Democrats assume that common sense will guide its citizens in the public realm. The assumption that the common man" is rational and thus fit to make decisions -and to bear the price of his errors- is not invalidated by current experience. The rise of what our vanguard" labels as populism" testifies to that -and worries our elites that are stunned by the reassertion of popular sovereignty.
The growing cleavage that separates those that are led by common sense and the devotees of elitist speculations is a crucial theme.
As reported the European Union is extremely worried" by the blows which Iran through proxies- and Israel in response land on each other. Due to liberalism-induced weakness the blame is equally divided. The resulting cop-out makes Trumps move of the US embassy to Jerusalem and the urging to renegotiate the nuclear limitation agreement with Iran into a sign that the end of the world is upon us.
We get the usual mixture of worn-out wisdoms that blame the victim while we are urged to condemn Trumps drive for a correction. Those that equal what is unequal plead that doing nothing after being struck is proof of statesmanship. Meanwhile Europe is unwilling to protect herself from millions of assertive migrants and humors the powers that have their missiles directed at it. This makes not noticing" into a virtue. History seems to repeat itself as the earlier never again" pledge is ignored.
Lamentations about the Near East are linked to Trumps handling of the Korean nuclear crisis. Let us face it; the news that Pyongyang is willing to discuss her nuclear projects came as a surprise to sophisticated expert circles. The more so as we know" that sanctions do not work". (That creates a dilemma. If sanctions fail and if military countermoves are unthinkable" furthermore if resistance strengthens their extremist" then the only option left is to surrender by inaction.)
Now Kim is vaguely offering his once non-negotiable" nukes for a deal". He also seems prepared to bolster the security of his regime by an agreement with the US South Korea Japan endorsed by Russia and China. That is broad and impressive; however it is still only a promise that is not backed by the Norths national means.
If the national interest would have priority over ideology-fed fantasies the perspective regarding Korea would elicit joy. The more so as earlier during the ping-pong of shrill exchanges Armageddon was predicted for which Trump was blamed. With a resolution in sight the left has downgraded Korea from a whirlwind to a breeze. Meanwhile a second line of defense of pretenses and hopes is being organized.
Even if Trumps tactics might work the interests of the country and global peace are subordinated to a paramount objective; deny Trump a triumph. The current packaging of the matter is that the outcome of the Trump Kim summit is unclear. All possible issues that could make the train derail are brought up in the hope that they will make failure materialize.
The earlier controversy caused by illegal nuclear and strategic missile tests put into the context of Americas destruction had served as an indicator that Trumps unbending stance menaces mankinds survival. Therefore the thinning of the clouds and the thunders softening should have been greeted with joy. Even the efficacy of a doubted hard-line tactic could have been extended appreciation. None of this has happened and the disappointment over the avoided crash is hard to overhear. The conclusion: Claimed humanitarian interests are subordinated to the principal goal of disqualifying the President. Obviously the insiders consensus is that Trump is more dangerous than any nuclear explosion.
Guided by that certainty and in the service of a noble cause all is undertaken to defeat Trump globally in order to score a domestic victory.
Alerted by the positive atmospherics preceding the Singapore summit the lefts artillery concentrates on shaking Kims trust in any agreement that he can have.
To do that limping analogies and the distorted rendition of the news are enlisted. The line taken connects the Iran agreement with the coming Korean deal. Kim is being told that Pyongyang will suffer Tehrans fate. Once the agreement is implemented Washington will declare it to be void and then exert pressure on the denuclearized and therefore defenseless country to bend to its will.
One is hard-put not to bring up the patriotic aspects of the spoiler role that certain circles" play to undermine the chances of a major settlement. Peace after sixty years the controlled reversal of globally threatening high-level nuclear proliferation and the re-entry of an isolated regime into the society of nations is no trifle. The price the success of hated Trump would appear not to be too high to any un-inebriated practitioner of anything resembling Realpolitik".
Trying to dissuade a by its nature suspicious regime from seeing in negotiations a possible solution is not a play with a common fire but amounts to shaking a bomb with its detonator ticking.
The insinuated equivalency of the Iran treaty and the possible Korean settlement limps. The Mullahs had an agreement that did not prevent them from going nuclear. The pact merely postponed the achievement of nuclear power status. Even that assumed that limited controls would prevent the clandestine completion of the project before the treatys expiration. Any imaginable agreement with NoKo will include effective controls and security for all contracting parties.
A stable settlement that guarantees the national security interests of the US the two Koreas and Japan is within reach. Nevertheless a number of pre-conditions are to be met and some of these are not only unknown but also not knowable" such as Kims thinking. One of the preconditions is obvious. To have a practical meaning the accord must have provisions that will be kept. Those ironclad guarantees depend mainly on Trumps the credibility. His ability to deliver" is contingent upon the backing he enjoys on his own turf. Incessant attacks to undermine the POTUS credibility can be taken as an indicator that his ability to fulfill his commitments to the treaty that the world needs is limited. It would be deplorable if an internal squabble would demolish the political creditworthiness" of the person that has the opportunity to arrest the spread of a dangerous sore of world affairs. Call working to bring about failure under these conditionsis indeed a fools lunacy.
