International

Trump Back in Office—So What? Why Not?

/ ontheoutside / Leave a comment

This piece grows out of a reaction to a Washington Post article about the threat to democracy posed by Trump.  The piece does a good job about the loss of the Founding Father’s vision and the human progress it represents.  The problem is that’s only part of the story,  A Trump election would hurt the United States in so many ways that it’s hard to do justice to what’s at stake. 

This is an attempt to think about some of the rest.  An authoritarian Trump takeover would be terrible for people, terrible for business, and terrible for the world as a whole.

The Dobbs decision is just a foretaste of the way Trump’s Christian society would impinge on people’s daily lives. Trump’s last-term tax cut is a foretaste of the way he will undermine fundamental part’s of the way people are accustomed to living: in education, healthcare, social security, opportunity for social advancement generally. No regulation of business practices at all–not for health, not for working conditions, not for pollution.

His regime, like all other authoritarian regimes, would be fundamentally corrupt, because there would be no means to challenge it. Businesses would be subject to arbitrary shakedowns.  The announced tax cuts—however attractive they may seem—would be small consolation in the new reality.

Then there is governance itself. Arbitrary decision-making that cannot be challenged and mistakes that can never be acknowledge. Denying climate change in particular will be a disastrous and unchallengeable mistake. We would lose our technical edge by supporting existing business over innovation and denying government’s role in research, since the private sector does everything better.

As a nation we’ve had stability for so long that people far too easily assume basic continuity—with no notion of how fragile it really is. As a nation it’s easy to lose what you have: Brexit made Britain poorer overnight. Israel accepted Netanyahu as proto-dictator, and is caught an ill-conceived and unsuccessful war fought for his personal benefit.  Electing Trump would be far worse than either.

For the world as a whole, we’re talking about a US unwilling to challenge Putin’s Russia or China on Taiwan.  A world in which we have essentially ceded both political and economic supremacy to China.  The Chinese and the Russians understand this perfectly and are backing Trump’s campaign, because they understand that whatever near-term issues there might be with his tariffs, Trump is their ticket to power.

In his first campaign Trump asked a question: “What have you got to lose?” That’s still in the air. We’ll throw out everything that has made us great—so what? why not? Because we’re talking about a disaster for the vast part of the US population and the world overall.

Student Protesters are Sacrificing Palestinians

/ ontheoutside / Leave a comment

As noted here before Netanyahu and Hamas are long-term allies and conscious co-authors of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.  Supporting either is supporting the common effort to kill Palestinians.  In the near-term the student protests reduce incentives for Hamas to agree to a cease fire, and they undermine Biden’s pressure on Netanyahu over Rafa.

Further, whether consciously or not, the student protests are also directly supporting the Republican attacks on universities.  Just as with the no-win grilling of university presidents, the goal is to discredit any institution that opposes today’s anti-democratic right-wing dogmas.  Chaos on campus is a great tool to further that aim and help elect Trump.  Anyone who thinks another Trump Presidency will be good for Palestinians (or Israelis for that matter) is out of his mind.

Before joining such a movement you need to think twice about what it really is.  The goals are not humanitarian.  Organizers and leaders of these movements have many different objectives—both personal and political—but the plight of Palestinian civilians in Gaza is nothing more than a recruitment slogan.  And it is used against the lives of Palestinians with the crassest dishonesty imaginable.

Genocide is the Wrong Question

/ ontheoutside / Leave a comment

It seems to me that the discussion of genocide yes or no in Gaza is actually letting Israel off the hook.

It’s easy to defend a charge of genocide. It’s true that the war with Hamas is still going on. It’s true that Hamas’ network of tunnels is such that it is impossible to imagine military action that doesn’t involve large numbers of civilian casualties. It’s even true that the Israelis are more or less losing the war, because they haven’t significantly reduced Hamas ability to launch another October 7 attack, and they haven’t even made much headway on those tunnels. So it’s not genocide, it’s an ongoing war of self-defense.

But that’s not actually what’s going on. When Netanyahu launched the war he certainly knew there was no chance of completely eliminating Hamas. He may have believed he could do it anyway; he may have just decided it was a good slogan. But early in the war it must have been clear to everyone that it wasn’t going to happen. For Netanyahu himself the war brought its own benefits–so he didn’t have to care–but you can’t fight a war without real objectives. And it must have been clear to everyone what those objectives had to be.

They had to be the same objectives as in the occupied zones: make sure the population knows who is boss and that massive force stands ready to crush any missteps or simply act on whim. For years that had been Netanyahu’s answer to all questions. It had worked to stop blowing up busses. It was the only achievable option for Gaza.

It’s not genocide, but it’s a war against the population. Make sure they never forget what happened to them–and that we can do it again. Absolute hell in every dimension. You don’t even have to try very hard. It’s mostly a byproduct of fighting Hamas and not caring about consequences, although blocking food trucks is a step beyond. It also serves Netanyahu’s other long-term objective–making a two-state solution impossible by hatred.

One hopes against hope there is some way to recover from this mess. That’s another subject. But it’s worth being clear about what is actually going on–and that it’s not new.

Summarizing the Gaza War

/ ontheoutside / 2 Comments

After all the bloodshed and polemics it’s easy to forget what has actually happened with the Gaza war.

Prior to October 7 Israel was in a pretty good situation that seemed likely to get better.  They had relations with several Arab countries and the prize of a relationship with Saudi Arabia seemed to be in the offing. Palestinians weren’t the main topic, but they also had something to gain from leverage in the process.

Hamas was desperate to prevent all that.  Any moves toward peace were the enemy of a purified Islamic state in Palestine.  On October 7 they carried out the most horrifying and offensive attack possible, with killing of children in front of their parents (and then killing the parents) as well as rapes and anything else they could think of.  The objective was to provoke an Israeli reaction that would torpedo the looming progress.

The Israeli government was certainly capable of understanding what was going on.   However instead of the obvious reaction—whatever we do we do we’re not going to let Hamas dictate our future—they did exactly the opposite.  Why was that? (Contrary to the usual rhetoric this was not a fight for Israel’s existence.)

Simply put, Israel’s interest and Netanyahu’s interest were not the same.  Netanyahu’s long-standing support of Hamas (as a counterweight to the Palestinian Authority) and his negligence of reported threats were directly responsible for the success of the Hamas attacks.  And despite his denials, all polls indicated that the Israeli population understood that.  So he had a problem. And the only way out was a great big war.

From that point on, the interests of Hamas and Netanyahu once again coincided.  The more civilians killed the better.  For Hamas it made them heroes defending the Arab world against the inhumanity of the Israelis.  For Netanyahu it proved that only he was tough enough to do what it takes.  (And what’s more, the longer the war the better the chance to bring back his buddy Trump who would support the dictatorial takeover of Israel.)

The interests of Israel however have been lost in the shuffle.  Anti-Semitism everywhere is on the rise, with not just relations with the Arab world but even the existence of Israel now active subjects of dispute.  Further the stated military objective—the elimination of Hamas—is nowhere near accomplished.  Despite the massive destruction and loss of life, it is estimated that Hamas has lost approximately 8,000 of its approximately 30,000-man army.  As the tunnels are mostly intact, there is no plan for how to change that.

But this war was never fought for Israel.  For Netanyahu it’s not clear how much he has burnished his reputation, but any challenge to his power has been pushed out to the indefinite future.  And Hamas is riding high.  So whatever horror the rest of the world may feel, we’ve got to call the war a smashing success for its perpetrators.  May they both rot in Hell.

Netanyahu is Like Manchin Only Worse

/ ontheoutside / Leave a comment

It’s worth being clear about the threat that Netanyahu poses–not just to Israel but to the US as well.

The Gaza war is immensely unpopular here. Not only because it is a war beamed to every television set, but also because it is unavoidably devisive. And Biden, by trying to achieve progress toward a two-state solution, has alienated the strong supporters of both sides. It is a truism that we need significant progress toward peace by November.

Enter Netanyahu. There are a number of things he wants from the Gaza war:

  1. To cover up his reponsibility for the October 7 events, as we’ve noted here before. For now, the majority of Israelis are unwilling to forgive him.
  2. To delay any election until his coverup is complete.
  3. To sell himself as the only one tough enough to fight the Palestinians. That has always involved rejecting any two-state solution as inconsistent with the fear campaigns that have kept him in power.
  4. To estsablish himself as dictator of Israel with, in particular, control of the judiciary so as to protect himself from corruption charges.

For these reasons it has always been clear that Netanyahu would keep the Gaza war going as long as possible. That means you have to regard his negotiations with Biden as akin to Manchin’s. He’ll give hints of progress, but when it comes down to action he’s far too dishonest to be believed.

However it’s worse than that. Netanyahu knows he needs Trump as President. If that happens the whole dictatorial takeover gains a new light. Instead of a democratic adversary in the US, he gains a dictator partner ready to support every feature of what he wants to do.

Electing Trump is not the most important item in Netanyahu’s agenda, but it fits perfectly with the rest. And you can count on Netanyahu to make the most of this God-given opportunity to get everything at once. 

Biden has his work cut out for him. Neither side wants peace, and one hopes there is someone watching his back.

What a Trump Election Means

/ ontheoutside / Leave a comment

The most important campaign message has to be a concise picture of what a Trump election will mean to peoples’ lives.  Inability to do this was a great failure of the Clinton campaign.  Even though the signs were clear, people were shocked by what really happened. The big women’s march early in Trump’s term was filled with people who suddenly awakened—too late—to what was going on.  I remember an OpEd piece somewhere on the subject:  “What have you got to lose?—Quite a lot as it turns out.”  We have to get to people this time.

This can’t be complicated if it’s going to be successful, so a maximum of four points for any audience.  For businessmen the priorities may be different than for students.  So for this piece I’m not going to try to cut the list .  Here’s one list of points to consider.

  • Women will lose control of their bodies

We’ve seen what Trump’s Supreme Court has done with abortion.  That’s what Trump did last time and the perpetrators want more:  a federal law outlawing abort in ALL states and strict prohibitions on availability of contraception.

  • Climate change will be become catastrophic. 

We already see accelerating consequences.  Trump will not only block US action but by strengthening the Russian-Saudi opposition he can effectively undermine all progress worldwide.  We only have a limited window to begin taking action.

  • The US will become isolated and weakened internationally

Trump has already said that NATO is dead.  Europe will belong to Putin and a vastly more powerful and emboldened Russia.  The US will be isolated in a hostile world dominated by Russia and China. Allies will be unable to trust any long-term US commitments.

  • Public services of all kinds will be cut

Another big business tax cut will mean public services of all kinds including education will suffer.  Weakening of Social Security, Medicare, and Obamacare with no substitutes.

  • The economy will become even more skewed to the very rich

Trump supports big current businesses, such as his own.  His Supreme Court has ruled for business over workers on every issue.  His tax plan was a huge giveaway to big companies and rich people—the primary effect was stock buybacks not investment or jobs or wages.  Despite the rhetoric he did not bring back manufacturing.

  • The US will face enormous risks at any strategic challenge

Trump faced one strategic problem—Covid—and only play-acted at being a leader.  He did nothing to help keep people alive, even with the promise of a coming vaccine.  That inaction is only one side of the problem.  As many of his associates have noted, he has an all-consuming fixation on not appearing weak.  That combined with impulsiveness and belief in his own genius means there are no limits to what he may be trapped into doing. Trump’s supporters want to believe he gets his way with threats, but threats without action are quickly hollow.

  • Government will be all over peoples’ lives

Trump has said that he will weaponize the Justice Department and even the military to control dissent.  No one should believe they will escape this.  The huge camps he talks about for illegal aliens show what he is willing to do to anyone who gets in his way.  Trump is easily slighted and vengeful.  Once he’s in power he’s no one’s friend.

  • Divisiveness will be worse not better

Trump makes no bones about caring only about “his” people. Even within his own party we’ve seen the most unproductive Congress ever.

  • We will lose democracy and it will matter

People may complain about how much say they have now, but that doesn’t compare with what is planned for Trump part 2.    Once the election is over there will be no further legal means to resist anything.  Dictatorships are bad for everyone—there is no way to fight corruption, protect oneself, or correct big mistakes. 

Threats to Israel’s Existence

/ ontheoutside / 2 Comments

There is one aspect of the Gaza mess that hasn’t drawn enough attention:  that there was nothing inevitable about the success of the Hamas attack.  There was ample warning, but the defense was too complacent and the government was too preoccupied with its own priorities (the judicial takeover and the draconian measures on the West Bank) to pay attention to what mattered.

There’s nothing new about this statement, but the necssary conclusion doesn’t follow—that the Hamas attacks did NOT put Israel in a war for its existence.  The attack should have been a minor issue with far fewer consequences.  The reason it wasn’t was complacency and government corruption.  The attacks became the horrendous incident they were only because of the past and present failures of Netanyahu governments. The outcome of any subsequent such attack depends primarily on whether Israel addresses those failures—arguably more so than on Hamas. 

It was always strange that Israel would respond to the Hamas attack by doing exactly what Hamas clearly wanted them to do. I won’t say options were easy, but it didn’t have to be this. As we’ve noted before, the only way to understand it is to recognize that Netanyahu’s interests and Israel’s interests were not the same. As a distraction from his responsibility, Netanyahu had every incentive to turn the Hamas attacks into the biggest incident he could possibly create.

At this point it’s not even clear how much all the death and destruction has contributed to the “complete destruction” of Hamas. More generally it’s certainly hard to conclude Israel’s position has become more secure.

We all have to come to terms with that fact that the apparently self-evident statement that Israel was in a war for its existence was actually—primarily—Netanyahu’s self-serving lie. And what’s even worse is that for both Hamas and Netanyahu, the more people who die the better.

Hamas and Netanyahu are still playing each other’s game

/ ontheoutside / 3 Comments

One big revelation (at least to me) to come out of the Gaza war is that Netanyahu provided for major financial support to Hamas as a way of weakening the PLO.   The idea was that weakening the PLO would undermine any efforts for a two-state solution.    Netanyahu hates the two-state solution, because his stock-in-trade is as a strongman protecting Israelis from Palestinian evil.  Hamas hates the two-state solution, because (as they announced) they want all non-Muslims gone.

It’s worth emphasizing that these converging interests are still driving this war.  First of all, there is no question that Israel is playing Hamas’ game.  Hamas launched an infinitely repulsive attack in order to provoke a violent Israel response—one that would undermine efforts for peace between Israel and the Arab world.  That Hamas placed its tunnels and other military installations under civilian institutions (such as hospitals) was not just to provoke outrage in the world in general but most specifically to provoke outrage in the Arab world.  The inevitable horrors inflicted on the population would make any coexistence with Israel intolerable.

If anyone other than Netanyahu were running the Israel government, there would have been at least some consideration for the wisdom of giving Hamas exactly what they wanted.  However for Netanyahu there were no such qualms.  This was a marvelous opportunity for pumping up hatred of the Palestinians as well as an opportunity for redeeming himself politically. “Just imagine how much worse this all would have been if instead of from Gaza this was all coming from a Palestinian state right next door!”  What’s more he could put on a show of irreplaceable toughness.  Any issues with his criminal activities or his treasonous past relations with Hamas would be erased by crushing the Palestinians now.  (And think of the opportunities from a subsequent occupation of Gaza.)

Once Israel started with such a response, they were stuck in it–because they had to succeed no matter what.  And for now there is little incentive for either side to stop.  The well-being of the Palestinians, or even the Israelis for that matter, is simply not an issue.  Things are going just fine, and both sides are delivered from the one thing they hate most—which is a workable (two-state) peace.