Trump’s Middle East Commerce Clause – Part II
When the Commercial Rubber hits the Moral Road
President Trump returned from his triumphant Mideast tour with a clarified vision of America’s global position. Commerce, or as Calvin Coolidge said 100 years ago “the chief business of the American people is business. They are profoundly concerned with producing, buying, selling, investing and prospering in the world”, has now returned front and center in American foreign policy. But the truth is that this has always been the case. American presidents always take CEO’s on trips to finalize deals that can be attributed to the President. The difference now is that President Trump has turned to commerce as the tool not only of American policy but as the tool which will bring peace to the world. This vision is not much less utopian from the “nation building” he condemned in his Saudi Arabia speech.
The administration’s assumption is that all people want most of all to live well – as in Mar-a-Lago well. I am pretty sure that is not true in the middle east and i would even guess that most Americans are not willing to do what it takes – physically, emotionally and yes, morally, to live Mar-a-Lago well.
This “living well” assumption is one that, like can’t miss stock picking programs, works until it doesn’t. At some point, and in my opinion that point will come very soon, the correct commercial decision will come up against a moral or value based dilemma that will cause harm to American values and therefore America. There will come a point where the commercial good will be a political liability, even in the United States. This is not a call to return to nation building or a call to put human rights as understood by the human rights global apparatchiks back in the policy making recipe but rather an understanding that while commerce can bring people together (much as sports can) and give them a stake in peaceful coexistence, it does not trump (no pun intended) culture. I think that culture was at the heart of Trump’s Saudi speech although I am not sure he understands that commerce and “living well” is cross cultural.
As a matter of fact, an argument could be made that the tariff plan and the push to return manufacturing to America makes more cultural than economic sense. That tariffs are a cultural and not only an economic policy is fine. All economic policy ought to serve the citizens of the country even if it does not increase economic growth and therefore the “wealth” of the country, economically defined. The same is the case with foreign policy.
I trust that what everyone is calling the “Trump Doctrine” has a moral element to it in spite of the rhetoric of the naysayers. We will see if that is true over the coming weeks. President Trump has a way of cutting through the lies that form the basis of diplomacy in these times, and this is especially true with regards Israel. With France, UK, Spain, Canada and maybe other Western countries pushing to sanction Israel and declare a Palestinian state we will see if this administration cuts it down in spite of the support it will certainly get from the Saudis and Qataris. Will the administration push back strongly against European and Canadian self-righteousness if Saudi and Qatari contracts are threatened?
On the one hand Qatar has all but saved Boeing but on the other hand they are the money behind the Moslem Brotherhood which is opposed to the west – especially its commercial aspects - and to the other Moslem allies of the United States.
The one major positive of President Trump is that he is not locked into old cliches and doesn’t take for granted as “true” what the globalists assume is true. That the administration will push back against a European effort to abandon Israel even if it effects the “commercials” is the challenge the Trump Doctrine will face. For, if it doesn’t have a moral/value based aspect of it but assumes commerce is the be all and end all of foreign policy, then it is no less utopian than the globalist-democratic project.
Iran, Gaza and old-Europe’s push to punish the Jews for defending themselves will be the first major test of moral underpinnings of the Trump Doctrine.
Excellent points. Trading nations require trans-cultural realism. The parody of Whiggism on offer by the classical liberal and 'Austrians' won't cut it.
Trump is a realist at heart. A realist with experience selling to plutocrats from any number of countries.
Qatari money is a problem, but the Qataris depend upon their ability to sell gas and invest in productive economies. Their ability to do either is not guaranteed. Sponsoring the Ikhwan in Gaza, England or France is one thing. Doing so in the US is a vastly riskier proposition.
The Sa'udis responded to 9/11 by distancing themselves from the dangers of becoming too close to crazies. The Qataris have not followed suit since 10/7. They have taken the precaution of getting the worst of the worst out of Doha, but they remain exposed to risk.
Failing states like the UK and France are falling under hostile control. They cannot be saved. Self-interest and sanity alone ensure that powerful constituencies within the US will contest similar developments.
Re Iran, I'd be cautiously optimistic. Trump understands what is at stake. He is advised by serious people.
Do not forget that Flynn was targeted after he assembled a team of analysts from CENTCOM to review the Al Qaeda archives for evidence of engagement with the Iranians. Brennan and Rice ensured that this did not proceed. Coincidence?
Iran's strategy of reaching out to America's rivals and outright enemies on several continents speaks for itself. The prospect of a nuclear bomb in the hands of the IRGC while the mullahs become the preferred gas supplier of the EU would not sit well with Washington. A Brussels/Tehran axis is as undesirable for the US as a Berlin/Tehran would have been in the 1940s.