Posted on by Nathan Riley

Trump the Statesman?

Does Make America Great Again mean Make Trump Great?

Trump ended the Iranian Israeli war quickly and one expects the warring nations sighed with relief. “During the conflict, Israeli cities sustained several hits from Iranian ballistic missiles, and Iranian military targets were subjected to widespread bombing. Neither side wanted the war to go on much longer, at least at that intensity, and both were eager for a way out that they could portray as a victory,” reported the Wall Street Journal.

Iran and Israel will return to their hostile coexistence. Such tension is frequent in international relations: the U.S. and U.S.S.R, South and North Korea, Cuba and the U.S. Even if you do not love each other, war isn’t necessary.

It is a stateman’s obligation to stifle war between hostile nations. A responsibility frequently lacking in the U.S. Congress, where war hawks play an important role supporting Israel’s use of force against Palestine and Iran.

Unlike President Biden, Trump recognizes that promoting peace and avoiding wars enhances U.S. influence.

After the 12-day war tested Trump’s loyalty to Israel, he said to hell with it and simply told Iran and Israel stop. In the process he stopped the spread of nuclear weapons by bombing Iranian facilities.

It is unknown if this no-war objective will remain a fixture of U.S. policy, but it should be. Joe Biden picked sides backing Ukraine against Russia and Israel against Palestine. He associated the U.S. with bloody crimes against humanity and did not stop fighting. Trump faces political headwinds if he tries the “stop fighting” mantra on Russia and the Ukraine. While Iran and Israel could both claim victory, such an ending has not surfaced in the Ukrainian and Russian war. There is no evidence that Trump is willing to accept a reality where Russia wins and Ukraine must cooperate with Russia.

But one thing is clear, Biden didn’t try to stop fighting, he picked sides, and the wars continued.

In West Asia, Trump stayed close to Israel but intervened only on the international principle of nuclear nonproliferation and then flatly told Iran and Israel stop fighting. An action that could lead to Israel backing off its hopes for a greater Israel and pave the way for coexistence between Muslin and Jew.

To take this position, the President acted alone without consulting Congress. According to the Wall Street Journal, a pro-Trump publication, he created “a new American foreign-policy doctrine focused on clearly defining national interests, aggressively negotiating to achieve them and the use of overwhelming force if necessary.”

A problem remains: Trump acted alone like a king. As the WSJ reported, “U.S. officials who would normally play a role during such a crisis were also left out of the loop, administration officials said, a sign of how narrow is the circle of advisers Trump trusts.”

It is possible, even common, to blast this President as a dictator, but one alternative receiving little consideration is for the Democrats to change their policy and support Trump’s posture. The Democrats could become the party of peace by avoiding dividing the world into liberal Democracies and authoritarian nations. The United States should be a party of world order and reject the misguided belief that it will only back countries who have governments approved by Americans.

Many nations reject U.S. political institutions but avoiding wars with them and between them is the path of wisdom and statesmanship. With one party backing the primacy of peace it becomes possible to reduce the threat that Trump becomes dictator.

Trump is hardly consistent, and his accomplishment in the West Asian war could easily be a one-off. But it is important that those of us who believe war is the evil and peace must be the object of policy to recognize that what Trump did reflects this principle.

This is not to say Trump is a good President or to ignore his attacks on immigrants, his requirement that people wanting medical care to seek employment, or his battle against an anti-racist program like Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). Trump is not the President trying to create harmony and fairness in the United States.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Was The Election Musk’s Swan Song?

The Republicans are still strong in Florida, but electing the Democrat for the Wisconsin Supreme Court is an unequivocal victory.

While it is true that Democrats picked up votes in Florida, the Republicans still won in a landslide. That they had less votes than last year proves nothing. Last year, Donald Trump was at the top of the ticket. This year, it was local elected officials who still crushed the Democrats, even if they are not a big attraction like “The Donald.”

One sign that Trump’s diminished popularity cost him votes occurred in Florida. One county that had always been Republican turned blue and voted for the Democrats. The county’s biggest employers are military bases. Politico reports that this county is known as the Cradle of Naval Aviation, in other words federal workers live there and vote. According to Politico, “There are more federal workers in Florida’s 1st District than in any of state’s 27 other congressional districts.” There are four military bases in or near the county of Escambia. Federal workers and their families have every reason to fear the wrath of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency. They stopped being Republicans and gave the Democrats a 2,000-vote margin. The Republicans still won, but throughout the South there are military installations. Musk may be pushing them into the Democratic column.

In Wisconsin, the Republicans turnout was as large as expected, but the Democratic votes surged, and Susan Crawford, the candidate who will keep the Wisconsin court liberal, easily won the election.

Musk, in his wisdom, gave millions to Brad Schimel, the Republican candidate. In a remarkable display of bad taste, Musk mocked Americans by giving two voters separate checks for 1 million dollars each.

Schimel and Musk lost big to the Democrats.

It is hardly a coincidence that within days of the election stories appeared that Musk will leave Washington. It is impossible to know if this is a wish or Trump has actually made up his mind, but one thing is sure, Congressional Republicans want Musk to leave. Stay tuned.

The other good news from this election is a magic bullet. Democrats honed in on “democracy” more than they did fascism, civil liberties, or other words damning the President. “Democracy” is who we are. Even voters with a grade-school education know and want the United States to be a democracy. The Wisconsin Democrats have given us a fighting word, and a cause that unites all members of the party and all voters in the United States. I suspect we will be hearing more about democracy and Trump’s hostility to it in the future.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Will Knocking Republicans Increase the Democratic Vote?

Freedom Democrats offer alternatives to many Democratic planks. Legalizing sex work, drugs, and respecting the transgendered and LGBTQ+ community are promises that these planks will be priorities for Freedom Democrats.

Freedom is a core value in the United States, and Freedom Democrats are identifying areas where liberty is limited. Sometimes this is a result of erroneous ideas. If gambling and heroin are addictive, and for that matter so is food, then we should no longer blame heroin or methamphetamine for addiction. Possession of these substances is not a crime. The crime is making people use similar substances without the scientific protections offered by the Food & Drug Administration. In truth, addiction is a common way for people to confront painful problems. Sometimes, people need a doctor to work through these problems. What people don’t need are strangers telling them, “If you only stopped taking heroin, then everything would be good in your life.” Just as women are entitled to privacy when they consult a doctor about pregnancy, so should millions of other Americans be assured of privacy when they have difficult problems that are upsetting their lives and the lives of the people they love. Freedom Democrats want a new America where people can work with doctors without the DEA or judges interfering.  

Other examples of this kind of promise are higher minimum wage, Medicare for All, and support for unions. These positions would be top priorities if Freedom Democrats get elected. They answer the question: If I vote for you, what will you do for me? Democrats used to animate their campaigns with these promises.

All too often, Democrats accept the notion that criticizing Republicans will persuade voters to support them. Elon Musk may be harsh, even cruel, but trying to win elections by saying, “We are good guys. We are not Elon Musk,” will only take you so far.

Three elections on Tuesday, April 1, are testing the proposition that Democrats will become popular by criticizing Republicans. Two House seats in Florida and a Justice of the State Supreme Court in Wisconsin will be elected on April Fool’s Day.

It is also a test of the Democrats’ faith that voters should support them because they believe in good government. The Republicans take a different tact. What did the President promise he would do: Make America Great Again. Trump was running to lower taxes, reduce government spending, raise wages, and get deals from foreign countries that would help the United States prosper. It will come as a surprise to some Democrats that millions of voters believed that he wanted to make the United States stronger and better.

A huge number of Democrats thought the Republican proposals were malarkey. They chose to say baloney and mocked the Republicans. In their anger, they forgot to tell the voters what they would do to help them in their lives.

Franklin Roosevelt was just as emphatic as Donald Trump. He promised Americans they would get “A New Deal.” Vague, you bet, so is Make America Great Again. But Roosevelt’s genius transformed the misery of the Great Depression into a promise of a better future. Once he took office, Roosevelt, among other things, created jobs, provided income to farmers, and started the Tennessee Valley Authority that brought jobs and electricity to a big chunk of the South.

This is a plea to the Democrats to push for a better America and stop believing that complaining about Trump’s fascism is a good way persuade voters. Bernie Sanders clearly understands this, but his ideas come out as a list without a slogan. The many smart people who back Democrats can and should do better.

April 1st will be a test. Will Democrats increase their vote? Or are we still looking for the man who can mobilize this country in a positive direction?

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Is Trump Winning Elections?

On Wednesday (March 26), Donald Trump, as part of his blizzard of new ideas and executive orders, announced that all foreign cars will have a 25% tariff. Presumably the three American manufacturers should be happy.

Curious, I looked for the American automobile manufacturers’ reactions. After saying they support President Trump, American Automakers, the trade association for American automobile manufacturers, was unenthusiastic. First, they wanted a durable solution, and the dramatic announcement of a major market change didn’t sound durable.

There is no sign that foreign competition is the American manufacturers’ major concern. The companies wanted answers to questions that governments normally provide before, not after, a drastic policy change is announced. General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis (formerly Fiat Chrysler) wanted to “avoid raising prices.” Making it probable that their problem was not foreign competition but that their cars were too expensive for American buyers. If the tariffs raised prices and consumers could not pay them, the number of cars made by these automakers would decline. This worry was accelerated by another Trump tariff on imported aluminum and steel. Making metals more expensive means car prices will increase. Normally, a government carefully weighs these issues before starting a new policy. If Trump had done that it was clear he never told U.S. automobile makers. In fact, the suspicion is that Trump, forever the showman, picked the 25% tariff because he liked the number and wanted to make a public impression. No good can come out of policy changes that are not backed by serious study.

Stock traders also worried. The price of Ford and General Motors stocks fell. The day before the tariffs Ford stock traded for $10.30; by Friday afternoon, two days after Trump’s announcement of the tariff, it was trading at $9.65. General Motors went from $52.59 at the close of Tuesday to $46.39 on Friday afternoon. Stellantis went from $12.40 down to $11.30.

In other words, the 25% tariff imposed on foreign cars did not bring good news. I’m not concerned about the automobile manufacturers’ stock prices, but I am curious whether these businesses really want Trump to be President. It is likely that the rich and powerful are nervously watching the President and wish he wasn’t there.

There is evidence that most people are turned off by the Donald. An election in Pennsylvania for its state senate flipped the district. A Republican local elected official, Josh Parsons, lost to a local Democratic mayor, James Malone. What was red turned blue in a district that overwhelmingly supported Trump.

Even the Trump administration is worried; they told Elise Stefanik from upstate New York she should stay in Congress. She will give up her chance to be the ambassador to the United Nations. Far from New York City, in upstate, the Republicans are the majority, but the administration was worried, and it decided to play it safe and keep her in the Republican majority.

Plainly, Trump is losing support, but the Republican in Pennsylvania lost by the narrowest of margins. The next test of Trump’s popularity occurs on April 1st. In Florida, there are two special elections for Congress caused by the resignation of Republican members of Congress. Matt Gaetz’s successor is being chosen, and Mike Waltz, who resigned to become one of Trump’s national security advisors, will have his successor chosen. In Wisconsin, millions of dollars are being spent in a statewide election, choosing a state supreme court judge. Brad Schimel, a conservative, is running against Susan Crawford, a liberal. The winner will decide if the state’s highest court has a liberal or conservative bent.

Clearly, one reason Trump is losing popularity is the aggressive behavior of Elon Musk. The Democrats are insisting their judge will stand up to Musk while Schimmel will do the rich man’s bidding.

We are just days away from an early read on Trump’s staying power. If the automobile manufacturers and Pennsylvania voters are changing their minds about Trump, this helps explains the decline in his polling numbers. On Tuesday April Fool’s Day we will find out if Trump’s bull-in-a-chinashop style will hurt him in the elections.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Addiction, Everybody Does It

One of the strangest promises Donald Trump has made is stopping fentanyl. The notion that being mean will stop drugs has never worked.

Freedom Democrats would be familiar with the iron law of prohibition: a more aggressive enforcement brings even more dangerous drugs to the market. When oxycodone was widely available, its safety had been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). That many users would experience withdrawal was an unfortunate side effect. That the drug was widely available also meant many persons used it who had received no prescription.

Freedom Democrats believe that the relationship between doctors and patients should be respected, especially by politicians. They have no expertise, and the doctor and the patient should develop their own course of treatment. No drug enforcement agency. No rules about dosage or where the drug’s may be used. That is up to doctors, their patients, and agreements about best medical practices.

Freedom Democrats, had they been in charge, would not have blood on their hands. The politicians who played the blame game are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths. Lawmakers blamed the pharmaceutical companies for trying to expand their market. In this one sided view, the users had no responsibility; they were simply victims of addiction, had no intelligence, and no will power.

Elected officials accepted the discredited idea that drug users aren’t citizens, have no rights, and are trapped. A nefarious evil captures the user’s soul and deprives them of choice. It’s malarkey; similar ideas have existed for centuries. Witches after all were supposed to exercise control over their victims. Back then, the witches were killed.

Centuries later Democratic and Republican politicians adopted policies that killed the users. They were denied any moral culpability; the drug users were trapped by their “habit.” The politicians dismissed the possibility that drug users were rational and able to control their lives. The way they handled their habit was comparable to the way millions respond to alcohol, food, and caffeine.

The only difference is this group isn’t stigmatized and dehumanized. The effort they put into controlling their habits receives positive reinforcement and often drug treatments.

But the closed-minded lawmakers offered oxycodone users no support; in fact, their one-sided view simply killed hundreds of thousands of users. It should take no brains at all to realize that if a person regularly uses oxycodone you don’t simply say, “You can’t have it. The law says stop.” The law offered habitual users no comfort and legal ways for changing their habits at their own pace. All too often, judges thought it reasonable to tell users you must stop now, a decision that should be made by doctors and their patients.

To nobody’s surprise, Stop Now was a gift to cartels and ingenious people who created alternative illegal supplies. History had repeated itself. Banning marijuana, cocaine, and amphetamines had produced illegal markets. In fact, they offered economic stimulus to criminals, and more work for the police. The criminal justice system will thrive.

Not so the drug users. They were too often conned into believing that a pill was oxycodone when in fact it contained a strong dose of fentanyl. The number of victims of the politician’s callousness soared to over 100,000 a year dead from overdoses. More people died in one year than died in the Vietnam War. Freedom Democrats would damn lawmakers for their callousness and cruelty.

This time the witches didn’t die; it was their victims.

Trump displaying the ignorance that is a trademark simply argued that drugs were reaching America because we weren’t really trying. He slammed tariffs on Mexico.

The iron law of prohibition suggests that fentanyl will be replaced by even more dangerous drugs that kill quickly. That drug has already surfaced—nitazenes. Being mean kills drug users.

The very idea that a societal habit like ribald humor can be banned is a joke. For one thing, and Freedom Democrats are an example of this, there is no agreement that drug use is criminal. Another problem is people make money selling banned substances. Banning alcohol in the 1920’s made many fortunes.

Trump’s effort to try harder in the silly hope that the drug will stop reaching the U.S. doesn’t recognize that law enforcement and drug smugglers all too often find ways to share the wealth. Mexico is famous for its ties between law enforcers and drug cartels. Nothing Trump does will change this reality, but we do know that a new drug is here—nitazene.

Democrats of course join Republicans in chasing the impossible goal of stifling the drug trade.

We are still looking for the charismatic and verbally fluent political leader who will support doctors being able to treat drug users without strangers violating their privacy and setting rules that harm a successful treatment.

Obesity is universally recognized as a major U.S. health problem. Doctors understand that many people eat for pleasure; in other words food acts like a drug. It was my habit and mastering it made my weight drop from 270 to 195 and brought a happier life. Dr. Peter Grinspoon’s book Up in Smoke and website makes sensible arguments for allowing doctors to treat patients who use drugs without outside interference.

He makes the point that using drugs is normal. We refuse to recognize that gambling, eating, and caffeine also have addictive impacts. In my case, my addiction to food started in elementary school. I fit Dr. Grinspoon’s theory that “suffering, often alone, feeling bad about myself, in the shadows” drove my eating and explained why diets did not work.

When I was grossly fat, I used to tell people I was addicted, and it was completely visible. Only a few people recognized that I was speaking about my eating habits. People didn’t associate eating with addiction. Addiction is the all-too-common habit of confronting other problems by repetitive behavior that brings no real relief.

Freedom Democrats recognize that drug use and overeating are sister phenomenon. This humane response is alien to Trump’s angry “stomp it out” mentality. It is one reason why Trump is malicious and cruel.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Is Trump a Tyrant?

Trump is making everybody nervous. His latest proposal for a 30-day ceasefire threatens his plans to establish normal relations with Russia.

Russia will only accept a ceasefire if Ukraine demobilizes its armed forces. Putin won’t allow Ukraine to rearm during a ceasefire, and so far he is winning this war. At the same time, Putin would look really bad if he rejected this idea. So Trump is making everybody nervous. Is he destroying the progress he’s made towards normal relations with Russia? Or is he making nice to the vast majority in the United States who damn Russia for invading Ukraine?

His other claim to progress in foreign affairs is the ceasefire between Palestine and Israel continues. But everybody is worried that war will resume any week now. Given the intense hatred between Israel and Palestine, this tension will remain normal.

The two wars conducted when Joe Biden was President horrified me and made me an unenthusiastic Democrat. Trump is doing so badly that he is restoring my enthusiasm for the Democrats.

His attacks on DEI, a desirable Democratic program, have inescapable racist overtones and anti-LGBTQ messages. His promises to dismiss and humiliate women make Trump indefensible. To nobody’s surprise, the President makes rational discussion impossible.

Diversity is a necessary ingredient of Democracy. It makes the pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian Americans members of the same community. In this sense, it serves the goal of inclusion—we should all get along. Equity offers all persons in the United States an opportunity to choose their own path.

Trump tears down computer sites offering applications for student loans, making it difficult, if not impossible, for families to pay for higher education. Computer information about filing a complaint is quelled.

It is absurd and embarrassing that in the 21st century the United States is closing its Department of Education. All governments have education offices, and the United States looks screwy to close its department.

Clear signals are being sent that it is okay to hire whites and create obstacles to blacks and Spanish-speaking people. Turning the Civil Rights gains of the 1960’s into partisan programs supported by Democrats and opposed by Republicans is a sop to those who accept the weak arguments that blacks and Spanish-speaking people take jobs away from whites. The objective should be finding jobs for everybody.

It is foolish to blame diversity, equity, and inclusion for making wages fall behind rising prices. The public has to make this clear to the political leadership. Prosperity is not full employment; prosperity is full employment if wages keep up with prices.

Trump’s pleasure at squashing DEI programs is too often embarrassing. On March 7th, the Enola Gay was removed from the Defense Department’s website. The word “gay” is a no-no, and Defense Department Secretary Hegseth has banned it from its website. Unhappily, Enola Gay doesn’t mean two guys holding hands; it is the name of the airplane that dropped the atom bomb on Hiroshima in 1945. Like the censors, who try to squelch sexual scenes, banning words leads to foolish embarrassment that makes, in this case, the Defense Department look stupid.

Add it all up, and Trump appears to be volunteering for the role of tyrant. He is tilting at programs that make free speech and divergent political views feasible. He gets furious when his order doesn’t happen. Most adults accept that they only get their way some of the time. It is unclear if Trump has accepted this reality.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Normal Relations With Russia?

I am not pro Trump, but early indications offer convincing evidence that he is not a clown. His upheaval suggests he wants to change history and put the United States on a new path.

His policies may have their roots in isolationism. I am not a student of U.S. foreign policy, so I have no opinion on this subject, but from the start of this administration Trump challenged U.S. power centers.

The shutdown of the U.S. Agency for International Development dealt a hammer blow to a CIA operation. To be sure, the agency feeds starving children and stops the spread of disease. Its humanitarian work is praiseworthy, but it is also linked to soft power, a U.S. tactic.

USAID is tied to political demonstrations to oust foreign governments. Leaders were deposed in Tunisia, Yemen and Libya. In Egypt, Hosni Mubarak left office in 2011. In 2014 U.S. Foreign policy mavens dreamed that if China crushed the Hong Kong Umbrella Revolution, it would revive the “unfortunate” memories of the massacre in Tiananmen Square. The most extravagant dreamers hoped sympathy demonstrations would leapfrog across China creating general instability.

At the other end of the globe, Ukraine’s Maidan Revolution started in 2013, and by 2014 a new pro-European Union government would become a NATO proxy.  The pro-Russian government was ejected.

The sharp economic contraction following breakup of the Soviet Union, brought USAID into Ukraine in 1992 and by 2022 in addition to programs supporting health and education, 80% of Ukrainian media outlets relied on grants, mostly indirectly, from American sources like USAID. Ukrainian political commentary is funded by U.S. dollars.

Trump’s hostility to USAID is an attack on the deep state, and one of his first actions. A promise made a promise kept. His new Defense Secretary slammed the Military Industrial Complex by insisting on an 8% budget cut.

Musk’s DOGE search for corruption and waste made it difficult for members of Congress to object. DOGE’s demands for personal details is not directed at you or me, but it is certain to make members of Congress cautious. At a U.N. security council vote the United States split with its European allies by refusing to blame Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. This was too much for a few Republican Congressmembers. Senator John Curtis, Republican of Utah, went on social media and said he was “deeply troubled by the vote,” which had “put us on the same side as Russia and North Korea.”

No Democratic leader would have taken on deep state institutions in this public fashion.

In West Asia, Trump’s personal envoy, Steve Witkoff, pushed Netanyahu into accepting a cease fire. Trump, his Vice-President, and new Defense Secretary challenged the Biden narrative that the Ukrainian invasion was unprovoked aggression by Russian dictator Vladimir Putin.

Trump will not make Russia an ally, but he will recognize that when Putin came to power Russia was broke and unable to guard its nuclear weapons. 35 years later Russia fought a war with a U.S. proxy, did not run out of weapons, and seized 20% of the disputed territory. Russia has reemerged as a great power, and President Trump is insisting that normal relations be established with Moscow. Putin is no longer an unspeakable dictator. He is President Putin.

It was revealed that under Biden the U.S. had virtually shut down the Russian Embassy in Washingon and ended diplomatic discussions, a mistake Trump quickly corrected. Putin insisted that Zelensky, the Ukrainian President, be excluded from negotiation and Trump refused to turn the Russian condition into a roadblock.

Biden had insisted Ukraine had stopped the Russian military; Trump said Ukraine had all but lost and could not act like a winner.  

Peace discussions over Eastern Europe were only one dramatic change in U.S. policy, the destruction of Gaza ended with Palestinians free to move in their own country and Hamas celebrated as heroes. Hostages were released. The ceasefire is holding, but its future is up in the air.

Trump’s preposterous suggestion that all Palestinians be removed prompted an Arab alliance and the drafting of a $20B plan to start the reconstruction of Gaza. The resumption of war is possible, even likely, but so far the ceasefire has cooled the fighting.

European nations are hesitantly considering negotiations with Russia as the U.S. President relaxes tensions with Moscow.

In a matter of weeks Trump has placed U.S. foreign policy on a new footing and opened the possibility of normal relations with Russia. Trump is not a clown, and he is challenging the deep state institutions that prospered during the Ukraine war while Russia was treated as an enemy.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Is The World Heading Towards Catastrophe?

The nightmare of Trump joining Putin in damning Ukrainian President Zelensky signals the end of NATO and the unraveling of a world order, bringing a proliferation of atomic weapons as nations seek protection. Wars will break out all over the world. Concerns like these animate international affairs.

Israel with U.S. support will attack Iran while invading Palestine to remove its population. Russia will come to the aid of Iran, its ally. Taiwan watching the epidemic of violence will seek China’s protection. U.S. troops will converge on this trouble spot deserting South Korea. Japan will be on its own and rearm. Violence will break out with China at its Philippine border, bringing Australia into this international maelstrom.

In West Asia, forcing Palestinians out of their homeland will inflame tensions between Israel, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. Turkey will protect its interest in Syria. Europe will unite and form an armed service to protect itself from Russian expansion.

In an optimistic view, there is no necessity for these trouble spots to bring armed conflict.

On Friday Feb 21, in Saudi Arabia a $20 billion Egyptian plan to redevelop Gaza under the supervision of the U.S. will be discussed by a working group preparing for an Arab summit in March. “The Arab proposal, mostly based on an Egyptian plan, involves forming a national Palestinian committee to govern Gaza without Hamas involvement and international participation in reconstruction without displacing Palestinians abroad.” The Arabs believe their 20-billion-dollar contribution will entice Trump while Israel will get a sweetener. Its firms will receive contracts. The Arabs want to prevent the expulsion of Palestinians, a human rights nightmare trumpeted by Netanyahu and Trump. Last week’s genocidal removal of the Palestinians could end with a reasonable solution and the rebirth of Gaza. Israel lowered tensions by publicly considering allowing Palestinians to emigrate voluntarily.

South Korea is getting a new President who may want the U.S. armed forces to leave. Japan may be thrilled and seek the end of U.S. supervision. What looked like a catastrophe might seem like a new beginning for Japan and South Korea. Japan and China share a mutual security interest; they depend on freedom of the seas. Food, fuel and other necessities must be delivered by ship. A pullback of U.S. forces would encourage the two nations to enter into cooperation agreements.

A calamity is not inevitable.

Everybody recognizes that forcing Zelensky out will have international repercussions. It’s possible to oust Zelensky without accepting the controversial view that Ukraine provoked the crisis. During Trump’s first term, Zelensky cooperated with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in making the argument that Trump was pro-Russian. The first impeachment of Trump revolved around the Ukraine and Zelensky sided with the Democrats. This political history demands a Trump reprisal against Zelensky.

But the bottom line remains, Putin is winning the war and is under no obligation to make concessions.

As is normal, the future is laced with possibilities, and we may hope that human wit will avoid disaster.

Posted on by Nathan Riley

Trump’s negotiating style Part 2

Trump has broken with the Democrats and their devotion to Ukraine. In a perceptive piece, Peter Baker writes “President Trump made clear that the days of isolating Russia are over and suggested that Ukraine was to blame for being invaded.”

Blame is an odd word for the harsh realities of internation relations. In Baker’s reporting the U.S. has in recent years adopted the view that Ukraine is the victim of Russian aggression. It’s a world of good guys and bad guys. Zelinsky is standing up for freedom and self-determination. Putin, “the dictator,” is the invader. Trump’s radical change: accepting Putin’s right to impose Russia’s will on the smaller good guys. A right often exercised by the United States.

Baker is surely right. Millions of Europeans and Americans accept the view that Russia is the invader and also accept the view that the callous Trump doesn’t care.

Trump has started peace negotiations on Ukraine and accepted the Russian agenda that excludes Zelinsky. Baker describes it as a scandal. My view is international relations are not for the faint of heart. A small country like Ukraine shouldn’t pick a fight with a great power like Russia. In fairness to Ukraine, Russia’s great power status was only recently confirmed. But a huge number of Ukrainians understood that provoking Russia was a disaster and fled the country after demonstrations (with CIA help?) ousted the pro-Russian government in 2014.

The war that turned hot in 2022 after the Russian invasion has basically shattered Ukraine while Russia’s industrial base has grown to supply their soldiers and improve their fighting force. It’s an unfair world, but Baker is wrong. The United States are not good guys; they are practitioners of great power politics.

While the Times and many Americans view Russia as the bully and Ukraine as the victim, American weapons and money supported Israel’s campaign against the Palestinians. A campaign so violent that it has provoked an investigation by the International Criminal Court into allegations that Israel is committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. The ICC has issued an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The rosy view of the U.S. as good guys is propaganda. Even if Ukraine did not cooperate with the CIA and rearm, it still should have seen the necessity of ignoring provocations and preserving a working relationship with their bigger neighbor: Russia. Perhaps a cooperative Ukraine might have avoided the February 2022 invasion.

Trump recognizes Russia’s great power status. Something that Congress and the Democrats resisted. This has had a dramatic effect on Europe, the United States, and Ukraine. The new administration in Washington believes Putin’s agenda is a workable basis for negotiations. The Russian president believes Zelensky’s leadership is illegal under Ukrainian law. Putin wants elections. Normally a U.S. demand.

As a result, Zelensky is excluded from the negotiations and will face demands that he resign. This is a concrete result of Trump’s five-week-old administration. 

At a meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in Brussels Pete Hegseth, the self-proclaimed warrior, and new Secretary of Defense announced policies that met Russia’s President Vladimir Putin agenda for opening negotiations.

Ukraine would not join NATO, it would cede to Russia provinces conquered during Ukraine’s misguided war against Russia.

Should an international force watch over Ukraine, Hegseth said it would be a “non-NATO Mission.” No countries were named but clearly China, a Russian ally would qualify, ditto for U.S. allies Japan and South Korea. Journalists reported Europe gave the proposal a chilly reception.

Negotiations have started; Hegseth spoke publicly on Wednesday Feb. 12 . Privately Steve Witkoff, Trumps special mediator, was in Moscow. The next day Trump and Putin had a long phone call that Trump called productive.

By Thursday, Hegseth was soothing Congressional critics and U. S. allies. His ideas would be subject to change during negotiations. He wasn’t announcing hard and fast positions. It would be up Trump to decide what “to allow or not allow.”

A possible major event has Putin and Trump holding direct talks in Moscow on May 9 for the celebration of the 80th anniversary of the German surrender to Russia in 1945, when Russia and the United States were allies against Hitler.

The President promised to engage in nuclear talks once “we straighten it all out” in the Middle East and Ukraine. The President is breaking with a costly Biden administration plan to modernize the armed forces. He told reporters, “There’s no reason for us to be building brand-new nuclear weapons…We already have so many you can destroy the world 50 times over.”

Talks about peace in Ukraine started on Feb 18 in Saudi Arabia. Ukraine was not invited. The location was odd for Ukrainian peace talks but a sensible one for involving Egypt in a Palestinian peace process.

At this initial meeting Moscow and Washington agreed to expand their embassy staffs. It would have the practical effect of making it easier for each country to obtain accurate information and permit non-binding discussion of tentative plans.

Perhaps another Putin hope was being realized. According to a Moscow statement, “The two sides expressed their mutual willingness to interact on pressing international issues, including the settlement around Ukraine.” Putin is eager to establish a framework for discussing major issues with the United States.

A neutral Ukraine might model itself after Austria. That country’s founding documents provide that “In all future times Austria will not join any military alliances and will not permit the establishment of any foreign military bases on her territory.”

Posted on by Nathan Riley

What Do I Get For My Taxes?

Ralph Nader is a sharp critic of the Democratic Party. For example, he believes the Party made a fatal mistake when they abandoned most states to the Republicans.

Like many critics, he thinks the D’s dug a hole when they devoted their efforts to impeaching and damning Trump. Sensible voters want to know, “What will you do for me?” Hating Trump does not answer this question.

Nonetheless, Nader remains pragmatic. “We’re sick of not having the government return the benefits of massive taxation to us.”

 “All we hear about is empire abroad. All we hear about is more military budgets.”

His attack on the Defense budget is widely shared among left voters. The attackers wish this agency was a giant piggybank that could pay for programs that voters will love, like the expensive proposition of providing healthcare for all. This view is untested in elections. No candidate besides Nader has pushed it, and when he ran he was damned as a spoiler: a vote for him was viewed as a vote for Republicans. Like most Americans, Nader believes the nation and the party is controlled by wealthy donors. Having good ideas for changing this dominance would be popular and improve Democratic chances.

Good advice, even from an unfriendly source, deserves serious consideration. His test: making the government return the benefits of massive taxation is realistic and a guide for supporting or rejecting Democratic policy ideas.

He clearly lowers the importance of helping the transgendered, people of color, women, and other groups. His criterion is good policy is universal. It can answer the question “What will it do for me?” Using this test, the Democrats top priority should be finding policies that bring benefits to every voter.

The most obvious example is ending the copays and the costs of medical insurance. It’s an ambitious idea, saying that a person seeing a doctor shouldn’t have to reach for their wallet will be expensive. It would require constant political support. European countries regularly limit their medical budgets to keep costs in line. Obviously, that restricts some medical care.

 Such a program may be impossible in the United States, given the opposition to taxation. Countries like Sweden devote 41.4% of their gross domestic product to taxes, in return for free college, free medical care, and comprehensive laws governing vacation time, hours of work. A degree of government supervision that would make most Americans apprehensive.

Nonetheless, Democrats should find ways to reduce the cost of medical care. It is a basic program that voters will greet with approval.

Their recent record is discouraging. Since 2023, Congress has passed laws to bring high-speed internet connections to rural areas and schools. The thought is there, but nothing happens. On January 6, 2025, the new Congress updated the laws and time will tell if the high speed connections are installed. The failure by the Democrats to translate the thought into deeds is a reason why rural states are red and backed Trump.

It should be easy to do. Democrats and Republicans favor the idea. It would be a real-life example to the question, “What do we get for our taxes?” Hopefully, these connections will finally go into effect.

Reviving the Democrats requires actual changes to people’s lives. It is one thing to see the need for improving infrastructure, but voters are clearly correct; they want to know what actually got built. Joe Biden made this a priority, but the Democrats never convinced the public that the construction made the United States better.

Nader’s test showing voters how high taxes improve their lives is pragmatic and sensible. Democrats should adopt this test. Surely, the voter who asks, “I pay all these taxes, what do I get?” deserves more than a pat on the back. He or she should actually see the benefits. Reviving the Democratic Party means doing things, not talking about them.