The discussion was held at the Cato Institute, Washington, DC on January 28, 2020: Moderator--Trevor Thrall of Cato and discussants--Kate Kizer, Win without War; Loren Schulman, Center for a New American Security; Mena Ayazi, Alliance for Peace building; and Professor Dan Nexon, Georgetown University.
Right off the bat, some discussants questioned whether the United States should pursue its foreign policy with a threat of US military intervention. But the US does not simply say to some country, "Do as we say, or we'll take military action against you!" There has to be some incident, in which the US is confronted with a hostile situation; in which military action is an option among others. The US' forces are currently in some 190 host countries, engaging in an advisory capacity to keep the peace and maintain stable governmental regimes against violence and aggression that would escalate hostilities in some region and state, e.g., against Al Quaeda.
Discussants were quick to point to issues that the US voters are concerned about: healthcare, homelessness, jobs, climate change; issues, be it noted, that several of the Democratic presidential candidates have proposed remedies for. They know that their solutions proposed must reach widespread acceptance by the voting public, since adopted recommendations would necessarily mean structural and procedural changes.
However, most plans being discussed in these citizen forums are not new: many have been tried and indeed successfully implemented here and in other countries, particularly, in Europe. It's only that the US public has been subject to stories of their deleterious unintended consequences. But the price of hesitating to forge ahead into what is for us uncharted territory is to accept populism, as in Trump's living by what has netted good results in the past, e.g. by relying on fossil fuels like coal.
I would encourage progressives to keep forging ahead developing new proposals to handle our problems and make for greater growth opportunities. They will be successful in gaining acceptance for them the more innovative they become. After all, they will be adding to our current US prosperity (which is consumer driven, by the way).
Foreign Policy Issues
Actually, I didn't hear the country of Iran mention, nor Turkey, China nor Russia, so I am not sure that this was really a discussion of foreign policy stances into the future! But in concentrating upon getting our troops out of Iran and Afghanistan, Trump has set up a straw man to take pot shots at.
The point is, I don't believe we're getting out of the Mideast, no matter what he does to divert our attention to home front issues alone. There will be troops there, THANK GOD AND THE UNITED STATES MILITARY! And, I have assurances that once Trump and his minions are out of office, we will assume the rightful position in trade organizations, such as the TPP. And, there is nothing wrong with a little competition from S. Korea's car industry for global penetration of that market, despite his fear generating among US manufacturers. He has done a modicum of good; and a lot of his actions have caused worldwide consternation. So, the Democrats are right in saying, the top issue in this Fall's campaign is a foreign policy effort: Show President Trump the door!
Trump's alliance with the dictators of the world will not last long, despite his efforts at regulating oil production worldwide, a little recognized endeavor of his.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment