If someone told you the following clip was from the Trump administration, would you doubt it? Unfortunately, it’s from last week.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDSS3JJNDh0&t=24s
This isn’t an isolated incident. Check out what the Biden administration is committing in Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela (especially Venezuela). It’s like the mob of crazy right wingers that stormed the Capitol took over the State Department instead. No sign of the guy in horns and a bearskin, but I wouldn’t bet against him being the next State Department spokesperson.
Please share widely!
This issue is really stuck in your craw, isn’t it? In this particular clip I would have liked more context and for the reporter to stop sounding like a broken record and let the spokesman finish his answer.
“This issue is really stuck in your craw, isn’t it? ” I confess, apartheid bothers me.
And your generous use of the word apartheid bothers me.
I see nothing wrong in this clip. If someone told me this was from the Trump administration, I would just laugh. The Trump administration would not have held a press conference. The Trump administration would not have a spokesperson attempting to answer an aggressive questioner politely. The Trump administration would never have advocated a two-state solution (it worked aggressively to sabotage that approach).
The spokesperson was answering truthfully and on-message, even though the questioner didn’t like it (and apparently neither did bob-gardner).
I see nothing remotely comparable between this press conference and the insurrectionist mob. Nothing at all.
1) So the answer to the question “where should the Palestinians go for redress?” is what?
2) Do you see anything Trumpean about responding to the Egyptian government’s targeting of the families of U.S. citizens by selling them $200 million of weapons?
3) Do you see anything Trumpean about giving MBS a free pass for murdering a permanent resident of the US?
4) Do you see anything Trumpean about ignoring election results and referring to Juan Guaido as “Interim President” of Venezuela?
Nothing at all?
Q1: So the answer to the question “where should the Palestinians go for redress?” is what?
A1: The Palestinians still do not have a place to go for redress, after more than 50 years of failed US diplomatic efforts. The Biden administration is doing all in its power to correct that problem — in stark contrast to the prior administration. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton each famously tried to solve that issue and each failed. Neither is remotely like Donald Trump.
The answer to your other three questions is “No, there is nothing Trumpian about any of these”.
The current administration has not promised to be perfect. I don’t know anything about your Q2. I join you in being disappointed that our response to MBS is not stronger. I don’t know what our stance should be towards the military dictatorship that has taken over in Venezuela. Mr. Trump buried the official report about MBS, while Mr. Biden publicly released it.
Germany has had several leaders after Adolf Hitler. None of those was perfect. That does not mean that any of those were remotely comparable to Herr Hitler.
So — no, I do not see anything at all Trumpian about Joe Biden and his administration.
“Justice is indivisible” M.L. King at the United Nations
“I see nothing!” Sergeant Schultz on Hogan’s Heroes.
You really see nothing Trumpean about selling arms to a dictator who is targeting the families of American citizens, Tom?
Are you really unable to distinguish Joe Biden from Donald Trump, Bob?
In too many cases, it’s a distinction without a difference, such as in Egypt or in Venezuela.
I suggest that if you or any of your loved ones were, for example, an immigrant or minority then the difference would be very stark indeed.
Your comment has the scent of white privilege.
Interesting pivot, from your being uncomfortable with the term “apartheid” to accusing me of “white privilege”.
You’re confusing the commentary of Christopher and me regarding apartheid.
Your commentary suggests that the suffering and abuse that Donald Trump has been inflicting on immigrants and minorities since 2016 is of no interest to you in comparison to the suffering of those in Israel, Egypt and Venezuela — suffering that by your own admission transcends any one administration.
I’m not sure that Israel, Egypt or Venezuela instituted explicit policies ripping babies from nursing mothers or building cages for their unfortunate victims.
By your benchmark, there is no difference between Donald Trump and any President since the creation of Israel in 1947.
If you want to double-down and dig in on that absurd outcome then feel free — it certainly helps the rest of us clarify your values and priorities.
What does anything I said have to do with immigration?
Have you even noticed the relentless four-year rampage that Donald Trump waged against immigrants?
You’re attempting to defend your absurd contention that the distinction between Donald Trump and Joe Biden is “a distinction without a difference”.
Is it so very hard to just admit that you’ve overstated your case?
Tom, you’re talking gibberish.
I stand by all the criticisms I made in my post.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/03/08/blinken-blinks-on-human-rights/
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/16/politics/mohamed-soltan-relatives-arrested-egypt/index.html
https://www.democracynow.org/2021/2/18/headlines/us_approves_200_million_in_arms_sales_to_egypt_amid_human_rights_concerns
You’re being silly on such a scale and with such misplaced passion that I’m not even sure I can characterize what you’re argument is. You seem to be saying that I should change the subject of my post to an issue I haven’t raised, and because I’m not posting about immigration I must be on the wrong side of that issue.
I’m not sure what triggered you, but it’s obvious something did.
You now claim that the four-year animus of the Donald Trump administration towards immigrants is “gibberish”?
You’re just gas-lighting us now.
Immigration has nothing to do with the valid foreign policy critiques Bob is making about Biden and I think you know that. Biden can be better than Trump on a host of issues and just as bad as him on the Middle East. Frankly the only interesting thing about Trump was his non-interventionist streak and he quickly eroded that to become just another president differing to the blob on endless occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, endless drone strikes, endless interventions in Syria, and endless blank checks to the Saudis and Israelis.
Here is an example what I’m responding to:
Bob is not making foreign policy critiques, he is asserting that Joe Biden is indistinguishable from Donald Trump.
I oppose ANY continued US support for Israel while Mr. Netanyahu remains in power. I enthusiastically agree that we should impose severe sanctions against MBS. I understand that it means essentially severing US ties to the Saudis and I suspect that is ultimately for the best. I don’t know enough about the situation in Egypt to express an opinion about it.
I utterly reject the assertion that because Joe Biden has not established a Palestinian state and severed ties with the Saudis within his first 100 days in office, Joe Biden is indistinguishable from Donald Trump.
That claim, like the above quote, is hysterical nonsense.
I agree the above quote is needlessly hyperbolic but I also think there’s a lot of substance in Bob’s argument that’s valid. If you oppose Netenyahu and MBS then you should also be disappointed in Biden who seems to be benignly neglecting the former and slapping the latter on the wrist. I agree there’s more time to assess this going forward and he seems rightly preoccupied with the pandemic to give foreign policy too much attention, but I hoped by 2024 we could point to a different four years than the previous four in every direction and it would be a shame if this continues to be the same policy with a different president spinning it.
I think the bigger question is whether or not you agree with Bidens policies on these three countries. They seem awfully close to his predecessors from both parties, and I think they are deeply misguided.
I disagree with Mr. Biden’s approach to these three countries, as I have disagreed with pretty much every administration in my adult lifetime. In my view, our continued support of Israel combined with our generations-long dependence on cheap foreign oil, has poisoned the well in the ME for decades to come.
Having said that, I categorically reject the premise that someone whom I disagree with is indistinguishable from Donald Trump.
I think we need something like a “Trump Corollary” to Godwin’s Law.
I think the issue was saying there’s no distinction between them more generally which invited Tom’s rebuttal on immigration. I think the narrower and more accurate critique is that Biden is no better than Trump about holding Saudi Arabia, Egypt, or Israel accountable for their human rights abuses. I think that narrower critique is accurate. Even centrists like Nicholas Kristoff are outraged at Biden’s about face on MBS. Probably the most disappointing thing he’s done in his presidency so far. I also see him approaching Bibi with benign neglect. He’s not fawning over him like Trump did, but he’s also not really holding him accountable in any way.
We have not had a president seriously take on the Israelis regarding the peace process since President Clinton. Frankly George W Bush had a better record than Obama and then Obama looks good in comparison to Trump who gave away all of our bargaining chips from freeing Pollard to the Jerusalem embassy. In exchange for literally nothing. That’s the status quo Biden is coming into and doing little to alter. Saudi Arabia is still getting A grade weaponry from our defense contractors to kill Yemenese civilians and keep their own people in line. The only difference is we are now politely asking them not to do the former, without any real enforcement leverage, and ignoring the latter entirely. This will breed another generation of disillusioned Muslim males without jobs or political agency who will lash out against the West who inevitably will need to battle another generation of our young people.. One wonders if this situation suits the contractors just fine.
It’s a distinction without a difference on Egypt, Venezuela, and MBS. I think that is a fair criticism to make. The only thing I’d quibble with Bob about is “too many cases”. I think saying that gave you an open to pound the table on immigration, but you and I both know he was talking more narrowly about the problematic parts of American foreign policy that never change between administrations of either party. Ben Rhodes called this the “Blob” in his excellent book on Obama’s foreign policy. I mean it took eight administrations to finally admit that sanctions against Cuba weren’t working and then that change got immediately reversed. Ditto the Iran deal which was going to be pretty hard to restore without Biden bombing Iranian backed militias in Syria without cause or Congressional authorization.
I do appreciate Biden putting the drone policy in review and taking steps to end the 20 year old AUMF we are operating under for a newer and hopefully more narrow one. I like Blinken and Austin, I just think he can do much better than Trump on holding the Saudis, Egyptians, and Israeli’s accountable. So far he is not, and it’s more than fair to call him out for that.
I have no issue with calling out Mr. Biden on any or all of these issues. That’s entirely different from asserting that he is indistinguishable from Donald Trump.
I’m quite sure that pretty much every German could find at least one substantive issue on which they disagree with a policy of Angela Merkel.
I hope that civilized people categorically reject a claim that Ms. Merkel is therefore indistinguishable from Adolf Hitler.
Um, I could have sworn the Biden administration finally placed blame squarely at MBS’s feet, something Trump refused to do.
Saudi critics say Biden refusal to sanction MBS puts them in danger (insider.com)
I was going to make a list of these articles, Christopher, but there are literally too many to count.
But by all means, stare of into space and say “Um” It must feel good.
I agree with Kristoff that Biden is dead wrong on how he is treating MBS and this is a well documented broken promise. My Muslim students are outraged and already losing faith in this administration. I have not, I’m actually pleasantly surprised by his sticking to his guns on the full package. I’m even cautiously optimistic about the 22’ midterms, but sticking with the Saudis is not a smart long term foreign policy.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/26/opinion/sunday/saudi-arabia-biden-khashoggi.amp.html
Two things can be simultaneously true. Biden can be a substantially better president than Trump and still be just as bad on Saudi Arabia. Every single president since FDR has been a Saudi lapdog, it’s time to stop. Particularly since we get little oil from them. At this point the special relationship is really to help the second biggest client of our defense contractors. I’m beginning to wonder if our relationship to the first client is predicated on the same basis.
At least we get something out of Egypt, mainly regional security and stability. We get nothing from the Saudis who undermined our Iran deal and continue to undermine our image abroad with their hypocrisy in the Muslim world. If we had not backed them in 90’ and 91’, there would likely be nothing for Osama bin Laden to get angry about.
Let’s also not forget where the hijackers came from and what little Saudi intelligence did to warn us about them. Just like British intelligence allowed Pearl Harbor to happen, so did Saudi intelligence for 9/11. They’ve used our soldiers to remove one regional rival and are trying to use them again to remove another. I won’t let another American die in a Saudi enabled war. Neither should President Biden.
The challenge is that weakening the Saud’s could lead to an even worse group in power. That is the general knot of all foreign policy. From they frying pan and into the fire. I wonder what the world was thinking when we had Trump in charge.
It has long been my contention that US policy should be to promote free and fair elections and live with the results regardless of our preferred outcome. I think a large part of “why they hate us” is because we preach freedom and democracy, but prop up illiberal regimes when it suits our interests.
I agree. We must never surrender to hypocrisy. If we do, then how can we expect others not to?
Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be much high ground occupied in our domestic politics. Trump killed 5 people on Jan 6, they just weren’t targeted. He was acquitted when a guilty finding would have been only a minor penalty.
The sad fact is that America has always had two systems of justice, where the rich, powerful and popular are never punished.
Pretty much. This backfired badly in Egypt and it’s doubtful the Brotherhood was capable of breaking the peace with Israel. The real reason they got removed is they were going to end the gravy train that the Egyptian army enjoys from monopolizing so many sectors of the Egyptian economy. They were ironically neoliberal Islamists who might’ve been better partners for American firms seeking to compete on an equal basis with the army.
The exact same thing just played out in Myanmar. Aung San Suu Kyi disgraced herself by being a handmaiden to genocide to stay in the generals good graces but as soon as she wanted to touch one generals gravy train he took her out. Sec, Blinken condemned these actions, but I still see no sanctions to back those condemnations up. She was a figurehead to justify the regime and make it palatable to Western business, and even though she’s been removed, the corporations seem there to stay. That’s the “no different from Trump” standard Bob is right to call out. Our foreign policy still seems directly tied to the primal needs of American multinationals rather than the actual values and interests of the country.
I enthusiastically agree.
Having said that, I think it is clear to anyone who will admit it that the immediate result will be:
While I think these are an acceptable price to pay ( think this is the inevitable result anyway), most Americans disagree.
I’m not so sure about #1. I think all parties in the region, including the Palestinian Authority, have given up on a real Palestinian state and are really lowering their sights to lifting the blockades and checkpoints to ensure economic activity. I actually think Kushner’s proposal with the UAE is a viable starting point in the short term, just give the Palestinians a ton of money and lift them out of poverty where they are and hope for the best. I do think the annexation happy Israeli right is an impediment to this since they would seize even more land. The goalposts have really moved to the right on all fronts and I think preventing that outcome is more important than statehood at this point. The Israeli right played the long game well in terms of preventing a state, but they will be stuck paying for the Palestinian welfare rolls and infrastructure improvements needed to keep the Bantustans of Gaza and the West Bank afloat without provoking violence or international sanction.
2. I think most American voters in all parties would welcome this, it’s the donor class in both parties that would view this as a defeat.
3. I think the agreement worked and if we can go back to it cleanly it can work again. Bidens problem is he is asking the Iranians to give up more to get back to the previous status quo, and they have no reason to do that, especially with the other parties maintaining the agreement. The US lost any leverage it had the day we pulled out, so if Biden is seriously about resuming the deal he should drop all the BS about liberalizing the regime and focus narrowly on keeping it free of nukes like Obama and Kerry successfully negotiated.
I believe we should be prepared to push back against #1. I have no problem being Israel’s friend, but friends also tell friends when they are screwing up. #2 may ultimately be negotiable if the very fact of us letting them determine their own fate serves to ultimately dampen opposition to us. As for #3 I can understand why that makes people nervous, but as a nuclear power ourselves I’ve always found it incredibly hypocritical to try to tell other countries they can’t be one.
I think the bigger short term concern is that they will just buy Russian and French weaponry or get closer to China. To which I say good riddance and God bless. We can make a separate peace with Iran and draw them to the West instead. That was Obama’s long term move that would’ve paid off handsomely. He also achieved energy independence and both the US and China are racing to get off carbon entirely by mid century.
So we don’t need Saudi oil anymore and I would argue we would win the soft power war we are presently losing to China if we ditched our hypocritical self-aggrandizement and empowered ordinary Arabs to control their own destiny. If they vote in Islamists so be it, as long as they don’t threaten the US or our partners we can do business with them. We would have far more credibility holding Assad accountable if we stopped bankrolling the butchers of Yemen and Khashoggi.
The idea that their hold on power is as tenuous as Mubarak’s is quite laughable. Also at the end of the day I’d rather sincere theocrats who at least express the will of the populace and leave the region alone over hypocritical oilmen who bankroll hijackers, suicide bombers, and Whabbism to keep their people of their backs. It’s a lot less likely empowering folks like the Muslim Brotherhood would lead to attacks against the United States than some already bankrolled by our supposed allies.
I tend to agree about our relationship with SA, which is why this is one of my favorite mic drops from The West Wing.
However, there has to be a better way to make Bob’s point. I get defensive quickly over a Trump comparison.
Again I think the comparison is accurate when it comes to these narrow lanes of intersection. It’s like saying Eisenhower was no difference from Hitler when it came to highway construction. That is an accurate statement and it would be inaccurate for anyone to cherry pick the middle part and say I’m calling America’s most renowned Nazi fighter a Nazi.
Nobody interested in any sort of civil or constructive exchange would make such a statement.
I think there is a broader problem of “meet the old boss, same as the new boss” when it comes to national security and foreign policy. The 9/11 AUMF has survived four administrations now, Gitmo is going to be old enough to drink before it’s closed, Patriot Act is still on the books and will probably be strengthened to some degree to deal with domestic terrorism after Jan 6, and our “special relationships” with some nefarious regimes is continuing despite the new administration.
Ah yes, the Autobahn – “Adolf Hitler’s one and only good idea.”