Capt.(Dr.) S G Naravane’s Post

https://lnkd.in/dpxGPqsj Biden Drops Out, the Dangers of a Lame-Duck President Emerge As Americans focus on the campaign, the world asks what our global role will be for the next six months. By John Bolton July 21, 2024 5:39 pm ET Joe Biden’s decision to withdraw from the presidential race effectively makes him a lame duck. The odds favored his achieving this status on Nov. 5 anyway, but America now faces a nearly 100-day longer interregnum than in prior transition periods. We may focus on the election campaign, but the wider world worries what Washington’s global role will be for the next six months. History affords no clear answer. The constitutional rule that we have only one president at a time is often hard for Americans, let alone foreigners, to grasp. The dangers posed by uncertainty about who’s in charge even in normal transitions are exacerbated by a weak incumbent no longer seeking re-election. U.S. adversaries, and even some allies, will see opportunities to advance their interests. Nor can we rule out what an otherwise responsible, but disappointed and possibly bitter lame duck might consider doing as his tenure in office dwindles.

President Biden's State of the Union address was disheartening to witness the struggles America continues to face under his presidency. The speech, marketed as energetic, felt more like a campaign kickoff than an honest evaluation of our nation's pressing challenges. Biden's efforts to position himself for another term seemed to overshadow the addressing of actual issues at hand. Despite his assertions, the speech lacked substance, offering little more than political posturing. It's particularly concerning that the President chose to extensively focus on his predecessor, repeatedly using the phrase "my predecessor," rather than presenting concrete solutions to the crises we're grappling with. From the ongoing pandemic to economic uncertainties, the address failed to instill confidence. The constant emphasis on division rather than unity doesn't bode well for our country's future. It's time for real leadership and actionable plans, not just political rhetoric. Adding to the concerns, the persistent issue of the southern border crisis was notably absent from substantial discussion, raising questions about the administration's commitment to addressing critical domestic matters. Moreover, the revelation that the White House is considering reallocating $200 million from the army to support Ukraine adds another layer of complexity. While supporting Ukraine is crucial, the decision to redirect funds from the military prompts questions about domestic priorities and national defense readiness. These combined issues underscore the multifaceted challenges facing the Biden administration.

Trump’s win has implications for geopolitics because it is clear that America’s days of being the ‘world’s policeman’ that began with the Truman Doctrine in 1947 in the initial throes of the Cold War is over. America is returning to a more isolationist policy because it is frankly cheaper. In doing so, Trump is prepared to come to a rapprochement with dictators like Xi, Kim and Putin, whom he admires, and let the world fend for itself. It will be no surprise if he withdraws from NATO. For Europe, a new reality will have to be grasped and a European army will need to be created. The USA spends nearly $800 billion a year on defence. There are 31 countries in NATO barring America. Together, they will need to raise defence spending to a similar amount or more to build an army that matches American might. It can be done over time if the wherewithal and European unity is there. However, for Britain and Brexit, there is a problem because the country stands alone. Britain has no ability to fight a war with a dwindling military and will need to join a European army. As for the new Trump administration 2.0, I forecast he will be true to himself and surround himself with a hardcore, loyal band of MAGA supporters. With control of both Houses and the fact that Trump doesn’t need to run again and therefore appease or compromise dissident voices, Trump has an opportunity to remould America in the way that Margaret Thatcher reshaped Britain. That will be his legacy and with J.D. Vance being only 40, the Republicans could be in power for the next 12 years before the American electorate decides to give the other side a go again, if Trump manages to improve the economy. One thing for certain is that the Republican Party of George Bush Jr. and Mitt Romney no longer exist. Trump has turned it into a populist party comprising traditional Democratic supporters such as white working class men, Union members and ethnic minorities. That could well be Trump’s true legacy. There is no doubt that he has charisma. It’s just a shame that he is so despicable. Hold on tight! It’s going to be a bumpy ride over the next four years!! I hope I’m wrong, but then again pigs might fly!!

In New Hampshire on Tuesday President Biden revisited one of his favorite expressions, “we’re at one of those inflection points, folks.” https://lnkd.in/gC7M4rq3 For Biden, we must be living in the era of “inflection points.” Biden has frequently used the concept of an "inflection point" to describe pivotal moments in both domestic and global affairs. He first referred to this during his November 2020 victory speech, framing his election as an "inflection point" to reclaim America's soul. Since taking office, Biden has repeatedly employed the term in key speeches, including at the United Nations in 2021, describing the global pandemic response as an "inflection point." He also invoked it following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, positioning the war as a crucial decision between democracy and authoritarianism. In his Oval Office address following the Hamas attack on Israel and the war in Ukraine, Biden again underscored the world’s current "inflection point" in history. This Cold War binary mindset: Western-style internationalism that sees the world as good vs. evil – a “rules-based international order” vs. “authoritarian order” and freedom vs. tyranny. is as useful as it is vague and empty. Michael Hirsh has a great summary of this term and put it bluntly, “Sadly, it’s unlikely that many people—Americans and others around the world—will buy the argument now, either.” https://lnkd.in/gG5zXFPA

July 5, 2024 Now that we’ve passed the Fourth of July and celebrated our great country, here comes a neck-snapping turn back to politics. A look at both camps. Former President Donald Trump continues to lead in the polls as voters tire of the same old results from the Biden Camp. As President Biden struggles to complete a sentence the whole country now gets a look behind the curtain. Were we really fooled by The President’s handlers limiting his exposure and putting him in a protective “bubble” for the last three and a half years. I think not. The “basement” strategy almost worked for the entire term. But one 90-minute debate blew the lid off the effort and now we see what they were hiding for The President’s entire term. The question now is “who is running the country?” This weekend starts the next chapter. The President will continue to try and repair his campaign, while the Democratic National Committee considers its options. There aren’t many. We’ll all be watching the President next week at the upcoming NATO summit in Washington and so will our allies. Can they trust this man to be the leader of the free world? As the NATO leaders gather in The Washington Convention Center many may be judging Joe Biden’s cognitive skills. One week later the same heads of state will see their alternative. Tried, true and tested, Donald Trump offers a return to safety and prosperity at the Republican National Convention. Timing couldn’t be better to present the option, just one week later. Is the former president perfect? No. Does he have the mental capacity to do the job and put in the hours? Yes. We’ll see. 

In a 2018 essay, Elliott Abrams, a former State Department official, reflected on Trump’s often tumultuous relationship with the officials in his government—and the consequences of that agitation for U.S. power. Two years into his term, “Trump is finding the vast U.S. government to be both an instrument of and a frequent barrier to implementing policies that he desires,” Abrams wrote. “There is a long history of conflict between U.S. presidents and the U.S. government,” he noted. But even though the gap between the commander-in-chief and the bureaucracy was not unique to Trump, it had become “one of the administration’s defining characteristics.” The discrepancy between Trump and some of his top officials, Abrams argued, appeared “to be the result of an effort by some within the government, and even in Trump’s cabinet, to blunt his initiatives.” Trump’s opponents “may applaud this internal resistance, but it brings with it problems of its own—namely, uncertainty as to where the United States really stands.” Turmoil at the top of the U.S. government, in other words, was clouding Trump’s actual policy—with dangerous ripple effects for allies and adversaries alike. The question now is how Trump’s second term will differ from his first, as he sets out to staff his administration with advisers who are fully invested in his domestic and foreign policy vision. https://lnkd.in/gyQrmChd

In a 2018 essay, Elliott Abrams, a former State Department official, reflected on Trump’s often tumultuous relationship with the officials in his government—and the consequences of that agitation for U.S. power. Two years into his term, “Trump is finding the vast U.S. government to be both an instrument of and a frequent barrier to implementing policies that he desires,” Abrams wrote. “There is a long history of conflict between U.S. presidents and the U.S. government,” he noted. But even though the gap between the commander-in-chief and the bureaucracy was not unique to Trump, it had become “one of the administration’s defining characteristics.” The discrepancy between Trump and some of his top officials, Abrams argued, appeared “to be the result of an effort by some within the government, and even in Trump’s cabinet, to blunt his initiatives.” Trump’s opponents “may applaud this internal resistance, but it brings with it problems of its own—namely, uncertainty as to where the United States really stands.” Turmoil at the top of the U.S. government, in other words, was clouding Trump’s actual policy—with dangerous ripple effects for allies and adversaries alike. The question now is how Trump’s second term will differ from his first, as he sets out to staff his administration with advisers who are fully invested in his domestic and foreign policy vision. https://lnkd.in/gyQrmChd

I am so sad to see Harris and the Dems playing by the GOP's playbook on immigration, crime, guns, the military, China, climate change, and the economy. We are accepting fear as the basis of policy rather than leaning into our power, ingenuity, and potential as a nation. Masha Gessen spoke at CMC's Athenaeum last night and they explained this as being backward-looking versus forward-looking. Trump et al., just like Putin and Modi and Xi and Bolsonaro and Orban and so many others, promise a return to a very specific mythological past (in the US, it's kind of "see Dick and Jane frack"). The Dems could instead be promising a brighter future based, like the past, on integrating immigrants into the economy rather than rejecting them, on innovation rather than old technologies, on using our knowledge and skills and labor to address rather than ignore the climate and pollution, on creating new jobs and new opportunities, on fair wages, on access to healthcare and education for all, on modern cities and new infrastructure, on all the things we can do rather than all the things we should fear.

THE LONG VIEW: LET'S AMERICA BE SMALL AGAIN AMERICA HAS LONG TREATED AGING LEADERS DIFFERENTLY.-- AND SO MIGHT OTHER COUNTRIES TREAT BIDEN OR TRUMP "Before the Biden-Trump debate, many foreign leaders and governments had surely drawn conclusions about Biden’s acuity from in-person meetings, just as they surely had about Trump’s acuity from encounters with him when he was president. But such optics are not only an electoral liability. The United States’ own treatment of aging foreign leaders in the past makes clear that when presidents are seen as suffering from the ravages of time, their standing abroad will also take a hit https://lnkd.in/eT33AeR9

In New Hampshire on Tuesday President Biden revisited one of his favorite expressions, “we’re at one of those inflection points, folks.” https://lnkd.in/gdG2v5Rm For Biden, we must be living in the era of “inflection points.” Biden has frequently used the concept of an "inflection point" to describe pivotal moments in both domestic and global affairs. He first referred to this during his November 2020 victory speech, framing his election as an "inflection point" to reclaim America's soul. Since taking office, Biden has repeatedly employed the term in key speeches, including at the United Nations in 2021, describing the global pandemic response as an "inflection point." He also invoked it following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, positioning the war as a crucial decision between democracy and authoritarianism. In his Oval Office address following the Hamas attack on Israel and the war in Ukraine, Biden again underscored the world’s current "inflection point" in history. This Cold War binary mindset: Western-style internationalism that sees the world as good vs. evil – a “rules-based international order” vs. “authoritarian order” and freedom vs. tyranny. is as useful as it is vague and empty. Michael Hirsh has a great summary of this term and put it bluntly, “Sadly, it’s unlikely that many people—Americans and others around the world—will buy the argument now, either.” https://lnkd.in/gCKS8Z6C