Kelly Sloan
My handful of regular readers will know it is something of a tradition for my last column of the year to be a tour of the world scene. The event of President Jimmy Carter’s passing last week overtook that slot, so I offer it now.
My periodic forays into international events vex my extraordinarily patient editors somewhat, who point out, quite reasonably, the name of this publication is Colorado Politics; my retort is generally along the same lines with which I counter my isolationist friends, left and right — look, I say, in the age of aircraft, satellites and the internet, foreign affairs suddenly become much more local. Besides, most political arguments, at any level, are economic in nature, and ours is wedded strongly to global trade. And if those arguments fail, I just feebly mutter something about all the military bases we have here. In any case, with the legislative session having just kicked off yesterday, and Elisabeth Epps no longer there, there hasn’t been enough time for anything too terribly dramatic to materialize, or to give it proper analytic treatment if it does. So, here we go…
In fact, the news which greeted the new year did a tragic job of conflating the foreign and local. The terror attack in New Orleans was carried out with, at the very least, ideological sympathy with overseas terrorist organizations. The concurrent event in Las Vegas, which for all the world appeared at least tangentially connected, turned out to be the particularly bloody and ostentatious suicide of a young soldier from Colorado Springs, precipitated (it appears) by mental health issues, likely catalyzed in the course of the young man’s execution of American foreign policy.
Stay up to speed: Sign up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday
The single most significant event influencing global interrelations was the election of Donald Trump. The U.S. remains the predominant power on the planet, and, accordingly, changes in U.S. policy direction exert a kind of gravitational pull. Closest to home that pull is being felt, at least rhetorically, in Canada, Panama and Denmark (which owns Greenland). Trump’s hectoring of outgoing Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (who’s departure is particularly welcome news north of the border) by suggesting Canada become the 51st State is, of course, unserious. There is little chance (threat?) of Canada being absorbed into the Republic; His Majesty remains unconcerned. Greenland and Panama are a little more interesting (Greenland rather more so). Many of the reasons for the Panama Canal Treaty of 1978 remain valid, and military intervention there, beyond simply defending the canal from an aggressor, would be a mistake. Cuba and Venezuela are bigger concerns in that region. As for Greenland, it’s been on the table before, and Trump has a point about its strategic value. It would be a delicate diplomatic act for a president unaccustomed to delicacy, but observers would be wise to take the President-elect seriously on this front.
In Europe, the Russian war in Ukraine remains the central event. Again, all eyes are on President Trump and what he might do — i.e. will he reduce American military support for Kiev, and, at least as importantly, what is he willing to give up for a peace deal? He has been cultivating a quasi-isolationist approach to Europe; on the other hand, he probably doesn’t want to be the president responsible for exposing the West’s belly. A weakened Russia is in America’s interest.
Last week, the final remaining conduit for Russian natural gas to Europe was closed, ironically a pipeline traversing Ukraine, the use deal for which the Ukrainians — obviously — refused to renew. This has minimal impact on Europe — everyone expected it, and after the initial gas shock following the invasion, the Europeans figured out how to get their gas from elsewhere — but it still represents an opportunity for the U.S. and the new administration in LNG exports.
Support for Ukraine remains essential, and, as a practical matter, a great deal will have to come from the U.S, but Trump is not unreasonable in his insistence it cannot all come from Uncle Sam. One potential benefit of Trump’s election and his brashness toward our allies could be enticing them to spend appropriately on defense. Ironically, Trump’s demagogic bluster against NATO could end up being the thing to salvage it.
The effect already seems to be working in other corners. French President Emmanuel Macron, for instance, appears to have suddenly been blessed with clarity concerning Iran’s nuclear ambitions, warning his diplomats Tehran is nearing the critical point in obtaining the bomb, and calling for harsher sanctions to prevent that from happening.
And finally, eyes eventually, reluctantly, turn toward East Asia. Communist China’s continued threats against Taiwan are the focal point there, and, not unlike Eastern Europe, there is a bit of unease as everyone wonders what Trump will do. The security implications for America in abandoning Taiwan are even more serious than the moral ones, which are enormous.
So, everyone is waiting for the cards to fall into place. Responsibility is not born entirely by the incoming administration, of course; Congress has its roles to play, and among the first must be a serious, concerted effort to rebuild, re-fund, and re-arm our military — a significant chunk of which is based in Colorado.
Kelly Sloan is a political and public affairs consultant and a recovering journalist based in Denver.
Author :
Publish date : 2025-01-08 18:44:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
Author : theamericannews
Publish date : 2025-01-09 08:01:18
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.