the Libyans.... for heavens sake let them get on with it(oh yes, and close the borders so we don't have to care what goes on abroad).

 

Gee, do you really think the US can isolate itself from the global political economy and not seek compromised relations with other countries? Why don't we just extend that wall to stretch along the Canadian border and the Pacific, Atlantic and Gulf seaboards so we can just sit quietly and close our eyes so no one will see us?

[williamgeorgeallen]

3 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Right.  Steal other countries resources, pollute their land, saddle them with massive amounts of debt, and don't forget, take over countries illegally.  Tibet.  Perhaps not the best role model.

i would still rater be in tibet than in syria or iraq.

[hawker9000]

Too bad Obama couldn't bring the same "multilateralism" to the domestic policy table that he approached foreign policy with.   Trump was elected in part because of the belief that he'll dam the torrent of domestic damage, and bring a little more actual leadership internationally.  Dem brownshirts will continue their ongoing campaign of intolerance and violence of course, so Trump has his work cut out for him.  Frankly, it's going to take more than bombast to fix things. 8 years of Obama's War on the Middle Class, and now we practically need a 2nd Reconstruction.

 

 

[craigt3365]

2 minutes ago, hawker9000 said:

Too bad Obama couldn't bring the same "multilateralism" to the domestic policy table that he approached foreign policy with.   Trump was elected in part because of the belief that he'll dam the torrent of domestic damage, and bring a little more actual leadership internationally.  Dem brownshirts will continue their ongoing campaign of intolerance and violence of course, so Trump has his work cut out for him.  Frankly, it's going to take more than bombast to fix things. 8 years of Obama's War on the Middle Class, and now we practically need a 2nd Reconstruction.

 

 

Obama inherited an economy that was in shambles.  He helped keep it from getting worse.  And now, things aren't fantastic, but they OK.  About the best in the industrialized world.  As for international leadership, seems he's fallen short there.

[onthesoi]

16 hours ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

i would still rater be in tibet than in syria or iraq.

..or Afghanistan, Libya, Israel, Pakistan, Ukraine.

[craigt3365]

Just now, onthesoi said:

..or Afghanistan, Libya, Israel, Pakistan, Ukraine.

Ukraine was great last year.  Loved it.  Israel a few years ago was OK also.  Tried to get into Afghanistan this year but couldn't make it.  Border was closed when I was there, visiting Tajikistan. 

[boomerangutang]

          Trump is all over the map.  He's in favor or ABC in the morning, then changes to XYZ by lunch.  He's like a peasant kid who enters a giant shopping mall for the first time in his life; "Oh, look at that, I never knew there were so many shoes in the whole wide world!  Oh look on at this other big glass window, there are pretty women but they look dead."  (his Secret Service minder whispers in his ear; "those are mannequins, sir") Trump responds; "why do they call them 'man-akins'?  They don't look like men to me."

 

      Note: of all Trump's 4 billion dollar appointees for top positions, none hold Ph'd's.   Trump has more white men for top positions than any recent president, other than Reagan.  Yes, the same R.Reagan who brought us Iran-Contra and increased taxes for middle class, and less taxes for wealthy.  

 

       Added note:  it's almost always old rich white men who plunged the US into wars, from Vietnam on up to Afghanistan.  Very often, those same old white men have vested interests in economic gain in those wars.  Just one of many examples:  Dick Cheney is heavily invested in providing weapons and support services/food/medical supplies/fuel to the US war machine operating in Iraq and Afghanistan.   For elder rich white men like him, war = fattening his wallet.   Same will happen with Trump and the wealthy white men he is surrounding himself with.  

[mrwebb8825]

America hasn't "Gone To War" since saving Europe in WWII. Ever since then it's been meddling where it shouldn't. Truman took us to Korea and Eisenhower got us out. Kennedy dealt with the Bay of Pigs without firing a single shot. Johnson took us into Vietnam and Nixon got us out.

Ford and Carter opened up the drug routes with the "Why can't we all just get along" style thinking. Reagan, while trying to finally make peace with Russia sent coverts in to blow the hell out the drug cartels.

Then it was the Bush, Clinton, Bush sandwich that tore ALL focus away from home security and drugs and tried to create their own version of the world in every country they could.

Then we have now survived the Obamanation of all respect any of the rest of the world had for us ending with his "Kiss Ass Apology" tour.

Hoping now that Trump is taking the reins there will be no more meddling, no more antiquated thinking, no more pull down America's pants for any and everybody that cries.