Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

Donald Trump’s first trip to Asia is set to be a predictable failure

It starts with a “greeting” from North Korea and will end with Trump coming face to face with Asian countries that need and want less and less from the United States.

Published

on

12,517 Views

Donald Trump is set to begin a trip to several East and South East Asian countries beginning at the weekend. His trip includes stops in Japan, South Korea, Philippines and Vietnam.

In many ways, Trump’s trip can already be consigned to the realm of useless predictability, simply because the countries of Asia are moving in such a way, that regional events are now far more impactful than any statements or actions, short of a war, that any US leader is capable of instigating.

1. Philippines 

The biggest disappointment for Trump will most likely be Philippines. In a short year, due to the epoch shifting leadership of President Rodrigo Duterte, Philippines has shaken its tunnel-vision style relationship with the US and has opened up to new relations with countries across Asia and Eurasia, including China and Russia.

Russia is expanding security ties with the former US colony which saw Russia deliver thousands of free arms to Philippines as well as multiple military vehicles. The recent visit of Russian Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu to Manila as part of a Russian Naval flotilla, is a further sign of Philippines’ historically good relations with Moscow.

Duterte welcomes Russian Naval ships to Philippines as military cooperation pact is signed

During Duterte’s first presidential visit to China, President Xi Jinping hailed Duterte’s rapprochement with Beijing as something that would usher in a “golden era” of good relations between China and Philippines. Already, Chinese firms are preparing to build new modern districts in Manila and China looks to play a vital role in the re-development of Marawi, the southern Philippine city that was recently liberated from the ISIS-Maute group after a five month long siege.

Against this backdrop, there is little the US can do to build new ties with Philippines. While the US still maintains a prominent presence in the country, President Duterte has frequently stated that he remains intent on breaking free of the colonial mentality, in spite of any offers the US might bring.

While Duterte personally loathed Barack Obama, once famously calling him a “son of a whore”, he has frequently said that he respects Donald Trump’s more straightforward rhetoric.

Because of this, it is likely that Duterte and Trump will have a good personal relationship. Leaked transcripts of a phone call between the two already indicates that they enjoy speaking to one another.

However, this will not likely translate into any new meaningful agreements between Washington and Manila, not least because the US Congress has steadfastly worked to undermine Duterte because of his anti-colonial and anti-drug policies.

Trump will end up leaving a country that the US once took for granted, with ultimately nothing to show.

2. South Korea 

If his speech to the UN is anything to go by, Trump’s brief one day visit to South Korea may well become eventful in terms of Trump’s threatening rhetoric against the DPRK (North Korea). However, South Korea’s President Moon Jae-in is doing everything he can to turn down the tensions prior to Trump’s visit.

Seoul recently agreed not to install any more US made THAAD missile systems, after complaints from China. This indicates China’s rapidly expanding influence in East Asia, including over countries with deeply intertwined relations with the US.

Furthermore, President Moon stated that his country will never seek to develop its own nuclear arsenal, in a move that appears to be a sign that South Korea does not seek to waste its resources buying expensive US made military technology. Protests against Trump are already being planned by peace activists throughout the country.

Amid Trump’s threats to cancel a US-South Korea free trade deal, Seoul continues to move economically closer to Russia, while consolidating new economic partnerships throughout the world. During his speech at the UN, Moon even acknowledged his willingness to participate in economic cooperation schemes with the DPRK, something first touted by President Vladimir Putin at the Eastern Economic Forum in Russia. President Moon and a delegation from Pyongyang both attended the forum in Vladivostok.

Two Koreas–One Road: The future of cooperation between North Korea, South Korea and Russia

Beyond standard fraternal greetings and expressions of bi-national friendship, Donald Trump will be hosted by a South Korean leader, who unlike his imprisoned predecessor Park Geun-hye, is not sympathetic to militarism and a threatening stance towards the North.

Trump’s visit to South Korea will be largely symbolic of a relationship that South Koreans feel is one sided and increasingly detrimental to the long term interests of East Asian peace.

3. Japan 

Right-wing (by Japanese standards) Prime Minister Shinzō Abe just won a snap election which many say he will try to use to abandon Japan’s constitutionally mandated pacifism. Although the US insisted on a pacific Japanese state after 1945, today, many in the US would like Japan to expand its military position in East Asia in order to present a rival force to China and also the much smaller North Korean military.

However, Japan’s legislative system and constitution makes it incredibly difficult for Abe to enact de-pacification. Additionally, there is little popular support for such a measure. Furthermore, while Abe’s victory is being hailed by many as a landslide, his party actually won six fewer seats than in the previous 2014 elections.

In this sense, while Trump and Abe may be speaking in similar tones, it is difficult to see what will come of the visit, especially since Donald Trump withdrew from the Trans Pacific Partnership, a would-be free trade agreement whose aim was to rival One Belt–One Road in the Pacific. Ultimately, Trump withdrew citing domestic concerns about offshoring industrial jobs.

In this sense, friendly stagnation may well be the atmosphere surrounding Trump’s time in Tokyo.

4. Vietnam 

It’s something of an ironic fact that a US President may find himself more welcome in a Communist Vietnamese state that was the location of multiple US war crimes during the 1960s and 1970s, than in traditionally pro-US nations in Asia.

In spite of the past, Vietnam has largely embraced trade with the US as part of its post-Cold War economic liberalisation. Moreover, Vietnam is the country whose regional disputes with China continue to be felt most strongly and in this sense Washington and Hanoi have found common cause.

Even though China is Vietnam’s number one trading partner, the ancient and modern rivalry between the two states still factors heavily for the leadership in Hanoi.

In this sense, it will be interesting to see how much Donald Trump indulges the leadership of Vietnam in anti-Chinese rhetoric. As Trump continues to vacillate between patronising and insulting China, Beijing will be keenly listening to what he says when in Vietnam. If he takes things too far in respect of anti-Chinese rhetoric, China will be deeply displeased, especially if Trump comes out swinging in respect of Vietnam’s dispute with China over South China Sea territorial and maritime rights.

Thus, the only country on his visit where anything even slightly positive might transpire, is one where Trump ought to be more diplomatic and less excitable than in any of the others.

CONCLUSION: 

The foregone conclusion of failure which is all but implicit in Donald Trump’s trip to Asia, is not entirely his fault. Barack Obama’s once touted ‘pivot to Asia’ ended up with Asian countries moving further away from the US. By the end of Obama’s term, China was not only the uncontested king of the region, with many strengthened alliances as well as new partnerships, but Obama threw away a great deal of good will that had existed with China, even under the George W. Bush administration.

With China and Russia working to make Asia and Eurasia less and less dependant on the US Dollar, Washington not only has less to receive but less to give Asia. The gradual decline of America’s presence in Asia is already underway.

Russia and China actively collude to bring down the only thing America cares about

To cap things off, North Korea has published the following statement ahead of Donald Trump’s visit. It serves as a kind of ‘greeting card’ ahead of a trip that will bear few fruits for anyone:

“The mouth of Trump, master of invective ill-famed for spouting bellicose and irresponsible rhetoric, caused trouble again.

At a recent interview with Fox News, he said the U.S. is incredibly well prepared to cope with the “north’s provocation” and anyone will be “greatly shocked” to know about it.

It is nothing surprising as he reeled off the rhetoric calling for “totally destroying” a sovereign state at a UN arena, obliged to discuss peace issue, only to throw the world into consternation.

But what is worthy taking note of is his sordid wordplay before his Asian junket.

Maybe, he wanted to threaten the DPRK, embolden his stooges like Japan and south Korea and show off his “might”.

But this only proves that he has a serious headache and is pushed into the corner because of the DPRK.

Now he is introducing nuclear carrier task force and other massive strategic hardware into waters off the Korean peninsula while spreading such ambiguous phrases as “calm before storm” and “only one effective way”. He is, at the same time, making all desperate efforts to make the whole world join it in putting sanctions and pressure on the DPRK, only to see it proving ineffective.

Instead, he disclosed his true nature as a nuclear war maniac before the world and was diagnosed as “incurably mentally deranged”.

The CNN recently carried out an opinion poll and 63 percent of respondents denounced Trump’s DPRK policy as “imprudent one which escalates tension”.

There are strong assertions within the U.S. political circle calling on Trump to take his hands off Korea, and experts on the Korean issue are denouncing Trump for trying to settle the “nuclear issue of the north”, whose solution has been failed despite scores of years of endeavors, with a few improvised words. They comment that Trump is too incompetent to play the role of standing in confrontation with the DPRK as it becomes a hard challenge even to president possessed of abilities and judgment.

Yet, Trump behaves as if he will do something big, while bluffing about “full preparedness” and “big shock”. He absolutely needs medicine for curing his psychical disorder.

He even affirmatively estimated and encouraged “China’s participation in sanctions on the DPRK”, and said that “China is truly helping the U.S. over the north Korea issue”. These brownnosing words are utterly sickening and disgusting.

Trump’s wild outbursts are just the hysteric spasmodic symptom of his discomfort and fear after finding that his strategy does not work on the DPRK and the DPRK is getting stronger, instead.

Incompetent ones are apt to make a false show of power.

Now is high time that the U.S. pondered over the might of the DPRK’s state nuclear force”.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

US media suffers panic attack after Mueller fails to deliver on much-anticipated Trump indictment

Internet mogul Kim Dotcom said it all: “Mueller – The name that ended all mainstream media credibility.”

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT


Important pundits and news networks have served up an impressive display of denials, evasions and on-air strokes after learning that Robert Mueller has ended his probe without issuing a single collusion-related indictment.

The Special Counsel delivered his final report to Attorney General William Barr for review on Friday, with the Justice Department confirming that there will be no further indictments related to the probe. The news dealt a devastating blow to the sensational prophesies of journalists, analysts and entire news networks, who for nearly two years reported ad nauseam that President Donald Trump and his inner circle were just days away from being carted off to prison for conspiring with the Kremlin to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

Showing true integrity, journalists and television anchors took to Twitter and the airwaves on Friday night to acknowledge that the media severely misreported Donald Trump’s alleged ties to Russia, as well as what Mueller’s probe was likely to find. They are, after all, true professionals.

“How could they let Trump off the hook?” an inconsolable Chris Matthews asked NBC reporter Ken Dilanian during a segment on CNN’s ‘Hardball’.

Dilanian tried to comfort the CNN host with some of his signature NBC punditry.

“My only conclusion is that the president transmitted to Mueller that he would take the Fifth. He would never talk to him and therefore, Mueller decided it wasn’t worth the subpoena fight,” he expertly mused.

Actually, there were several Serious Journalists who used their unsurpassed analytical abilities to conjure up a reason why Mueller didn’t throw the book at Trump, even though the president is clearly a Putin puppet.

“It’s certainly possible that Trump may emerge from this better than many anticipated. However! Consensus has been that Mueller would follow DOJ rules and not indict a sitting president. I.e. it’s also possible his report could be very bad for Trump, despite ‘no more indictments,'” concluded Mark Follman, national affairs editor at Mother Jones, who presumably, and very sadly, was not being facetious.

Revered news organs were quick to artfully modify their expectations regarding Mueller’s findings.

“What is collusion and why is Robert Mueller unlikely to mention it in his report on Trump and Russia?” a Newsweek headline asked following Friday’s tragic announcement.

Three months earlier, Newsweek had meticulously documented all the terrible “collusion” committed by Donald Trump and his inner circle.

But perhaps the most sobering reactions to the no-indictment news came from those who seemed completely unfazed by the fact that Mueller’s investigation, aimed at uncovering a criminal conspiracy between Trump and the Kremlin, ended without digging up a single case of “collusion.”

The denials, evasions and bizarre hot takes are made even more poignant by the fact that just days ago, there was still serious talk about Trump’s entire family being hauled off to prison.

“You can’t blame MSNBC viewers for being confused. They largely kept dissenters from their Trump/Russia spy tale off the air for 2 years. As recently as 2 weeks ago, they had @JohnBrennan strongly suggesting Mueller would indict Trump family members on collusion as his last act,” journalist Glenn Greenwald tweeted.

While the Mueller report has yet to be released to the public, the lack of indictments makes it clear that whatever was found, nothing came close to the vast criminal conspiracy alleged by virtually the entire American media establishment.

“You have been lied to for 2 years by the MSM. No Russian collusion by Trump or anyone else. Who lied? Head of the CIA, NSA,FBI,DOJ, every pundit every anchor. All lies,” wrote conservative activist Chuck Woolery.

Internet mogul Kim Dotcom was more blunt, but said it all: “Mueller – The name that ended all mainstream media credibility.”

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Canadian Lawmaker Accuses Trudeau Of Being A “Fake Feminist” (Video)

Rempel segued to Trudeau’s push to quash an investigation into allegations that he once groped a young journalist early in his political career

Published

on

Via Zerohedge

Canada’s feminist-in-chief Justin Trudeau wants to support and empower women…but his support stops at the point where said women start creating problems for his political agenda.

That was the criticism levied against the prime minister on Friday by a conservative lawmaker, who took the PM to task for “muzzling strong, principled women” during a debate in the House of Commons.

“He asked for strong women, and this is what they look like!” said conservative MP Michelle Rempel, referring to the former justice minister and attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould, who has accused Trudeau and his cronies of pushing her out of the cabinet after she refused to grant a deferred prosecution agreement to a Quebec-based engineering firm.

She then accused Trudeau of being a “fake feminist”.

“That’s not what a feminist looks like…Every day that he refuses to allow the attorney general to testify and tell her story is another day he’s a fake feminist!”

Trudeau was so taken aback by Rempel’s tirade, that he apparently forgot which language he should respond in.

But Rempel wasn’t finished. She then segued to Trudeau’s push to quash an investigation into allegations that he once groped a young journalist early in his political career. This from a man who once objected to the continued use of the word “mankind” (suggesting we use “peoplekind” instead).

The conservative opposition then tried to summon Wilson-Raybould to appear before the Commons for another hearing (during her last appearance, she shared her account of how the PM and employees in the PM’s office and privy council barraged her with demands that she quash the government’s pursuit of SNC-Lavalin over charges that the firm bribed Libyan government officials). Wilson-Raybould left the Trudeau cabinet after she was abruptly moved to a different ministerial post – a move that was widely seen as a demotion.

Trudeau has acknowledged that he put in a good word on the firm’s behalf with Wilson-Raybould, but insists that he always maintained the final decision on the case was hers and hers alone.

Fortunately for Canadians who agree with Rempel, it’s very possible that Trudeau – who has so far resisted calls to resign – won’t be in power much longer, as the scandal has cost Trudeau’s liberals the lead in the polls for the October election.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Why Joe May be Courting Stacey

Joe Biden has a history on compulsory integration dating back to the 1970s that Sen. Jesse Helms called “enlightened.”

Patrick J. Buchanan

Published

on

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via The Unz Review:


Of 895 slots in the freshman class of Stuyvesant High in New York City, seven were offered this year to black students, down from 10 last year and 13 the year before.

In the freshman class of 803 at The Bronx High School of Science, 12 students are black, down from last year’s 25.

Of 303 students admitted to Staten Island Technical High School, one is African-American.

According to The New York Times, similar patterns of admission apply at the other five most elite high schools in the city.

Whites and Asians are 30 percent of middle school students, but 83 percent of the freshman at Bronx High School of Science, 88 percent at Staten Island Technical and 90 percent at Stuyvesant.

What do these numbers tell us?

They reveal the racial composition of the cohort of scientists and technicians who will lead America in the 21st century. And they tell us which races will not be well represented in that vanguard.

They identify a fault line that runs through the Democratic Party, separating leftists who believe in equality of results for all races and ethnic groups, and those who believe in a meritocracy.

Mayor Bill de Blasio has expressed anger and frustration at the under-representation of blacks and Hispanics in the elite schools. But Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the state legislature have ignored his pleas to change the way students are admitted.

Currently, the same test, of English and math, is given to middle school applicants. And admission to the elite eight is offered to those who get the highest scores.

Moreover, Asians, not whites, are predominant.

Though 15 percent of all middle school students, Asians make up two-thirds of the student body at Stuyvesant, with 80 times as many slots as their African-American classmates.

The egalitarian wing of the Democratic Party sees this as inherently unjust. And what gives this issue national import are these factors:

First, the recent scandal where rich parents paid huge bribes to criminal consultants to get their kids into elite colleges, by falsifying records of athletic achievement and cheating on Scholastic Aptitude Tests, has caused a wave of populist resentment.

Second, Harvard is being sued for systemic reverse racism, as black and Hispanic students are admitted with test scores hundreds of points below those that would disqualify Asians and whites.

Third, Joe Biden has a history on compulsory integration dating back to the 1970s that Sen. Jesse Helms called “enlightened.”

Here are Biden’s quotes, unearthed by The Washington Post, that reflect his beliefs about forced busing for racial balance in public schools:

“The new integration plans being offered are really just quota systems to assure a certain number of blacks, Chicanos, or whatever in each school. That, to me, is the most racist concept you can come up with.

“What it says is, ‘In order for your child with curly black hair, brown eyes, and dark skin to be able to learn anything, he needs to sit next to my blond-haired, blue-eyed son.’ That’s racist!

“Who the hell do we think we are, that the only way a black man or woman can learn is if they rub shoulders with my white child?

“I am philosophically opposed to quota systems. They insure mediocrity.”

That was 44 years ago. While those views were the thinking of many Democrats, and perhaps of most Americans, in the mid-’70s, they will be problematic in the 2020 primaries, where African-Americans could be decisive in the contests that follow Iowa and New Hampshire.

Biden knows that just as Bernie Sanders, another white male, fell short in crucial South Carolina because of a lack of support among black voters, he, too, has a problem with that most loyal element in the Democratic coalition.

In 1991, Biden failed to rise to the defense of Anita Hill when she charged future Justice Clarence Thomas with sexual harassment. In the Senate Judiciary Committee, he was a law-and-order champion responsible for tough anti-crime legislation that is now regarded as discriminatory.

And he has a record on busing for racial balance that made him a de facto ally of Louise Day Hicks of the Boston busing case fame.

How, with a record like this, does Biden inoculate himself against attacks by rival candidates, especially candidates of color, in his run for the nomination?

One way would be to signal to his party that he has grown, he has changed, and his 2020 running mate will be a person of color. Perhaps he’ll run with a woman of color such as Stacey Abrams, who narrowly lost the 2018 governor’s race in Georgia.

An ancillary benefit would be that Abrams on the ticket would help him carry Georgia, a state Donald Trump probably cannot lose and win re-election.

Wrote Axios this morning:

“Close advisers to former Vice President Joe Biden are debating the idea of packaging his presidential campaign announcement with a pledge to choose Stacey Abrams as his vice president.”


Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending