Trump Dump: Foreign Policy (Thread I)

[EnterpriseSovereign]

The Independent

United Nations Security Council lectures US ambassador Nikki Haley on purpose of UN after America's Iran demands
Organisation reaffirms support for multilateral nuclear agreement, while Iranian ambassador delivers lengthy history on popular revolt in US

Michael Schwirtz 2 hours ago

Click to follow
The Independent US

Nikki Haley denounced the Islamic Republic as an 'oppressive government'
POPULAR VIDEOS

At least nine crews tackle fire at Bristol University listed building

Barcelona announce £142m Coutinho transfer from Liverpool
Efforts by the Trump administration to marshal a muscular international response to Iran’s crackdown on anti-government protesters appeared to backfire Friday, as members of the UN Security Council instead used a special session called by the United States to lecture the US ambassador on the proper purpose of the body and to reaffirm support for the Iran nuclear agreement.

It was an afternoon of high diplomatic theatre that began with a passionate denunciation of Iran’s “oppressive government” by the US ambassador, Nikki R. Haley, and ended with the Iranian ambassador delivering a lengthy history of popular revolt in the United States — from the violent demonstrations at the Democratic National Convention in 1968 to the Occupy Wall Street protests in 2011.

In the interim, council members did, one by one, condemn the Iranian government’s response during more than a week of protests. As of Friday, more than 20 people had been killed and hundreds had been arrested. The authorities have blocked access to social media and have blamed foreign “enemies” for instigating the unrest, a common refrain at times of upheaval that in this case the government has provided no evidence to support.

READ MORE
Nikki Haley says the world is watching Iran's response to unrest
Be careful who you put your trust in when it comes to Iran protests
What I learned from staying in Iran during the last days of the Shah
Russia warns US not to interfere in Iran's 'domestic affairs'
Iran declares victory against anti-government protesters
In her remarks, Haley said the United States would remain steadfastly behind the Iranian protesters.

“Let there be no doubt whatsoever,” she said, “the United States stands unapologetically with those in Iran who seek freedom for themselves.”

But there was evidence of a mini-revolt brewing within the Security Council chamber, not only among traditional adversaries like Russia and China, but also among close allies like France and Sweden. Many seemed to fear that the outspoken criticism by the Americans was simply a pretext to undermine the Iran nuclear deal, which President Donald Trump has long desired to scrap.

It is not precisely clear what Haley hoped to achieve by convening the session Friday, which was not previously scheduled. Until the meeting began at 3 pm, it was not even certain whether Haley would be able to secure the votes needed to call the session to order.

But even before the session began, France’s ambassador, François Delattre, warned against “instrumentalisation” of the protests “from the outside.”

Speaking before the council, he went further.

“We must be wary of any attempt to exploit this crisis for personal ends, which would have a diametrically opposed outcome to that which is wished,” Delattre said.

He asked rhetorically why the Security Council had not taken up the issue of Black Lives Matter protests in Ferguson, Missouri, which were at times also met with a violent police response.

“The real reason for convening today’s meeting is not an attempt to protect human rights or promote the interests of the Iranian people, but rather as a veiled attempt to use the current moment to continue to undermine” the Iranian deal, Nebenzya said.

Iran protests – in pictures
11
show all
Trump has repeatedly excoriated the deal, which was a signature diplomatic achievement of his predecessor, Barack Obama. In October, he refused to recertify the deal, though he left it to Congress to legislate changes to it. (None of the other world powers that signed the deal believes renegotiation is possible.)

This month, Trump will again have to choose whether to continue to waive sanctions, as the deal requires, or chart a more confrontational approach that would further antagonise European allies.

Trump himself conflated the protests with the Iran nuclear deal this week, arguing that financial benefits received by the Iranian authorities as part of the accord had fuelled the corruption that the country’s people were protesting.

At the Security Council on Friday, most members insisted that these two issues were separate.

“It needs to be crystal clear to the international community that the situation in Iran does not belong on the agenda of the Security Council,” said Sacha Sergio Llorenty, the Bolivian ambassador.

Sweden’s representative, Irina Schoulgin Nyoni, concurred: “We have our reservations on the format and timing of this session.”

Such reticence to support the US position is the latest evidence of growing international resistance to the Trump administration’s foreign policy priorities, particularly at the United Nations. Last month, a large majority of UN members voted for a resolution denouncing the United States’ decision to recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and move the US Embassy there.

Haley had to use her veto to block a similar resolution in the Security Council that was supported by every other member.


READ MORE
Iran's Grand Ayatollah accuses foreign powers of meddling in protests
On Wednesday, the US Mission to the United Nations held a cocktail reception for the nine countries that voted against the resolution in the General Assembly, which, aside from Israel, were Guatemala, Honduras, Togo, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru and Palau.

In a video message played at the reception, Trump thanked the attendees for “standing with the United States.”

He said the vote would “go down as a very important date,” and their support was “noted and greatly appreciated.”

The New York Times

Can I have a Presidential administration that isn't an embarrassment to the world at large? When did that become too much to ask?

November 8, 2016

[Gandalf]

Not to speak on behalf of the rest of the world, but we've been laughing at your presidents for a while. Bush II had "Bushisms," Clinton apparently started conflicts because he got caught with his pants down, and Bush I vomited on the Japanese Prime Minister.

I have an hypothesis that this got bad when American presidents also had to be media personalities, so the imagery of the sacred office ran head long into the reality of the guy sitting in it.

[Simon_Jester]

Well, the main question on my mind is, were Clinton and Bush the Elder embarrassments more often than not?

I don't have to ask about Bush the Younger.

[LaCroix]

Bush one was pretty much ok, everyone has occasional strange moments, but nothing really tarnished the office.

Clinton, we mostly remember that he had been cheating on his wife, and the Republicans tried to use this to stage a coup. We laughed at it, pretty much like the times whenever a British MP got in trouble for some sex scandal.

Neither of them really damaged the office.

Bush the lesser was at first pretty much regarded as a trained monkey, a fratboy who got a figurehead post he's too immature to really do, and a big team of grey eminences behind him moving things for him. He got reclassified as stupid pawn, and his eminences as a coven of warmongering liars.
They did a lot of damage by their slandering of saner voices in the international community in order to continue their pet project war (Along with Britain going all in with them for political reasons, breaking with the EU position). In a way Brexit and the EU stance towards the US and Britain stems from this breach of etiquette and trust.

Obama fixed a lot of this, but there were still a lot of barely patched up cracks in the international relations, which Trump went to work on with a jackhammer.

The fact that someon like Trump can become President, and then make it such a banana republicish caricature of a government without any resistance from half the legislature pretty much destroyed the office and the image of the United States, forever.

[Simon_Jester]

Well, maybe we can have a good reputation some time near the end of this century if we play our cards right, but I'll count myself luckier than I deserve if I live to see it...

[The Romulan Republic]

Bush one was pretty much ok, everyone has occasional strange moments, but nothing really tarnished the office.

Clinton, we mostly remember that he had been cheating on his wife, and the Republicans tried to use this to stage a coup. We laughed at it, pretty much like the times whenever a British MP got in trouble for some sex scandal.

Neither of them really damaged the office.

Bush the lesser was at first pretty much regarded as a trained monkey, a fratboy who got a figurehead post he's too immature to really do, and a big team of grey eminences behind him moving things for him. He got reclassified as stupid pawn, and his eminences as a coven of warmongering liars.
They did a lot of damage by their slandering of saner voices in the international community in order to continue their pet project war (Along with Britain going all in with them for political reasons, breaking with the EU position). In a way Brexit and the EU stance towards the US and Britain stems from this breach of etiquette and trust.

Obama fixed a lot of this, but there were still a lot of barely patched up cracks in the international relations, which Trump went to work on with a jackhammer.

The fact that someon like Trump can become President, and then make it such a banana republicish caricature of a government without any resistance from half the legislature pretty much destroyed the office and the image of the United States, forever.

Forever is a long time. If Germany or Japan can be regarded as a respectable nation today, then I dare say American can again, in a few decades at least.

It might be fairer to say that it has destroyed the office and image of the United States for the foreseeable future, barring fundamental changes to the nature of American culture and government. Changes which it is the duty of every American to work towards.

[K. A. Pital]

Trump just made the US feel like a cleptocratic banana republic... It's bad, but at some point the superstructure finally aligns with the base. Maybe we've reached that point.

[LaCroix]

Forever is a long time. If Germany or Japan can be regarded as a respectable nation today, then I dare say American can again, in a few decades at least.

Well, it has been 60 years, and I still hear a lot of "All Germans are Nazi" jokes (Can't speak for the japanese), and a deep distrust whenever Germany does anything that might be construed as foreign influence and I'm pretty sure this will never end.

Sorry to break it to you, but 'Forever' is the right term.

[The Romulan Republic]

Forever is a long time. If Germany or Japan can be regarded as a respectable nation today, then I dare say American can again, in a few decades at least.

Well, it has been 60 years, and I still hear a lot of "All Germans are Nazi" jokes (Can't speak for the japanese), and a deep distrust whenever Germany does anything that might be construed as foreign influence and I'm pretty sure this will never end.

Sorry to break it to you, but 'Forever' is the right term.

Jokes, yeah. But in the US, or Canada, I very much doubt that most people take that seriously (I can't speak for perceptions in Europe, or elsewhere in the world).

Hell, the Left and Centre over here seems to more often regard Germany as a beacon of sanity, these days, with "Merkel is the new leader of the free world" jokes and so forth. No, people haven't forgotten Nazi Germany, nor should they- any more than people have forgotten that the US once had slaves and committed genocides. But most people recognize that that does not define the character or policies of the country today. Which is what I meant.

It is quite possible, I admit, that the US will not be able to assume a role of international leadership again in my life time. And perhaps that's a good thing. Let someone else have a turn at that role for a while.

[FaxModem1]

Forever is a long time. If Germany or Japan can be regarded as a respectable nation today, then I dare say American can again, in a few decades at least.

Well, it has been 60 years, and I still hear a lot of "All Germans are Nazi" jokes (Can't speak for the japanese), and a deep distrust whenever Germany does anything that might be construed as foreign influence and I'm pretty sure this will never end.

Sorry to break it to you, but 'Forever' is the right term.

Jokes, yeah. But in the US, or Canada, I very much doubt that most people take that seriously (I can't speak for perceptions in Europe, or elsewhere in the world).

Hell, the Left and Centre over here seems to more often regard Germany as a beacon of sanity, these days, with "Merkel is the new leader of the free world" jokes and so forth. No, people haven't forgotten Nazi Germany, nor should they- any more than people have forgotten that the US once had slaves and committed genocides. But most people recognize that that does not define the character or policies of the country today. Which is what I meant.

It is quite possible, I admit, that the US will not be able to assume a role of international leadership again in my life time. And perhaps that's a good thing. Let someone else have a turn at that role for a while.

The question is, since China is taking that leadership role, is that better for the world?

[The Romulan Republic]

Probably not. Superpowers tend to get there in large part by acting like dicks.

I'd prefer we have either a democratic global government, or barring that, a world that is not either monopolar or polarized between two major powers. The sole superpower plus exploited proxies model has not gone terribly well, and the two feuding superpowers with proxies model nearly killed us all.

Then again, the multiple major powers model gave us two world wars and a depression, so...

And breaking up all the big powers to there are no big fish isn't realistically going to happen without xenophobic bigotry winning the day plus massive amounts of bloodshed.

So as unrealistic as it may seem, I default to global democratic government as the only model that has not yet been tried and proven to be broken.

[TheFeniX]

I'm sure the rest of the world lacked a deep distrust when the U.S. and U.S.S.R spent the better part of a century starting proxy wars and getting millions killed with "foreign influence." But Nazi jokes are a thing... Man, people are fucking weird when it comes to appearances.

Sidenote that's always kind of bothered me: why does no one bothering giving Italy any shit for WW2? Maybe other countries do, but I doubt many Americans could name drop it. They would probably say "Russia." Maybe Italy just sucks that much.

And a global democratic government... yea, THAT's feasible in any shape or form.... or something to aspire to.

[Elheru Aran]

Italy was more of a power player in the late 20s and 30s with its expansion into Africa and starting the whole goose-stepping Fascist thing, in the 40s it was seen as being pretty firmly under Hitler's thumb, and their dismal performance in Africa didn't really help. They were a bit tougher in their own country but the Germans were the real backbone of the Axis there. So Italy pretty much gets an supporting-actor credit in the movie.

[Simon_Jester]

Forever is a long time. If Germany or Japan can be regarded as a respectable nation today, then I dare say American can again, in a few decades at least.

Well, it has been 60 years, and I still hear a lot of "All Germans are Nazi" jokes (Can't speak for the japanese), and a deep distrust whenever Germany does anything that might be construed as foreign influence and I'm pretty sure this will never end.

Sorry to break it to you, but 'Forever' is the right term.

Your country was literally invaded and occupied piecemeal by Nazis with massive brutality.

I honestly doubt Trump's going to break the 100 milliHitler line for aggressive international evil acts, though there are some outlier possibilities that could send him waaay past that point.

[Thanas]

The day your country decided to fuck up its education system.

[Thanas]

Your country was literally invaded and occupied piecemeal by Nazis with massive brutality.

Neither Austria or Hungary were forced into becoming nazi stooges.

[LaCroix]

Your country was literally invaded and occupied piecemeal by Nazis with massive brutality.

Neither Austria or Hungary were forced into becoming nazi stooges.

Indeed, we goose-stepped into formation just like the GOP scrambled to get the most comfy barrel to be bent over.

But I know for a fact, that I get better service in a lot of countries if I drop the hint that I'm not German ( even though I actually am, technically). There is still a lot of casual hate.

The main damage to the US, which is why I believe it will be "forever", is that no matter who will be the next President, you showed that there is a possibility that you switch to "insane clown leader" on a drop of a hat, and that your other branches government will mostly fall in line with the joke candidate, and happily goosestep on. And every time that happens, your laws and political climate will make it even easier to happen again - fortified (entrenched is not a strong enough word, anymore) partisanship, political minorities are crushed by the two party system, gerrymandering, voter suppression.

Other countries had obviously unfit candidates as well, but most respectable counties have population that saw through that and dismissed that idiot as irrelevant. Even after this year if madness, you still have a significant portion of your country cheering their 'savior'! Those are enough idiots waiting to be conned to make every election a tight one.

Nobody will ever fully trust a country that is at all times no more 4 years away from the next Trump.

[Simon_Jester]

The day your country decided to fuck up its education system.

For the record, I am aware that Austria was annexed and Hungary a voluntary affiliate of the Axis; I had somehow gotten the mistaken impression that LaCroix was a Czech. I honestly can not account for how I formed this impression.

Your country was literally invaded and occupied piecemeal by Nazis with massive brutality.

Neither Austria or Hungary were forced into becoming nazi stooges.

I misremembered LaCroix's country of origin, and did not think to check. My mistaken belief that he was a Czech is simply a mistake of fact, which I apologize for.

That said, it remains true that many countries were specifically invaded by the Nazis, and ethnic minorities were specifically rounded up and slaughtered, and so on.

Trump may cause vast damage through malign neglect, but unless he has a nuclear temper tantrum (unlikely), it is not probable that we will see numerous countries being directly invaded by the US military, or millions of people being rounded up and thrown into gas chambers. This is not to in any way lessen my criticisms of Trump as a man, simply to observe that these specific physical things seem unlikely to happen in my opinion.

But I know for a fact, that I get better service in a lot of countries if I drop the hint that I'm not German ( even though I actually am, technically). There is still a lot of casual hate.

The main damage to the US, which is why I believe it will be "forever", is that no matter who will be the next President, you showed that there is a possibility that you switch to "insane clown leader" on a drop of a hat, and that your other branches government will mostly fall in line with the joke candidate, and happily goosestep on. And every time that happens, your laws and political climate will make it even easier to happen again - fortified (entrenched is not a strong enough word, anymore) partisanship, political minorities are crushed by the two party system, gerrymandering, voter suppression.

Other countries had obviously unfit candidates as well, but most respectable counties have population that saw through that and dismissed that idiot as irrelevant. Even after this year if madness, you still have a significant portion of your country cheering their 'savior'! Those are enough idiots waiting to be conned to make every election a tight one.

Nobody will ever fully trust a country that is at all times no more 4 years away from the next Trump.

This is an unfortunate and extremely valid truth that you point out.
Barring systematic reform and the US essentially reinventing itself, that reputation will not go away.

[The Romulan Republic]

I'm sure the rest of the world lacked a deep distrust when the U.S. and U.S.S.R spent the better part of a century starting proxy wars and getting millions killed with "foreign influence." But Nazi jokes are a thing... Man, people are fucking weird when it comes to appearances.

You have a point.

Sidenote that's always kind of bothered me: why does no one bothering giving Italy any shit for WW2? Maybe other countries do, but I doubt many Americans could name drop it. They would probably say "Russia." Maybe Italy just sucks that much.

And that's another good point.

Maybe its because Mussolini was ultimately so ineffective. He just doesn't seem that threatening to people now that history has obscured the details, especially when compared to Hitler.

And a global democratic government... yea, THAT's feasible in any shape or form.... or something to aspire to.

I don't expect to see it in my lifetime.

However, I do not think that it is inherently more unthinkable or unrealistic than, say, landing on the Moon would have been to someone a couple hundred years ago, or women having the vote would have been when America was founded.

The unthinkable becomes reality because a few people have the imagination to believe that it can happen, and start taking the first steps towards it, even if it is not realized in their life times.

I would say that the emergence of casual intercontinental air travel and global communications (the former being less than a century old, the latter less than half a century) have both made global government (weather democratic or despotic) far more realistic than at any other time in human history- and we have yet to see the full reprecussions of those technological advances upon the world.

[TheFeniX]

However, I do not think that it is inherently more unthinkable or unrealistic than, say, landing on the Moon would have been to someone a couple hundred years ago, or women having the vote would have been when America was founded.

You talk about wanting to stamp out the GOP in one thread, then talk about how you want the vote of say.... some guy in Iran who thinks women are nothing but chattel and who's government backs his opinion on this, to have a say in the dealing of your country?

Nah, I'm good. Democracy already means putting up with backwards assholes stuck in the stone-ages and we've already got an Alabama.

EDIT: Shit, should have made a jab at Texas instead. Whatever.

[Simon_Jester]

At least in this era there is the hope that enlightened and positive values can spread across the world. In previous times, that wasn't really an option, and the only kind of world government that could have existed would be some kind of armed dictatorship by a conquering power.

[The Romulan Republic]

That.

However, I do not think that it is inherently more unthinkable or unrealistic than, say, landing on the Moon would have been to someone a couple hundred years ago, or women having the vote would have been when America was founded.

You talk about wanting to stamp out the GOP in one thread, then talk about how you want the vote of say.... some guy in Iran who thinks women are nothing but chattel and who's government backs his opinion on this, to have a say in the dealing of your country?

Nah, I'm good. Democracy already means putting up with backwards assholes stuck in the stone-ages and we've already got an Alabama.

EDIT: Shit, should have made a jab at Texas instead. Whatever.

There are ignorant and bigoted people in every country, which you kind of demonstrated. So there's no need to bring fear-mongering about Iranians telling us what to do into it.

I think that the general trend of most of the world is towards liberalization of social values, and that by the time a hypothetical global government could be achieved, this would likely have progressed further (though history may, of course, prove me wrong).

Though I will never support any system of government which does not include a guarantee of equality before the law, nor would I consider such a government "democratic".

I also think that in a globalized world, where one country's actions inevitably do have serious effects on other countries, it is not unreasonable to suggestion that nations should have a say in the actions of other nations, when those actions will effect them as well. National sovereignty is in my mind an outdated concept, and one that has done more harm than good.

And before anyone says "Well, why do you object to Russia interfering in America's elections"- because I believe that everyone should have an equal say, in the open light of day, within the context of a set of mutually agreed upon rules. You know, democracy.

Though it occurs to me that this is all getting off-topic. If you wish to continue the discussion, feel free to do so by PM, however.

[K. A. Pital]

You are too obsessed with the reputation of the US. So it lost its reputation? Big deal.

The world will go on. It is not as if paying attention to US politics or the fates of worthless British royal spawn was healthy for the world anyway.

I feel bit sorry for the people of USA, but truth is, they produced the political system which produced Trump. So, you reap what you saw.

[The Romulan Republic]

You are too obsessed with the reputation of the US. So it lost its reputation? Big deal.

That reputation (or lack thereof) matters in terms of my country's ability to interact diplomatically (or in any way other than unilateral violence) with the rest of the world.

The world will go on.

Undoubtbly (unless Dickless Donald manages to start a nuclear world war, anyway).

But there are a lot of things that are deeply shitty without being apocalyptic.

It is not as if paying attention to US politics or the fates of worthless British royal spawn was healthy for the world anyway.

Paying attention to US politics was and is necessary, because the US, like it or not, has disproportionate power (and the loss of that power would leave a vaccume, the filling of which is likely to be... messy).

The royals... yeah, you've got me there.

I feel bit sorry for the people of USA, but truth is, they produced the political system which produced Trump. So, you reap what you saw.

And those of us who object to the aspects of our political system that made Trump possible sure appreciate being told, essentially "You're getting what you deserve."

[K. A. Pital]

That reputation (or lack thereof) matters in terms of my country's ability to interact diplomatically (or in any way other than unilateral violence) with the rest of the world.

Then you have to, um, work to restore it. A reform of the broken electoral system that gave us two terms of Dubya the Warmonger and Trump could be a start... wait, not possible.

Paying attention to US politics was and is necessary, because the US, like it or not, has disproportionate power (and the loss of that power would leave a vaccume, the filling of which is likely to be... messy). The royals... yeah, you've got me there.

True that. But the US is already rapidly losing power, because the world's changing. I just hope it happens in a safe and controlled way, that's the best I can hope for, kind of like the post WWII removal of the British Empire. But Trump isn't at all reassuring in that regard!

And those of us who object to the aspects of our political system that made Trump possible sure appreciate being told, essentially "You're getting what you deserve."

No, you didn't, because you were against, that's why I feel sorry... but the country as a whole, maybe yes (though I feel sorry even for them, even for idiots whose relatives were deported by Trump because they were immigrants). Because Trump is a symptom of deep defects in the society.. not easily healed.