Trump shouldn't let himself be manipulated by agenda-driven cronies
By: Rachel Marsden
PARIS -- Despite his generally good instincts, U.S. President Donald Trump is
proving that his biggest weakness is on the foreign affairs front, an area where
his background is lacking. This forces him to rely on unelected advisers, many
of whom seem to be peddling their own agendas.
Take, for instance, the speech that National Security Adviser John Bolton gave
to the Federalist Society earlier this month. Bolton seemed to be
virtue-signaling Israel by announcing that America was closing the Palestinian
mission in Washington, and by threatening the International Criminal Court with
sanctions if it pursued investigations of America or Israel for war crimes. It's
hard to imagine either of these things being at the top of the average
American's foreign policy priority list.
I met Bolton when he was in Paris a few years ago for a Friends of Israel event,
and he has addressed the exiled Iranian opposition, whose main base is in Paris.
I have also heard from a number of financiers, lobbyists and former generals who
have passed through town on various agenda-peddling roadshows. One American
general invited me to an Iranian opposition rally, suggesting that attending
would be the patriotic thing to do. I declined.
The general's political pickup line made little sense to me. How exactly does
messing around in Iran -- or anywhere else in the Middle East, for that matter
-- translate into a patriotic endeavor? Sure, it's understandable why America
and its allies invaded Afghanistan in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist
attacks. The architect of those attacks, Saudi national Osama bin Laden , was
being sheltered by the Taliban in Afghanistan. The mission was originally
limited to neutralizing the Taliban. That should have been the end of America's
involvement in Afghanistan. Instead, the mission has since been redefined as
"nation-building"
It's absurd to reason that America can't leave because terrorism would flourish.
When was the last time a Taliban member committed an act of terrorism in
America, Europe or in any other Western nation? The only threat the Taliban
poses is to armed foreigners who insist on staying in Afghanistan -- and after
17 years, the continued U.S. presence in Afghanistan could legitimately be
characterized as an occupation.
Trump really doesn't have to deal with Afghanistan at all if he doesn't want to.
He just has to declare a belated victory and leave. It's as simple as that.
Osama bin Laden is dead . Mission accomplished. If American companies want to
pursue business opportunities on the wild Afghan frontier, they should do it on
their own. The U.S. government could offer tax breaks to these companies to
encourage business development and to offset the costs of venturing into the
unknown -- just as Elon Musk's SpaceX gets government subsidies for blasting
homemade rockets into space.
If the U.S. government was really concerned about terrorism, it should have
started by sanctioning Saudi Arabia based on the fact that 15 of the 19
hijackers in the 9/11 attacks were Saudis. It also could have sanctioned Saudi
Arabia for supporting the Islamic State, which committed terrorist attacks
inside Western nations. But the Saudis won't be sanctioned because they buy
American weapons. So does their regional ally, Israel. Both nations do as much
string-pulling in the Middle East as does America's perennial whipping boy,
Iran.
Why is America even still involved in the region at all, particularly when it
stands on the verge of total energy independence from the Middle East?
The fact that the U.S. still has a presence in Afghanistan can only mean one
thing: Trump actually believes what his advisers are whispering in his ear.
These people have their own agendas, seeking personal profit or patronage
payback while they wrap themselves in the American flag.
COPYRIGHT 2018 RACHEL MARSDEN