Althouse: "Nostalgia for the Trump-era geopolitical landscape seems entirely reasonable: Before his defeat there was no Russian invasion of Ukraine, no brutal struggle in the Holy Land..."

June 23, 2024

"Nostalgia for the Trump-era geopolitical landscape seems entirely reasonable: Before his defeat there was no Russian invasion of Ukraine, no brutal struggle in the Holy Land..."

"... and a weaker alignment of anti-American powers rather than the increasing consolidation by our rivals in Moscow and Beijing and Tehran and even Pyongyang. The Biden administration would obviously deny responsibility for these deteriorations.... But I... think that liberal investment in the idea of Biden as the great defender of the liberal international order against isolationism and reaction has made it hard for Democrats to reckon with how much more stability the American-led order seemed to enjoy under the crudely transactional machtpolitik of Trump. That contrast means that if there is a positive case for Biden’s foreign policy, it can’t just be made with rote warnings about how Trump will unravel NATO and let our enemies run roughshod — not when those enemies seem so much more aggressive under Biden than before."

Writes Ross Douthat, in "The Biden and Trump Weaknesses That Don’t Get Enough Attention" (NYT).

41 comments:

Yancey Ward said...: Are there comments on Douchehat's essay?; 6/23/24, 9:21 AM
R C Belaire said...: How many more articles like this will we see before Biden is pulled and Hell freezes over? It will be fun and instructive to watch how the DNC pulls that off...; 6/23/24, 9:24 AM
Achilles said...: Douthat and the other "Republicans" in DC ignore that Trump stopped the endless warmongering. The warmongering was just as bad under Republicans as Democrats.

The reason for all of this sturm and drang right now is that Trump has ended the false choice scenario we were stuck with and gives voters the chance to vote for a candidate that actually ends the warmongering.

The regime didn't actually indict the Bush's and Cheney's for obvious reasons. They were all on the same side.; 6/23/24, 9:28 AM
Achilles said...: R C Belaire said...

How many more articles like this will we see before Biden is pulled and Hell freezes over? It will be fun and instructive to watch how the DNC pulls that off...

Medical emergency.

Martyrdom.

You can't speak ill of the dead/elderly/sick or you are mean. This is a strong cultural moor.

This will be used to end all criticism of the Biden Regime and castigate opposition.; 6/23/24, 9:30 AM
gspencer said...: The first* debate of Trump-Biden is this Thursday evening. Earlier that day the USSC will close its 2023-2024 term, making public its opinions on all pending cases. Expected in that group is the presidential immunity case.

Depending on the Court's conclusion, one of the debaters will be scoring points, or at least trying to.

*Might be the only debate. We're all waiting to see if the American pharmacological industry is as good as it claims to be; 6/23/24, 9:31 AM
Kakistocracy said...: There was a Russian proxy war with Putin's Wagner forces in Ukraine during Trump's term in office.; 6/23/24, 9:47 AM
JaimeRoberto said...: Trump's foreign policy has been described as transactional. I'm genuinely curious what is meant by that. Doesn't every entity involved in an agreement, whether that entity is a person, a company or a country, expect to get something from it? Is that transactional? What is the alternative?

As for machtpolitik, I had to look up the definition: "a doctrine in political theory advocating the use of power and especially of physical force by a political state in the attainment of its objectives." That seems to apply more to non-Trump administrations.; 6/23/24, 10:06 AM
Drago said...: LLR-democratical Rich (Abacus Boy): "There was a Russian proxy war with Putin's Wagner forces in Ukraine during Trump's term in office."

LOL

That's all you've got?

That post Maidan in 2014 (thats Obambi/Dementia-Glitcher timeframe Rich) and Ukraine govt/Azov types in attacks against ethnic russkis in Eastern Ukraine led to guerilla pushback in Eastern Ukraine but no invasion is somehow on Trump?

Too funny.

I cant wait to see how you embarrass yourself next!; 6/23/24, 10:09 AM
Achilles said...: Rich said...

There was a Russian proxy war with Putin's Wagner forces in Ukraine during Trump's term in office.

Actually it was in the middle east in Syria. Wagner forces tried stuff. Got wiped out. Over 200 of them.

You don't end or avoid wars by talking alone. You do it mostly with actions. If you do your actions right it doesn't take very many.

The difference between Trump and the DC Regime is Trump wasn't trying to start wars. He was trying to end them.

He is just smarter than all of you idiots.; 6/23/24, 10:10 AM
Yancey Ward said...: "There was a Russian proxy war with Putin's Wagner forces in Ukraine during Trump's term in office."

And when did that proxy war in eastern Ukraine start, Rich the Liar?; 6/23/24, 10:11 AM
Eva Marie said...: The comments at the NYT are uniformly critical of Douthat.
This one was interesting:
“Biden was ill-advised to take on a reelection challenge at his age. I think if he blows the election, Trump will no longer be the most hated man in America.”
This may make Trump’s first year easier than his last first year in office. All the fury will be focused on Biden, his advisors, and the Democrat Party.; 6/23/24, 10:13 AM
pacwest said...: Anyone who reads my comments knows I am constantly touting Trump's foreign policy. There is one huge drawback to it though. For 7 decades American foreign policy has remained constant with only minor adjustment here and there. As misguided as it was on many occasions it has remained the same on its base assumptions. It has become ossified and unable to adapt. Trump came to the Presidency with a different viewpoint rooted in his experience as a businessman. A very good thing imo. It also required the rest of the world to adapt to this change, which they did fairly quickly. (See Abraham Accords) The problem is that it is a major shift from previous policy and required a long term shift in how other nations dealt with the new policies. 4 years later America shifted back to old established policies. Now, if Trump wins we get another shift. This is a real problem for any country that is nominally an ally. You can't run a country effectively when you have to keep changing your own policies with the shifting winds in America every four years. After awhile you're going to say screw it and not even try. At which point our influence on the world will dramatically decrease. A very bad thing imo.

Note that I'm not endorsing the old status quo here. I'm just saying that turning 180 degrees every 4 years leads to bad results for American leadership in the world.; 6/23/24, 10:36 AM
Hassayamper said...: As for machtpolitik, I had to look up the definition: "a doctrine in political theory advocating the use of power and especially of physical force by a political state in the attainment of its objectives." That seems to apply more to non-Trump administrations.

Sloppy, pretentious writing. Typical journalism-major horseshit.

Perhaps we can be charitable and assume he is referring not to military force, but to Trump's brazen willingness to overturn the apple cart of long-settled economic policies and treaties and international organizations in pursuit of America First goals. I'm thinking of his imposition of tariffs on China, or his renegotiation of NAFTA, which involved some browbeating and threats against the Mexicans and to a lesser extent the Canadians.; 6/23/24, 10:56 AM
doctrev said...: pacwest said...
Anyone who reads my comments knows I am constantly touting Trump's foreign policy. There is one huge drawback to it though.

Note that I'm not endorsing the old status quo here. I'm just saying that turning 180 degrees every 4 years leads to bad results for American leadership in the world.

6/23/24, 10:36 AM

There's nothing much Trump or anyone else can do about that. His work in Saudi Arabia, North Korea, and Mexico was broadly beneficial even as the mongoloids of the Biden campaign decried it. Now Saudi Arabia is dropping the petrodollar, North Korea enthusiastically backs the Russia-China axis, and the border crisis is worse than ever.

This is partly why BRICS is absolutely going to supplant globalist America, but that may be for the best.; 6/23/24, 11:00 AM
Michael K said...: I agree with pacwest above but the question is what if we have a regime that wants to lose?; 6/23/24, 11:00 AM
Political Junkie said...: Nice points, pacwest.

I wonder who DJT will go with for SOS. Will it be Pompeo? Could it be Condi? How about a young R senator that wants to burnish his/her resume? Maybe Hawley or Cotton, or a Gov (DeSantis or Kim Reynolds)?; 6/23/24, 11:01 AM
Skeptical Voter said...: Short answer to Douthat. Results matter.

As for Biden--what have you done to me lately? Actually it's a question for the Obama Lite Posse running things for Joe. As for what they've done to me--just say it's not looking good.

And PacWest has a point. But the flip flopping on policy doesn't have to occur if the US electorate comes to its senses.; 6/23/24, 11:08 AM
Hassayamper said...: There was a Russian proxy war with Putin's Wagner forces in Ukraine during Trump's term in office.

Pretty small beer indeed. I note that you don't mention the reason for that conflict. The corrupt Ukrainian government (installed by our CIA after the 2013-14 Maidan Revolution that deposed Yanukovych, and holding the best American Vice President that money could buy in their vest pocket) began attacking the ethnic Russians in the eastern provinces of Luhansk, Donetsk, and Zaporizhzhia. Putin probably would have invaded right away if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016, instead of limiting himself to a mercenary proxy war until Trump left office.; 6/23/24, 11:45 AM
n.n said...: A Summer after the Obama/Biden/Clinton et al World [Ethnic] Spring.; 6/23/24, 11:52 AM
Jupiter said...: You know, I'm guessing Ross didn't get raped on the subway on his way into work this morning. Isn't that right, Ross? You weren't raped on the subway this morning? Do you think your political priorities might be different if you had been raped on the subway this morning?; 6/23/24, 11:58 AM
Mason G said...: "Note that I'm not endorsing the old status quo here. I'm just saying that turning 180 degrees every 4 years leads to bad results for American leadership in the world."

It's not just "in the world". This flip-flopping has significant implications right here at home. How long does it take to build a new power plant or oil/gas pipeline? You can't just turn those projects on and off at the flip of an executive order.; 6/23/24, 12:09 PM
narciso said...: one strike in deir er zour, there were also two russian air bases in syria, that put putin on notice,

is it a coincidence that putin strikes under two democratic presidents, I don't think so,
did the kabul capitulation fall into his thinking,; 6/23/24, 1:38 PM
Jupiter said...: Here Ross. What he said.; 6/23/24, 1:49 PM
imTay said...: Another way to describe "transactional" is compromise and diplomacy to maintain the peace. The alternative is blind adherence to an ideological aggressiveness. Kind of like the "Brezhnev Doctrine" under the Soviets.

"did the kabul capitulation fall into his thinking,"

Blinken told Congress that his motivation for getting our troops out of Afghanistan was that they would be vulnerable to Russian retaliation, by arming up the Taliban in the same way we are arming up Ukraine, when the planned (OK, he didn't say "planned," it's just that he admitted that it was planned by revealing planning for a war with Russia figured in his thinking in what happened in Kabul.) when the planned war with Russia happened.

They were clearing the decks and making choices, and their choice was that the sacrifices of the soldiers who fought in Afghanistan would be thrown away, (one such young man, whom I met when he proudly brought his medical evac helecopter to the local elementary school,) is buried in a small cemetery by a road I sometimes walk on, and I can't walk by there without thinking how we betrayed him.; 6/23/24, 2:23 PM
imTay said...: Russia had no choice but to fight this war, as they have been saying they would do if NATO tried to expand to Ukraine, since Gorbachev and the fall of the USSR, and the reunification of Germany. The bugout at Kabul had nothing to do with it. This is all Joe Biden's obsession with trying to break up Russia and overthrow Putin.

As Margaret Thatcher once pointed out in a speech about how communism doesn't work, Russia, covering 1/6 of the land surface of the globe, is the richest country in natural resources on earth. We want to install another Yeltsin, so that the West can exploit those resources on the cheap, just as we have done in Africa for centuries. In fact this has been the dream of Western Europe for centuries. Russia, which has been invaded by the Mongols, by the Swedes, by Napoleon, and by Hitler, has no need to invade other countries. The USSR was driven by a blind ideology, as the US is today. Russia abandoned its ideology, the US will not. That would be "transactional" and somehow would be bad.

But to think that Russia, under threat by the US, would not seek powerful allies, and that China, under plain and open threat by the US as well, would not welcome the alliance, is of a childlike innocence.; 6/23/24, 2:34 PM
John said...: I had a conversation last summer with a lawyer for TransCanada (now TC Energy), the pipeline company that was building the XL pipeline that Trump had authorized, but Biden killed on day 1 by executive order. The company put about $5 billion into the project up to the point it was cancelled and is suing the US government under NAFTA. It will take forever, but there is a good chance TC will win.; 6/23/24, 4:50 PM
pacwest said...: John thats a good example. Did the lawyer say anything about them being willing to start on the pipeline again if Trump wins and oks it? I'm guessing they might be reluctant or at least have some written guarantees.; 6/23/24, 5:38 PM
Kakistocracy said...: imTay writes: "Russia had no choice but to fight this war]"....

imTay, Trump and Farage, are literally just regurgitating Russian propaganda.

I am quite surprised Russia didn't ask for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, and a chateau in France as part of his peace deal to counter NATO aggression...; 6/23/24, 6:02 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: The ability of Ross Doughnut to make a long nuanced column about the obvious is truly remarkable.

In 2016, Liberal/leftists (and mitt Romney) screeched that Trump was going to be a disaster in foreign policy, and cause WW III Or surrender to Putin or take us out of NATO or whatever.

From 2017-2020 with POTUS Trump we had peace with the world and almost nothing bad happened.

So in 2024 the liberal/leftists are screeching the same thing as in 2016, as if Trump was never POTUS for 4 years.

Of course Ross Doughnut says that in about 500 words and fuzzes up the message.; 6/23/24, 6:14 PM
Greg the Class Traitor said...: imTay said...
Russia had no choice but to fight this war,

Oh, bullshit.

NATO is already on their border, and has been ever since the Baltic States were let in. The only "threat" NATO has EVER posed to Russia is it prevent Russia from enslaving more people who have the misfortune to be on Russia's borders.

Pull your head out of your ass; 6/23/24, 6:16 PM
Greg the Class Traitor said...: imTay said...
As Margaret Thatcher once pointed out in a speech about how communism doesn't work, Russia, covering 1/6 of the land surface of the globe, is the richest country in natural resources on earth. We want to install another Yeltsin, so that the West can exploit those resources on the cheap, just as we have done in Africa for centuries.

Let me guess, you're a sophomore in college, really proud to be babbling back what idiocies your "professors" shove down your throats.

Would we rather have Russia run by someone who ISN'T a former KGB Col, perpetually at war with the West? Yes, yes we would.

Is Russia under Putin EVER going to be anything other than a source of raw materials for other, more successful, countries?

No, no it isn't. Because the Communist apparatchiks who run Russia under Putin are all technically incompetent, and unwilling to allow anyone with actual technical competence to accumulate any real power in "their" country.

So the only business that Putin and his cronies will allow to be successful, are resource extraction companies

What was Trump fighting for? Trump was fighting to convince Europe NOT to get their resources 9oil) from Russia, because of teh dependence that imposed on Europe.

It's Putin who wants Russia to be what you accuse teh West of trying to force on Russia.

Please, stop being a moron; 6/23/24, 6:23 PM
Greg the Class Traitor said...: gspencer said...
The first* debate of Trump-Biden is this Thursday evening. Earlier that day the USSC will close its 2023-2024 term, making public its opinions on all pending cases. Expected in that group is the presidential immunity case.

There's 14 cases still left to go. Some will be consolidated into single opinions, but we're looking at 10 - 12 opinions released.

Next opinion release day is Wednesday. There will be Order's released on Monday
https://www.supremecourt.gov/
The chance of every single remaining opinion being released on Wed is roughly 0%
We got 9 opinions in 2 days last week. We ar highly unlikely to get 12 opinions in 2 days this week.

So my claim is there will be opinions released Wed, Thursday, and Friday, with the Presidential Immunity released on Friday, after the debate; 6/23/24, 6:33 PM
Rusty said...: Blogger imTay said...
"Russia had no choice but to fight this war,"
Of course they did. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014. Ukraine never threatened to join NATO until Joe Biden gave Putin permission to start a wider war in Ukraine.
A curse on both their houses.; 6/23/24, 6:42 PM
n.n said...: In 2014, there was a violent Western-backed coup in Kiev, a Slavic Spring in the Obama/Biden/Clinton ethnic Spring series. The regime assaulted Crimea, depriving the people of essential resources necessary to their survival (think Clinton in Serbia). The Russians were already present in force, and cooperated with the Ukrainians to restore services. The Western-backed regimes and aligned axis progressed with ruthless determination to assault East Ukraine that resisted the assertion implied in the coup. It wasn’t until recently that Russia joined their struggle through invitation to stand against the violence carried out by Zelensky et al.; 6/23/24, 7:27 PM
imTay said...: "Of course they did. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014."

After a "color revolution" of which we have cooked up dozens worldwide, and then a plain old coup d'etat in 2014 when those. damned Ukrainians simply voted in another Russia friendly government after the first time we overthrew their government. Zelensky was elected with over 60% of the vote on a pledge of patching things up with Russia, and was simply overruled the day he took office, and from the day Biden seized power here, he has been provoking Russia.

Oh no! It wasn't us! Here we openly plot the overthrow of Putin, openly try to gin up regime change in Iran, in Syria, even in Hungary, Libya, I could go on, forget out our now hemisphere, where coups are our natural right to cause, even now we are attempting a regime change in Georgia, flooding the streets with Soros funded mobs, just like Maidan, but we would blanche at the prospect of a regime change in Kiev! Oh no! We would NEVER do a coup in Kiev! Just to get at Putin? Ha! We would NEVER do that. Right?

Lavrov, who is Russia's foreign minister, and whose official reports of meetings with western officials are blocked by internet controls, has nonetheless claimed that Binken told him, in the week leading up to the invasion, that Ukraine *was* coming into NATO, and that the US *was* going to install nuclear tipped missiles in Ukraine, five minutes flight time from Moscow.

Now you can say that Lavrov is a liar, and that Blinken never said this, but what you can't say is that it would be impossible for Blinken say this to Russia, and that it would be impossible for us to force Russia to invade Ukraine, if war with Ukraine was what we wanted.

You guys should read some history books. A good one is The Guns of August, which details all of the shenanigans leading up to WWI, and how much effort the sides put into trying to get the other side to attack first.

Language is an interesting thing, BTW, pointing out that I am explaining a point of view shared by many people is not the same thing as saying I am lying... is it Rich.

Oh, and it's none of our business how Russia handles its resources, and if they wanted to sell them cheaply to Germany, creating an economic titan to rival the US, or now, as we have laid an iron curtain across Europe, to sell them cheaply to China, creating not an economic titan, but an economic colossus, well, this is the choice we made. Geography says that we can't wall off Russia from China, Russia is the fourth largest economy in the world, per the IMF, bigger than Japan, and China is half again larger than the US, if you measure GDP by what the citizens of each country can buy with their dollars, or rubles, or yuan.

Biden screwed up, and a more "transactional" approach to both Russia and China would have as a lot further from the brink of nuclear war than we currently sit. The opposite of "transactional" is what? Moral? What is morality but ideology? Are we morally superior to the Russians and the Chinese? If so, does this mean that we are honor bound to humiliate them in war? Well, history is full of empires who finally collapse due to hubris, the USSR being only one example.; 6/23/24, 8:23 PM
pacwest said...: transactional = we get something you get something. After that it's a just haggling over the price.; 6/23/24, 10:19 PM
imTay said...: "After that it's a just haggling over the price."

Diplomacy.; 6/24/24, 5:42 AM
Rusty said...: The war in Ukraine is a matter of ego to the ruler of Russia. It is a matter of a fabulous amount of graft for Ukraine. Of course its a source for graft for those western countries that are supplying Ukraine. Those NGOs don't come cheap.; 6/24/24, 6:49 AM
Greg the Class Traitor said...: Blogger imTay said...
"Of course they did. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014."

After a "color revolution" of which we have cooked up dozens worldwide, and then a plain old coup d'etat in 2014 when those. damned Ukrainians simply voted in another Russia friendly government after the first time we overthrew their government. Zelensky was elected with over 60% of the vote on a pledge of patching things up with Russia, and was simply overruled the day he took office, and from the day Biden seized power here, he has been provoking Russia.

You are so completely full of shit.

News flash: no one in Ukraine wanted to be bound to Russia, which is what teh guy the Ukrainian people tossed out was trying to force.

Which is why the Ukrainian Parliament voted massively against his plan to do so.

Stop being Putin's toady. Stop being a pathetic useful idiot who believes lies from a Communist KGB Col about how religious he is. He's playing you, and you're a moron; 6/24/24, 10:14 AM
imTay said...: "News flash"

Yeah, I have heard the talking points of the scrupulously honest Biden Administration.

The simple fact is after the first color revolution we fomented in Ukraine, the "Orange Revolution" the Ukrainians quickly voted in another Russia friendly government. This is not up for debate. This is the government that was overthrown in a coup in 2014.

It is also not up for debate that Zelensky ran on a platform of patching up relations with Russia, and was quickly overruled, and sent his military on an "anti-terrorist" operation, you know, using heavy artillery, to try to end the resistance to the 2014 coup, that was still happening there. It was a *civil war* which happened because about 20% of Ukrainians completely rejected the new government installed by coup.

"no one in Ukraine wanted to be bound to Russia"

Almost 3/4 of the Ukrainian Navy defected to Russia in 2014 when Russia took over Crimea, there is no insurgency there. The insurgency against the 2014 Maidan coup had been going on for eight years at the time of the invasion. This indicates that there *were*, in fact, people in Ukraine who were perfectly content to be bound to Russia. These militias had no problems recruiting soldiers and operating among the population, which, if your statement were true, would have been extremely difficult.

This civil war is none of our business, and believing the fairy tales that the Biden Admin is telling us is not in the best interests of the United States, what is in the best interest of the United States is a clear eyed examination of the truth.; 6/24/24, 3:20 PM
Tim said...: "Biden screwed up", so a day ending in"Y". It is his superpower.; 6/24/24, 5:54 PM