Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

Germany will ‘fight’ for its interests in face of Trump’s ‘America First’ policy, says Economic Minister

America’s foreign policy is enacting an approach that sees the world as a global chess game

Published

on

2,414 Views

It’s no secret that Germany has many deep ties with America that seem to be completely unbreachable. But in the face of Trump’s ‘America first’ policy, those ties are feeling some strain. America first, by definition, means that America’s interests, across all sectors, get the top priority above those of all others, and even in spite of them, with heavy emphasis on the ‘spite’ part.

The manner in which Trump’s foreign policy has progressed during his tenure so far indubitably shows forth his loyalty to this program, which perceives that whatever America wants, it will get, regardless of how it impacts others, and everybody else is expected to just grin and bear it.

But that’s not how you treat your friends, and not how a partnership really works. America has a strong social and cultural policy with equality at its base in just about every human perspective and interaction, at least, insofar as the words go, but in action, it’s an ideal that is quickly losing ground on the value of actions, even at a time when equality is taking on a new emphasis in America’s cultural capital of Hollywood.

America’s foreign policy is enacting an approach that sees the world as a global chess game, and every other player is viewed as an opponent to be bested, a game where America wins at the loss of everyone else, the ‘better end of the deal’. It’s completely different from the party line that Washington has put forward for decades, where fairness, equality, and respect were put forward as motivating factors for international activities and agreements, even if, oftentimes, America still acted like it was purely out to advance its own interests. America still put on a nice face with nice words as a costume for their self interested global influence.

Today, American actions haven’t really changed all that much, in a way, but what has changed is the philosophy that it overtly advances. Now, under President Donald Trump, it brazenly tells the world that America will do and get what it wants, and everyone else must be good little boys and girls and play along, even if it means that they will lose. In Trump’s mind, it’s called ‘winning’, and in order to win, someone must lose.

Even America’s strongest allies have been reluctant to acknowledge America’s self interested global policies, because as long as they got something for it, they were okay with it. But lately, they’re not getting as much for it, if anything at all.

French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Theresa May were happy to go along with Trump’s strikes against Syria last month, as well as America’s sanctions regimen against Russia, even concocting their own reasons for taking a ‘defensive’ posture against Russia, all under the conduct of their friend and partner on the western side of the Atlantic.

Then the Iran nuclear deal came up to the chopping block. America has publicly declared that the Iran nuclear deal is not in their interests, and for that reason they will not participate, they won’t play, because it means that they won’t win, because in this deal, there are no losers.

This time, by following America’s lead, scrapping the Iran deal would not be in America’s European allies’s interests, its a game where the Europeans would be the ones on the losing end.

For that reason, Emmanuel Macron, British FM Boris Johnson, and German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, crossed the pond to plead their case and protect their interests, in hopes that Trump would respond amicably and respect them.

But once their cozy meetings were through, and they had returned home, Trump set out once again to win the game. He went full speed ahead and quit the Iran nuclear deal, regardless of, and in spite of, his European ‘partners’s interests and pleas to do otherwise.

Now, the interests of America’s European allies had not only gone up to the guillotine, without trial, but underwent the blade of ‘America first’. Now, playing the game with America, on the American side, can openly result in a European loss, and the Americans don’t care.

America here demonstrates to its allies and ‘partners’ that it has no intention of being a partner, or even a friend. There are only strategic interests, and America is behind Europe only when it suits those American strategic interests. America will be first. America will win, even if that means Europe must lose.

Europe, then, is coming to realise this new fact that the global order and global relationships are no longer based on multilateral cooperation to achieve a common goal, because between America and Europe, the goal is no longer a mutual one.

For America, the goal is America’s global hegemony at all costs. For Europe, it’s quite different. Whatever the talk about ‘shared values’ that might be coming out of lips of European leaders as they address America’s foreign posture, they are now coming to realise that the values of America and Europe are no longer congruent.

The American withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement, a multilateral agreement enjoying the commitment of each member of the United Nations Security Council, including Germany and the EU, isn’t the only divergence of perspective. America has been on a roll as of late doing things that America says are for its own interests, but which stand diametrically opposed to those of America’s European allies.

That list includes the tariffs on Chinese aluminum and steel exports, the embassy move to Jerusalem which lethally stoked the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, extraterritorial sanctions on any company doing business with Iran, which stands to adversely impact the European economy, opposition to oil and gas cooperation between some European countries and Russia, verbally slamming Germany for its participation in the NATO defense budget balance, potentially opening up a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, among others.

Those shared values, that Europe and America are supposed to uphold together, along with economic and security cooperation, are what cement the friendship and partnership between Europe and America.

America, however, is disrupting each of these with its latest actions, between a shared vision of multilateralism, perceiving political, rather than military, means of resolving conflict and establishing cooperation and prosperity, to ensuring security against potential threats, to economic cooperation. America, not Syria, Iran, Russia, or Islamic extremists, right now is making itself the single biggest threat to each of these

Following his trip to Russia to secure economic cooperation and that of the shared value of economic access to the Iranian market, the Germany Economy Minister, Peter Altmaier, declares that Germany will respond to America’s narcissistic foreign policy by defending its own interests.

The statements do three things: they demonstrate that the shared value system between America and Europe’s economic powerhouse, Germany, are quickly eroding; they demonstrate that Germany is finding some shared interests with the Russians; and they demonstrate that Germany will stand up for its own strategic interests against the overt inimical effects of America’s foreign policy.

Deutsche Welle reports:

German Economy Minister Peter Altmaier said Europe will defend its interests if the US prioritizes its own over others. He also accused Washington of wanting to block a Russia-Germany pipeline to boost its own exports.

Europe will respond firmly if the US places its own economic interests above those of others, Germany Economy Minister Peter Altmaier said on Friday.

“The US are our friends and partners, and we want to defend our common values,” Altmaier told ARD public service television.

“But if it’s America first, and they put their economic interest before others, then they have to expect Europe to define their own interests and fight for them,” he added.

Amid growing fears of a trade war, the USA under the Trump administration imposed tariffs of 25 percent on steel imports and 10 percent on aluminum in March, but gave temporary tariff waivers to the EU and several other countries. The exemptions are due to expire June 1.

Shale gas

Earlier in the interview, Altmaier also defended the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which Washington, along with many eastern European countries, would like to block. They say that by sidelining Ukraine, it gives Russia too much leverage over countries reliant on its energy sources.

Altmaier, however, attributed US opposition to its desire to increase its own shale gas exports.

“They are looking for markets, which we can understand, and they can land it here easily,” Altmaier said. “But it is much more expensive than pipeline gas, so blocking Nord Stream 2 on its own won’t guarantee exports.”

Altmaier’s comments come as German Chancellor Angela Merkel is to hold talks with her Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, that are expected to cover not only the US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal and the war in Syria, but also energy issues and the conflict in eastern Ukraine.

Shared interests and values between America and Europe are quickly diverging. America is finding that it can and will achieve its goals and strategic interests with or without its European friends, as it demonstrated last week, and even into this one.

The end goals to be accomplished, as envisioned by the Europeans and the Americans are increasingly digressing, and even opposing, whereas the number of shared interests between the Europeans and the Russians, on the other hand, are increasingly converging, whether it is a peaceful, political resolution to the conflicts going on in Syria or the Ukraine, to energy cooperation, to security interests meaning keeping a lid on nuclear proliferation and shared market accesses, to commonly battling the economic barriers that America is erecting. While Europe is discovering that it need to find its own path in the world, that path is leading farther away from America, and lining up a little closer with those on the other side of the Baltic.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
2 Comments

2
Leave a Reply

avatar
2 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
2 Comment authors
Wayne BlowLinda Wren Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Wayne Blow
Guest
Wayne Blow

America “partner and friend” of EU and Europe ??? What kind of dumb-ass “dee-pees are you f-cking brain-dead idiots on East side of Atlantic? Don’t you know how Trump and his populace refer to you stupid “dee-pees ? They openly laugh and ridicule you for being such suckers, don’t take my word for it , why not just ask Trump the liar ????

Linda Wren
Guest
Linda Wren

Sorry Merkel but you are a liar. In fact nearly all of EU are hypocrites. You go to Moscow to ask for talks with Russia then lump more sanctions onto them for Crimea? Well I hope Putin returns with same by return

Latest

May Forces Brexit Betrayal to its Crisis Point

We’re 29 months later and the U.K. is no closer to being out of the EU than the day of the vote. 

Published

on

Authored by Tom Luongo:


The only words that were left out of Theresa May’s announcement of achieving Cabinet approval over her Brexit deal were Mission Accomplished.

Theresa May was put in charge of the U.K. to betray Brexit from the beginning.  She always represented the interests of the European Union and those in British Parliament that backed remaining in the EU.

No one in British ‘high society’ wanted Brexit to pass.   No. One.

No one in Europe’s power elite wanted Brexit to pass.  No. One.

No one in the U.S.’s power elite wanted Brexit to pass.  No. One.

When it did pass The Davos Crowd began the process of sabotaging it.  The fear mongering has done nothing but intensify.  And May has done nothing but waffle back and forth, walking the political tight rope to remain in power while trying to sell EU slavery to the both sides in British Parliament.

We’re 29 months later and the U.K. is no closer to being out of the EU than the day of the vote.  Why?

Because Theresa May’s 585 page ‘deal’ is the worst of all possible outcomes.  If it passes it will leave the EU with near full control over British trade and tax policy while the British people and government have no say or vote in the matter.

It’s punishment for the people getting uppity about their future and wanting something different than what had been planned for them.

Mr. Juncker and his replacement will never have to suffer another one of Nigel Farage’s vicious farragoes detailing their venality ever again.  YouTube will get a whole lot less interesting.

It’s almost like this whole charade was designed this way.

Because it was.

May has tried to run out the clock and scare everyone into accepting a deal that is worse than the situation pre-Brexit because somehow a terrible deal is better than no deal.  But, that’s the opposite of the truth.

And she knows it.  She’s always known it but she’s gone into these negotiations like the fragile wisp of a thing she truly is.

There’s a reason I call her “The Gypsum Lady.” She’s simply the opposite of Margaret Thatcher who always knew what the EU was about and fought to her last political breath to avoid the trap the U.K. is now caught in.

The U.K. has had all of the leverage in Brexit talks but May has gone out of her way to not use any of it while the feckless and evil vampires in Europe purposefully complicate issues which are the height of irrelevancy.

She has caved on every issue to the point of further eroding what’s left of British sovereignty.  This deal leaves the U.K. at the mercy of Latvia or Greece in negotiating any trade agreement with Canada.  Because for a deal between member states to be approved, all members have to approve of it.

So, yeah, great job Mrs. May.  Mission Accomplished.  They are popping champagne corks in Brussels now.

But, this is a Brexit people can be proud of.

Orwell would be proud of Theresa May for this one.

You people are leaving.  Let the EU worry about controlling their borders.  And if Ireland doesn’t like the diktats coming from Brussels than they can decide for themselves if staying in the EU is worth the trouble.

The entire Irish border issue is simply not May’s problem to solve.  Neither is the customs union or any of the other stuff.  These are the EU’s problems.   They are the ones who don’t want the Brits to leave.

Let them figure out how they are going to trade with the U.K.  It is so obvious that this entire Brexit ‘negotiation’ is about protecting the European project as a proxy for the right of German automakers to export their cars at advantageous exchange rates to the U.K. at everyone’s expense.

Same as it was in the days of The Iron Lady.

If all of this wasn’t so predictable it would be comical.

Because the only people more useless than Theresa May are the Tories who care only about keeping their current level of the perks of office.

The biggest takeaway from this Brexit fiasco is that even more people will check out of the political system. They will see it even more clearly for what it is, an irredeemable miasma of pelf and privilege that has zero interest in protecting the rights of its citizens or the value of their labor.

It doesn’t matter if it’s voter fraud in the U.S. or a drawn out betrayal of a binding referendum. There comes a point where those not at the political fringes look behind the veil and realize changing the nameplate above the door doesn’t change the policy.

And once they realize that confidence fails and systems collapse.

Brexit was the last gasp of a dying empire to assert its national relevancy.  Even if this deal is rejected by parliament the process has sown deep divisions which will lead to the next trap and the next and the next and the next.

By then Theresa May will be a distant memory, being properly rewarded by her masters for a job very well done.


Please support the production of independent and alternative political and financial commentary by joining my Patreon and subscribing to the Gold Goats ‘n Guns Investment Newsletter for just $12/month.

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

Latest

The DOJ Is Preparing To Indict Julian Assange

Ecuador’s relationship with Assange has deteriorated considerably with the election of President Lenin Moreno.

Published

on

Via Zerohedge…


The US Justice Department is preparing to indict WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange which, after sensitive international negotiations, would likely trigger his extradition to the United States to stand trial, according to the Wall Street Journalciting people in Washington familiar with the matter.

Over the past year, U.S. prosecutors have discussed several types of charges they could potentially bring against Mr. Assange, the people said. Mr. Assange has lived in the Ecuadorean embassy in London since receiving political asylum from the South American country in 2012.

The people familiar with the case wouldn’t describe whether discussions were under way with the U.K. or Ecuador about Mr. Assange, but said they were encouraged by recent developments.

The exact charges Justice Department might pursue remain unclear, but they may involve the Espionage Act, which criminalizes the disclosure of national defense-related information. –WSJ

In short, the DOJ doesn’t appear to have a clear charge against Assange yet. Then there’s the optics of dragging Assange out of Ecuador’s London Embassy and into the United States, then prosecuting him, and if successful – jailing him.

Prosecuting someone for publishing truthful information would set a terrible and dangerous precedent,” said Assange lawyer Barry Pollack – who says he hasn’t heard anything about a US prosecution.

“We have heard nothing from authorities suggesting that a criminal case against Mr. Assange is imminent,” he added.

Moreover, assuming that even if the DOJ could mount a case, they would be required to prove that Russia was the source of a trove of emails damaging to Hillary Clinton that WikiLeaks released in the last few months of the 2016 election.

An indictment from special counsel Robert Mueller that portrayed WikiLeaks as a tool of Russian intelligence for releasing thousands of hacked Democratic emails during the 2016 presidential campaign has made it more difficult for Mr. Assange to mount a defense as a journalist. Public opinion of Mr. Assange in the U.S. has dropped since the campaign.

Prosecutors have considered publicly indicting Mr. Assange to try to trigger his removal from the embassy, the people said, because a detailed explanation of the evidence against Mr. Assange could give Ecuadorean authorities a reason to turn him over. –WSJ

It’s no secret that Assange and Hillary Clinton aren’t exactly exchanging Christmas cards, however would WikiLeaks’ release of damaging information that was hacked (or copied locally on a thumb drive by a well-meaning American), be illegal for Assange as a publisher?

Despite scant clues as to how the DOJ will prosecute Assange aside from rumors that it has to do with the Espionage Act, the US Government is cooking on something. John Demers – head of the DOJ’s national security division, said last week regarding an Assange case: “On that, I’ll just say, we’ll see.”

The U.S. hasn’t publicly commented on whether it has made, or plans to make, any extradition request. Any extradition request from the U.S. would likely go to British authorities, who have an outstanding arrest warrant for Mr. Assange related to a Swedish sexual assault case. Sweden has since dropped the probe, but the arrest warrant stands.

Any extradition and prosecution would involve multiple sensitive negotiations within the U.S. government and with other countries. –WSJ

Beginning in 2010, the Department of Justice beginning under the Obama administration has drawn a distinction between WikiLeaks and other news organizations – with former Attorney General Eric Holder insisting that Assange’s organization does not deserve the same first amendment protections during the Chelsea Manning case in which the former Army intelligence analyst was found guilty at a court-martial of leaking thousands of classified Afghan War Reports.

US officials have given mixed messages over Assange, with President Trump having said during the 2016 election “I love WikiLeaks,” only to have his former CIA Director, Mike Pompeo label WikiLeaks akin to a foreign “hostile intelligence service” and a US adversary. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions has said that Assange’s arrest is a “priority.”

Ecuador’s relationship with Assange, meanwhile, has deteriorated considerably with the election of President Lenin Moreno – who called the WikiLeaks founder a “stone in our shoe,” adding that Assange’s stay at the London embassy is unsustainable.

Ecuador has been looking to improve relations with the U.S., hosting Vice President Mike Pence in 2018 amid interest in increasing trade.

Ecuador’s Foreign Relations Ministry declined to comment. This month, Foreign Relations Minister José Valencia told a radio station the government hadn’t received an extradition request for Mr. Assange.

Mr. Assange has clashed with his Ecuadorean hosts in over internet access, visitors, his cat and other issues. Last month, he sued Ecuador over the conditions of his confinement. At a hearing last month, at which a judge rejected Mr. Assange’s claims, Mr. Assange said he expected to be forced out of the embassy soon.  –WSJ

Assange and Ecuador seem to have worked things out for the time being; with his months-long communication blackout mostly lifted (with strict rules against Assange participating in political activities that would affect Ecuador’s international relations). Assange is now allowed Wi-Fi, but has to foot the bill for his own phone calls and other communication.

In October, a judge threw out a lawsuit Assange filed against Ecuador from implementing the stricter rules,.

“Ecuador hasn’t violated the rights of anyone,” Attorney General Íñigo Salvador said after the court ruling. “It has provided asylum to Mr. Assange, and he should comply with the rules to live harmoniously inside Ecuador’s public installations in London.”Assange’s attorneys say he will appeal the ruling – however it may be a moot point if he’s dragged into a US courtroom sooner than later.

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

Latest

Trump Understands The Important Difference Between Nationalism And Globalism

President Trump’s nationalism heralds a return to the old U.S. doctrine of non-intervention.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Raheem Kassam, op-ed via The Daily Caller:


President Macron’s protests against nationalism this weekend stand in stark contrast with the words of France’s WWII resistance leader and the man who would then become president: General Charles de Gaulle.

Speaking to his men in 1913, de Gaulle reminded them:

“He who does not love his mother more than other mothers, and his fatherland more than other fatherlands, loves neither his mother nor his fatherland.”

This unquestionable invocation of nationalism reveals how far France has come in its pursuit of globalist goals, which de Gaulle described later in that same speech as the “appetite of vice.”

While this weekend the media have been sharpening their knives on Macron’s words, for use against President Trump, very few have taken the time to understand what really created the conditions for the wars of the 20th century. It was globalism’s grandfather: imperialism, not nationalism.

This appears to have been understood at least until the 1980s, though forgotten now. With historical revisionism applied to nationalism and the great wars, it is much harder to understand what President Trump means when he calls himself a “nationalist.” Though the fault is with us, not him.

Patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism: nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism … By pursuing our own interests first, with no regard to others,’ we erase the very thing that a nation holds most precious, that which gives it life and makes it great: its moral values,” President Macron declared from the pulpit of the Armistice 100 commemorations.

Had this been in reverse, there would no doubt have been shrieks of disgust aimed at Mr. Trump for “politicizing” such a somber occasion. No such shrieks for Mr. Macron, however, who languishes below 20 percent in national approval ratings in France.

With some context applied, it is remarkably easy to see how President Macron was being disingenuous.

Nationalism and patriotism are indeed distinct. But they are not opposites.

Nationalism is a philosophy of governance, or how human beings organize their affairs. Patriotism isn’t a governing philosophy. Sometimes viewed as subsidiary to the philosophy of nationalism, patriotism is better described as a form of devotion.

For all the grandstanding, Mr. Macron may as well have asserted that chicken is the opposite of hot sauce,so meaningless was the comparison.

Imperialism, we so quickly forget, was the order of the day heading into the 20th century. Humanity has known little else but empire since 2400 B.C. The advent of globalism, replete with its foreign power capitals and multi-national institutions is scarcely distinct.

Imperialism — as opposed to nationalism — seeks to impose a nation’s way of life, its currency, its traditions, its flags, its anthems, its demographics, and its rules and laws upon others wherever they may be.

Truly, President Trump’s nationalism heralds a return to the old U.S. doctrine of non-intervention, expounded by President George Washington in his farewell address of 1796:

” … It must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of [Europe’s] politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.”

It should not have to be pointed out that the great wars of the 20th century could not be considered “ordinary vicissitudes”, but rather, that imperialism had begun to run amok on the continent.

It was an imperialism rooted in nihilism, putting the totality of the state at its heart. Often using nationalism as nothing more than a method of appeal, socialism as a doctrine of governance, and Jews as a subject of derision and scapegoating.

Today’s imperialism is known as globalism.

It is what drives nations to project outward their will, usually with force; causes armies to cross borders in the hope of subjugating other human beings or the invaded nation’s natural resources; and defines a world, or region, or continent by its use of central authority and foreign capital control.

Instead of armies of soldiers, imperialists seek to dominate using armies of economists and bureaucrats. Instead of forced payments to a foreign capital, globalism figured out how to create economic reliance: first on sterling, then on the dollar, now for many on the Euro. This will soon be leapfrogged by China’s designs.

And while imperialism has served some good purposes throughout human history, it is only when grounded in something larger than man; whether that be natural law, God, or otherwise. But such things are scarcely long-lived.

While benevolent imperialism can create better conditions over a period of time, humanity’s instincts will always lean towards freedom and self-governance.

It is this fundamental distinction between the United States’ founding and that of the modern Republic of France that defines the two nations.

The people of France are “granted” their freedoms by the government, and the government creates the conditions and dictates the terms upon which those freedoms are exercised.

As Charles Kesler wrote for the Claremont Review of Books in May, “As a result, there are fewer and fewer levers by which the governed can make its consent count”.

France is the archetypal administrative state, while the United States was founded on natural law, a topic that scarcely gets enough attention anymore.

Nationalism – or nationism, if you will – therefore represents a break from the war-hungry norm of human history. Its presence in the 20th century has been rewritten and bastardized.

A nationalist has no intention of invading your country or changing your society. A nationalist cares just as much as anyone else about the plights of others around the world but believes putting one’s own country first is the way to progress. A nationalist would never seek to divide by race, gender, ethnicity, or sexual preference, or otherwise. This runs contrary to the idea of a united, contiguous nation at ease with itself.

Certainly nationalism’s could-be bastard child of chauvinism can give root to imperialistic tendencies. But if the nation can and indeed does look after its own, and says to the world around it, “these are our affairs, you may learn from them, you may seek advice, we may even assist if you so desperately need it and our affairs are in order,” then nationalism can be a great gift to the 21st century and beyond.

This is what President Trump understands.

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