Tag: Russia
Wrong and wrong, maybe wrong again?
I could of course be wrong again. But that’s the gloomy picture I am seeing on the day after an election gone wrong.
I was 100% wrong about the outcome of this election. I expected Harris to win the battleground states. She lost them. I expected her to win the popular vote by a wide margin. It’s not yet clear, but it appears she lost it.
I should have known better
I spent the last week in deep red Hall County, Georgia, doing “voter protection” for the Georgia Democratic Party. That entails monitoring paper ballot processing as well as helping adjudicate ambiguously marked ballots. I also duplicated a few dozen so that the scanner can read them. This is done in cooperation with Republicans and County election officials. Yesterday I was a poll watcher in a precinct whose voters include both a retirement community and mostly Mexican immigrants. The electoral mechanism both in the county government center and at the polling place was professional, efficient, and thus boring.
The demographics were more interesting. Hall is a county of more than 42,000 people that depends heavily on two industries. Chickens are first. Medicine is second. Both industries use large numbers of Mexican immigrants. There are not many native-born Americans feeding and slaughtering the chickens or tending the bed pans. Nor I imagine would you get on well doing construction, another thriving sector, if you didn’t speak Spanish.
By the time I got to the polling center yesterday about 11 am the early rush was over. Mid-day belonged mainly to the retirees, many of whom looked like they were patrons of the medical center. The late afternoon saw a rush of mostly younger Mexican Americans. A young US-born Mexican American poll worker provided translation whenever needed. I observed no tension of any sort between the two demographics. The mostly retired poll workers were impeccably correct and helpful to the immigrants, all of whom were US citizens. I hope they all recognized the symbiosis between the two communities.
My precinct voted more than 60% for Trump. Symbiosis doesn’t extend to the ballot box. I have no doubt about where most of the Trump and Harris votes came from.
It’s identity politics
Trump has found a way to make voting for him a question of identity. His racist dog whistles were vital to his first election. His macho man displays are vital to this second, as they shifted male votes in his direction. I find both difficult to understand, as I don’t regard white, male identity as anything more than an arbitrary classification. You could just as well call me short and old, with much more physical evidence to back the claim. I’m not proud of being white, male, short, or old.
I am proud of being an American. To me, that means having lots of individual rights and collective responsibilities. During my lifetime, I have seen the rights expanded. Younger people, Blacks, Latinos, women, and LGBTQ Americans now enjoy far more freedom than they did in my 1950s childhood. It seems to me the responsibility of white males to adjust to those changes. “All men are created equal” is not ambiguous (even if it should now read “all people”). “Make America Great Again” is a slogan that appeals to those who want to return to segregated, male-dominated, heterosexual America. I don’t share that aspiration.
I expect Trump to try to fulfill many of his promises. He made them to cater to interest groups that own him. He will try to deport large numbers of undocumented immigrants and end asylum. As President, Trump will impose more tariffs, raising the cost of living and inducing retaliation by other countries. He will fire large numbers of civil servants. His allies in Congress will try to end abortion country-wide and repeal Obamacare. They will give more tax relief to the rich and burden the middle class. Trump will welcome cryptocurrencies and try to manipulate the Federal Reserve, undermining monetary stability. His Supreme Court nominees will be people prepared to adjust their jurisprudence to his policy preferences.
I could be wrong again
As bad as I think the re-election of Trump is for America, I fear it is worse for the world. Trump will do at least some of what he has promised. We will see an end to American support for Ukraine and surrender of part of it to Putin. That will encourage Russia to try again in Moldova or the Baltics. He will withdraw American troops from South Korea and Japan, encouraging them to get their own nuclear weapons.
The Balkans, which concern many of my readers, will not be top priority. But Trump’s re-election will encourage ethnonationalists throughout the region. If Ukraine is partitioned, why shouldn’t Serbia to try to capture northern Kosovo and Republika Srpska? Why shouldn’t Kosovo join Albania? Washington might even help. War will be a real possibility. Ethnic cleansing and state collapse will follow. All the while, the Trump family will be benefiting financially from Jared Kushner’s Saudi-financed investments in Serbia and Albania.
In the Middle East, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu will get Trump’s full support. The new Trump Administration will not restrain Israel in Gaza, the West Bank, or Lebanon. Trump will likely encourage military confrontation with Iran. That is the only option left to deter Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Trump will try to get the Saudis to recognize Israel. They will string him along. It remains to be seen whether they will accept Netanyahu’s “less than a state” for Palestine. That proposition is essentially the continuation of the status quo: one state with unequal rights. It is what many call “apartheid.”
I could of course be wrong again. But this is the gloomy picture I am seeing on the day after an election gone wrong.
A true conservative would vote Harris
I don’t have a lot of Republican friends. That’s true. But for those Republicans I know identity is the reason for their attachment to that party. One was born into a family in Arizona in which no one had ever voted for a Democrat. Another, an otherwise first-rate political analyst, simply believes what Republicans say and doubts what Democrats say. He puts the burden of proof on his opponents.
Neither of these colleagues has ever before supported across-the-board tariffs or deportation of immigrants. They both pride themselves on not being racists. Yet they will vote for a candidate who wants to impose broad tariffs and deport millions. Trump is also a confirmed white supremacist and has promised to restrict minorities from moving to the suburbs. Republican identity trumps [pun intended] their policy preferences. It shifts the burden of proof, so here are some proofs.
The domestic issues
To be fair, traditional Republicans are in a difficult spot. The Republican party they knew and loved favored lower taxes and high defense expenditures. It has evaporated. Trump’s Republican party favors lower taxes only for the truly wealthy and abandonment of defense obligations.
Presidents Reagan and George W. Bush welcomed immigrants. Trump blames them for crimes they haven’t committed, as he did for the Central Park five. He wanted them executed, which is what he wants for immigrants who kill “Americans.” The five, all Black, were innocent.
Traditional Republicans do have reason to dislike Kamala Harris’ policy proposals. They fear extra spending for her housing, healthcare, education, and other “social” programs would explode the deficit. But they should be aware that the data is clear. Trump did that, even before the COVID-19 epidemic. Her spending proposals will have to pass in Congress. Trump’s promise of tariffs he can levy without Congressional approval
There is a decades-long history of lower percentage debt increases under Democratic than Republican presidents:
This is at least in part due to Republican control of one or both Houses of Congress. That’s a good reason for a Republican debt hawk to vote for some down-ballot Republicans. But it is not a good reason to vote for Trump.
Foreign policy
On foreign policy, the situation is even clearer. Both Trump and Harris are hawkish on China and protective of Israel. But Trump reached a trade agreement with China that Beijing didn’t implement. He did nothing to respond. The trade agreement also cost the US budget a great deal due to related agricultural subsidies. They continue. Trump would back Israel to the hilt. Harris wants to rein it in, provide humanitarian assistance to Palestinians, and prevent a wider war.
Trump has threatened to abandon allies in Europe and to end support for Ukraine. Harris backs the NATO allies and Kyiv. Most NATO members are now fulfilling their 2024 NATO commitment to spend 2% of GNP on defense. The big jumps came under Biden, after the Russian expansion of the Ukraine invasion. They did not come under Trump. Allied solidarity in supplying Ukraine has helped to counter Russia’s expansionist impulse and reduce the threat to other “frontline” states.
Putin’s Russia is an expansionist, imperial power trying to correct what it regards as history’s mistakes. If Moscow wins in Ukraine, it will try again in Moldova and eventually Poland and other former Soviet satellites. It is not exaggerating to say Ukrainians are dying to prevent Americans and Europeans from fighting.
Trump has encouraged South Korea and Japan to think about getting their own nuclear weapons. That he thinks would reduce US commitments in Asia. It is a truly bad idea, as it would leave Asian security at risk of a nuclear confrontation. The US would not control the outcome.
Trump has signaled he would not help defend Taiwan. China will take advantage of that signal. Biden’s expressed willingness to support Taiwan has arguably forestalled a Chinese effort to take it over.
If you are a true Republican, vote Harris
Half of Trump’s former cabinet secretaries are not supporting his re-election bid. Nor is his Vice President, about whose safety during the January 6 riot Trump was unconcerned. Former Vice President Cheney, a staunch conservative, and his also conservative daughter Liz are voting for Harris. So too is Mark Milley, Trump’s Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, along with hundreds of other retired generals. Milley regards Trump as “fascist to the core.”
Preventing Trump from doing what he has pledged to do should outweigh any remaining identity issues. A true Republican would vote Harris.
A Balkans agenda for the lame duck
We are entering the final stretch before the US election. That means a lame duck period for lower priority parts of the world like the Balkans until January 20. Neither Kamala Harris nor Donald Trump is likely to say anything about the region before November 5. Even after Inauguration Day it will be some time before the new administration focuses on the Balkans.
We can guess their views
Harris’ views on the Balkans are unknown. But she has spent a career prosecuting criminals and defending equal rights. That likely tells you something about her attitude toward corruption and ethnonationalism. Trump is a corrupt white supremacist who tried to partition Kosovo while in the White House. If elected, he will no doubt empower Ric Grenell or his doppelganger to try again in Kosovo and Bosnia. Serbia has leverage on Trump. Jared Kushner has been looking for investment opportunities there.
What should the people at the State Department and in the White House do in this lame duck period? They should seek to correct the mistakes of the last three years, which have produced mainly diplomatic failure in the Balkans. The Biden Administration mistakenly focused on creating a statutory Association of Serb Majority Municipalities in Kosovo. In Bosnia, it rightly sought to disempower ethnonationalist politicians, but it succeeded mainly with Bosniaks. Those priorities condemned Biden’s Balkan policies to strategic defeat. They also alienated Kosovars and Bosniaks, America’s best friends in the region.
Here are a few ideas to correct course. Assuming that Harris will be elected, as I fondly hope, these thoughts aim to reduce the sway of ethnic nationalism. They would also increase the functionality of governance in still-fragile Kosovo as well as Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Some ideas
- Consult with Kosovo Prime Minister Kurti on a joint plan to establish beyond doubt his country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. This should include an end to Belgrade intimidation of Serbs who join Kosovo security institutions and wider international recognition.
- Adopt as the official US stance conditional support for a nongovernmental Association of Serb Majority Municipalities. The municipalities themselves should form this Association consistent with the Kosovo constitution. The conditions should include Belgrade fulfillment of its obligations under the agreement in which Pristina agreed to the Association.
- Tell Belgrade publicly that it needs to produce accountability for the Serbian government malfeasance of last year. That includes the kidnapping of Kosovo police, rioting against KFOR, and the Banjska terrorist plot.
- Stop the bad-mouthing of Serbian environmentalists who oppose the Rio Tinto lithium plant. Start publicly criticizing corruption and growing autocracy in Belgrade.
- End the Bosnia High Representative’s intervention to reverse the European Court of Human Rights ruling in the Kovacevic case. The ECHR ruling promises a big step in reducing ethnic nationalist control of state institutions in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
- Develop criminal charges in the US against the leading Serb and Croat advocates (Milorad Dodik and Dragan Covic) of ethnonational division in Bosnia.
There are some tall orders in this list. But the failure of three years of misguided US and EU diplomatic efforts suggests a dramatic turn is needed.
The resistance will be strong
Serbia’s President Vucic is committed to the “Serbian world” goal of governing Serbs in neighboring countries. He has succeeded in Montenegro. The government in Podgorica is under Serbia’s thumb. In Bosnia and Kosovo, only de facto partition can deliver success to Serbia. Belgrade will resist all the above moves, as will their proxies in the neighboring countries.
Belgrade is at risk of falling irreversibly under the influence of Russia and China. The US needs to counter that influence with sticks as well as carrots. The carrots only appeasement approach has failed. Here is the result:
The Americans will be far more effective at all of this if the EU and UK will act in tandem. The UK will likely follow a strong US lead. The EU may not follow right away, That makes another task for the lame duck interval: getting Brussels on board.
This is pandering, not diplomacy
The US and Europe have now teamed up to applaud the mining of lithium–needed mainly for electric vehicle batteries–in Serbia. The enthusiasm is over the top. German Chancellor Scholz was in Belgrade for the July signing of a Serbia/EU “strategic partnership” on sustainable raw materials, battery value chains, and electric vehicles. The US has likewise signed an agreement on US-Serbia strategic cooperation in the field of energy in Serbia.Â
Brussels and Washington intend these agreements to encourage commercial exploitation of Serbia’s lithium deposits, under a contract with the British-Australian firm, Rio Tinto. Institutional investors (that is mutual funds, banks, pension and hedge funds) control 58% of Rio Tinto. The single biggest shareholder (11% Google AI tells me) is the Aluminum Corporation of China.
Not quite right
That is the first hint that something is not right. Washington and Brussels do not usually support British or Australian firms, or firms whose single largest shareholder is Chinese. But both the EU and US appear to have decided that Serbia’s lithium deposits are a top priority for electric car batteries.
But are they? Here is one picture of known lithium resources around the world:
Serbia’s lithium deposits amount to 1.3% of the global total. The resources are distributed widely around the world, most in the Western Hemisphere. Lithium is a commodity traded in a worldwide market, like oil. Serbia’s production has no great significance in this global picture.
Nor is the future market for lithium a sure thing. Other technologies are in the research and development pipeline. Five or ten years from now lithium is unlikely to be the only economically viable technology.
Why then?
Why then are European and American officials tripping over themselves to encourage the development of the Serbian lithium deposits? Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kasanof has even suggested the lithium project could block the rise of ethnic nationalism in the Balkans. Meanwhile,
Here is a hint of what is really going on: US Ambassador Chris Hill told a debate in Belgrade on political options for the Western Balkans that many of the people protesting against plans to mine lithium in western Serbia support Russia.
Those protests are the most serious opposition movement still extant in Serbia today. Red-baiting (if we can still label Moscow as “red”) the demonstrators aims to undermine their impact. That is not the usual US position on environmental concerns. But the Rio Tinto project is a top priority for President Vucic. We can only imagine why. He has no doubt told the local diplomats that he will greatly appreciate their help in squelching the protests.
Let me be clear: I have no objection in principle to economic cooperation with Serbia, or to environmentally and financially sound production of lithium in Serbia or elsewhere. But I do object to European and American officials trying to squelch environmental and financial concerns to please an increasingly autocratic president.
Appeasement is the policy
The diplomatic pandering is part of a broader effort to appease Serbia, provide it with economic goodies, and convince it to turn westward. Let’s skip whether redbaiting legitimate environmental criticism reflects Western ideals. The bigger issue is whether this approach has any chance of working.
It is notable that in neither the European nor in the American agreements cited above does Serbia undertake to conduct its mining in an environmentally sound or financially transparent way. The State Department made it clear the US wants financial probity. The European agreement does likewise. But Belgrade didn’t commit to it in either agreement.
Serbia has aligned itself militarily and politically with Russia and China since Vucic became President, the recent purchase of French Rafale warplanes notwithstanding. Belgrade has also undertaken repeated efforts to destabilize northern Kosovo and to undermine the independence of Montenegro as well as the territorial integrity of Bosnia. The idea that Belgrade can be convinced to embrace the West is dumb. Vucic will take EU money and American political pressure on his environmental opponents, but neither will make him give up his affection for like-minded autocrats with irredentist ambitions.
Trump is out of gas but keeps farting
Donald Trump’s performance last Tuesday night in the debate with Kamala Harris was pitiful. He has been griping ever since about the moderators, but most of the country knows the truth. Trump was unable to hold his own while Harris established her credentials as a worthy contestant for the presidency. Whether you agree with her policy proposals or not, she looked, acted, and spoke like a president. He did not.
It isn’t over yet
But there are still more than seven weeks to the election. Battered, Trump will now fight back harder and dirtier than ever. The Republican Party will do everything it can in the battleground states to limit voting by minorities, citizens born in other countries, and younger people. It will try to hinder vote counting in big cities and cast doubt on the outcome in any state that produces only a narrow margin for Harris.
The Democrats are prepared for this onslaught and will counter the Republicans in court, both before and after the election. Both parties seem to be hard at work registering new voters. But just the confusion of claims and counterclaims will create problems, including a media frenzy.
Some of this could work against Trump. Even the Republican governor has said the claims about illegal immigrants eating pet cats and dogs in an Ohio town are untrue:
But Trump and Vance are not saying things like this because they think them true. Vance has admitted he is prepared to “create” stories he thinks represent the interests of his constituents:
What Vance and Trump are trying to do is attract attention and subtract from Harris’ momentum, using racist tropes. That is having some success. Half of America is now thinking about immigration rather than Trump’s felony convictions or Harris’ economic proposals.
Harris is proving wise
Harris did challenge the pets story, but she does not challenge all of Trump’s falsehoods or defend the Biden Administration at every opportunity. According to CNN, he told 33 lies (“false claims”) during the less than 45 minutes he spoke during the debate. It would have been impossible to take them all on. If she had, it would have looked as if he set the agenda, not her.
I regretted that she did not counter his assertion that immigrants are committing a lot of crimes, though she no doubt knows they commit fewer per capita than people born in the US. I also regret that she failed to respond to the first question in the debate: are Americans better off than four years ago? She should have. Unemployment, growth, energy exports and many other parameters are dramatically improved since January 2021.
Harris’ virtues
But Harris is persistent and tireless in claiming to serve the American people. That is what some of us want to hear. We don’t hear it from Trump. He disowns responsibility for any failures, even claiming he did nothing to encourage the January 6 attack on The Capitol that he spent weeks inciting. Trump claims to be the best president ever and that Biden is the worst. He claims he can fix everything and Biden could fix nothing. Anyone even vaguely familiar with the Biden legislative accomplishments compared to Trump’s knows that isn’t true. Harris certainly does.
I attended a Harris fundraiser Saturday here in DC. She seemed to me, at a distance of 150 feet or so, to be genuine and sincere.
She is animated, vigorous, and coherent. I can’t say that about her opponent. Trump played golf a lot while president. He is still doing it during the campaign. He offers little more than tariffs on everything, replacing the Federal civil service with his cronies, and concessions to Putin and other dictators. Trump is out of gas but still farting.
Hopeful v hopeless: guess who won
Last night’s presidential debate between former President Trump and Vice President Harris conformed to expectations. An ill-tempered Trump lied, rambled, and indulged in conspiracy theories. A smiling and bemused Harris projected herself as an agent of change and optimism. She was amiable and hopeful. He was threatening and hopeless. That’s what really counts.
Policy doesn’t count, but it is still worth considering
The economy: advantage Harris
On the economy, Trump promises little more than steep tariffs on everything, which a president can impose without Congressional approval, and extension of the tax cuts passed in 2017 for the (very) rich. Neither proposition should be attractive to 90% of Americans. He continues to insist that other countries will pay the tariffs, but they will also raise prices whenever they can to recoup whatever they pay. In addition, they will retaliate against US exports. So MAGA means higher prices and loss of market share abroad. Little to celebrate there.
Harris is flogging tax breaks for small business, families, and home construction. Not all of what she proposes makes good sense, and she has not said how she will pay for them. But her proposals respond to what most Americans are concerned about. All of what she wants would have to pass in Congress, which means there is at least a chance to get it right. Even if the Democrats were to gain control of both Houses, it would be difficult to hold together their majorities for proposals that don’t make sense.
Immigration: advantage Harris
This is Trump’s strong suit, but he played his hand poorly. He repeatedly claimed that immigrants are increasing the crime rate in the US. He even claimed that crime is down in Venezuela and other countries because all the criminals are being sent to the US. Harris didn’t respond forcefully on these points. I suppose she was wary of championing immigration. But crime is down in the US and it is not down in Venezuela and other migrant-exporting countries.
Harris hit a solid note with her response. She rightfully claimed Trump had blocked a bipartisan immigration bill that would have sharply increased the number of agents on the border. She did not say what a lot of us know: America needs immigrants. The labor market is tight and immigrants are prolific entrepreneurs who found a large number of new, small companies.
Foreign policy: advantage Harris
Trump was at pains to claim that he got NATO countries to ante up and that the world loves him. But America’s allies have been increasing military expenditures at least as fast under Biden. Trump repeated his claim that he would end the Ukraine war by negotiation before he even took office. The only way he could do that is by signaling lack of support for Ukraine. Trump was only able to cite Hungary’s would-be dictator, Viktor Orban, as a leader who appreciates him. Of course Putin, Xi, and Kim are also in that camp, but they are even less to Trump’s credit.
Harris cited Trump’s love affairs with those miscreants, as well as with the Taliban, as evidence of his failure to align the US with its democratic friends and allies. Even more important is that he failed to get anything worthwhile from his dreadful friends. Harris was effective in parrying Trump’s criticism of the Afghanistan withdrawal, which he had negotiated before Biden won the 2020 election.
Next
I expect the polls to show a visible jump for Harris in the next couple of weeks. She demonstrated at the debate a demeanor, temperament, and acuity that contrasted sharply with Trump’s. He looked and played the part of a tired incumbent. His ideas, insofar as he had any, were stale. Taylor Swift got it right. Kamala Harris will be the next President. That will give the Republicans time to end their romance with a crooked flim-flam man.
