On Point: In Praise of Trump Administration Transactional Diplomacy

[Valin]

Strategy Page

Austin Bay

January 5, 2021

Until the Trump administration began its experiment in 21st-century American transactional diplomacy, "intractable international problems" dismayed, vexed and bamboozled establishment diplomats, whether they hailed from Washington's Beltway morass, U.N. agencies or cachet townhouses in European capitals.

I specify American transactional diplomacy -- meaning negotiating and then concluding two-way deals (bilateral agreements, in diplo-speak) that demonstrably benefit two antagonistic nations. The payoff of conflict and creating peace level: The deal diminishes their level of mutual antagonism, promotes kinder words and opens opportunities for wealth-creating interaction.

Aside to open-minded readers: "American" indicates the two-way deal was brokered by the U.S. as a third party. American means U.S. power and prestige explicitly support the agreement. It means American DIME power -- American Diplomatic, Intelligence/Information, Military and Economic power -- adds steel to the deal.

Note I translate common-sense terms into diplo-speak so elite media types will understand it.

(Snip)

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

This end Jan. 20 2021 around 2:07 pm.

[Valin]

The Swamp Returns to Washington

Dr. Alex Joffe

January 5, 2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The incoming Biden administration has begun to appoint personnel and articulate policies, both directly and through the extended voice of the foreign policy establishment and the media. The return of second-tier Obama administration personnel and the marginalization of left-wing progressives portends a return to the process-laden policies of the past. International agreements and institutions, and a return to 20th century “rules” and “norms”, are unlikely to be adequate to confront rogue states like China and Iran.

(Snip)

On the other hand, some progressives keep asking why Iran and even China should be “contained” at all. More tempered is a strand of progressive left thinking that actually echoes certain Trump policies (albeit with minimal attribution), particularly in questioning continued US involvement in Afghanistan, Syria, and Iraq, and promoting the idea that regional powers police their own interests. Implicit in this is a critique of American involvement in every hemisphere. It also illustrates the contrast (and convergence) of left-wing and right-wing critiques: one attacks American “hyperpuissance” (as it was labeled in post-Cold War Europe) in favor of multipolarity and is regarded politely, while the other is dismissed as “isolationism.”

(Snip)

But the fact that reviled outsiders led by an erratic and crude individual, working on the basis of intuition alone, produced no new wars, negotiated several peace and trade agreements, and began to reorient the US and its allies from a rhetorical to a real opposition to China—all while producing record economic growth—should not be forgotten. For the establishment, especially the foreign policy swamp, these results were produced by the wrong people in the wrong way.

Now, with the band back together and bipartisan comity reestablished in Washington and across the Atlantic, the future remains to be seen. The institutions of global diplomacy will be reinvigorated, as will the media and academic organs that are vital to the manufacturing of consent. So too will the oligarchies dedicated to profiting from the monopolization of global information, finance, commerce, and “green” energy, all well represented in Biden’s administration.

Whether these class structures, built atop crumbling foundations, will benefit American citizens or, indeed, citizens of any country, as opposed to those who exist above and beyond them, is far more uncertain.

[Valin]