US Slashes United Nations" Budget By $285 Million Following "Stunning" Jerusalem Rebuke

The United States announced a $285 million cut in the United Nations" "bloated" budget for next year, negotiated by UN Ambassador Nikki Haley. A statement by the United States Mission to the United Nations reads: 

Today, the United Nations agreed on a budget for the 2018-2019 fiscal year. ‎Among a host of other successes, the United States negotiated a reduction of over $285 million off the 2016-2017 final budget. In addition to these significant cost savings, we reduced the UN’s bloated management and support functions, bolstered support for key U.S. priorities throughout the world, and instilled more discipline and accountability throughout the UN system.

Pleased with the cuts, Haley added "you can be sure we’ll continue to look at ways to increase the UN’s efficiency‎ while protecting our interests." 

The move follows a contentious week at the U.N., after 128 nations voted in a "stunning rebuke" of President Trump"s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Prior to the vote, Trump threatened to cut foreign financial aid to any countries who opposed the move - first with a tweet by Ambassador Nikki Haley threatening that the US would be "taking names," followed by comments made by Trump to reporters last Tuesday, according to Reuters. 

U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday threatened to cut off financial aid to countries that vote in favor of a draft United Nations resolution against his decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

 

“They take hundreds of millions of dollars and even billions of dollars, and then they vote against us. Well, we’re watching those votes. Let them vote against us. We’ll save a lot. We don’t care,” Trump told reporters at the White House.

Haley also circulated a letter to all UN member states effectively warning them not to vote against Trump"s decision. "As you consider your vote, I want you to know that the President and U.S. take this vote personally," she wrote. "The President will be watching this vote carefully and has requested I report back on those countries who voted against us."

As we now know, this accomplished absolutely nothing: 

The full UN vote - which the US & Israel lost 128-9, with 35 brave abstentions - is here: pic.twitter.com/ZtrztqTgyK

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) December 21, 2017

As we wrote last week, The outcome of the vote was hailed as a "victory" by Palestine. “We will continue our efforts in the United Nations and at all international forums to put an end to this occupation and to establish our Palestinian state with east Jerusalem as its capital,” Abbas" spokesman Nabil Abu Rudainah said. Predictably, both Israel and the US were displeased.

The General Assembly vote came days after the U.S. vetoed a similar resolution in the U.N. Security Council. The panel"s other 14 members voted in favor of that measure – a move that Haley called an "insult" to the U.S. Shortly after the Security Council vote, Arab and Muslim leaders at U.N. called for an emergency special session of the General Assembly to discuss the U.S."s Jerusalem decision.

In a defiant speech ahead of the General Assembly vote on Thursday, Riyad Al Maliki, the Palestinian foreign affairs minister, cast the Trump administration’s Jerusalem decision as an affront on regional peace and security that has isolated the U.S. from the international community. “Does the United States not wonder why it stands isolated in this position?” he asked.

Turkey, which has led the Muslim opposition to the US Jerusalem declaration, was among the first to speak at the meeting. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu stressed that only a two-state solution and sticking to the 1967 borders can be a foundation for a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine. The minister said that since Jerusalem is the cradle for the “three monotheistic religions,” all of humanity should come together to preserve the status quo.

“The recent decision of a UN member state to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel violates the international law, including all relevant UN resolutions. This decision is an outrageous assault on all universal values,” Cavusoglu said.

The United States contributes approximately 22 percent of the U.N. budget - or around $3.3 billion, which President Trump asked the State Department to cut by over 50% in March.

U.S. officials in Washington and New York learned during the past week that they will be asked to find ways to cut spending on obligatory and voluntary U.N. programs by 50 to 60 percent from the International Organization Affairs Bureau’s account. State Department officials, for instance, were told that they should try to identify up to $1 billion in cuts in the U.N. peacekeeping budget, according to one source. The United States provides about $2.5 billion per year to fund peacekeepers. -Foreign Policy

U.S. diplomats warned key U.N. members during a March 9 meeting in New York to “expect a big financial restraint” on American spending – which is not surprising following President Trump’s comments from last December: 

The United Nations has such great potential but right now it is just a club for people to get together, talk and have a good time. So sad!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 26, 2016

As to the U.N., things will be different after Jan. 20th.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 23, 2016

Ambassador Haley was clear in her comments after the budget cut, telling the press "We will no longer let the generosity of the American people be taken advantage of or remain unchecked," adding "This historic reduction in spending – in addition to many other moves toward a more efficient and accountable UN – is a big step in the right direction.

Putin Blasts American Establishment"s "Russian Spy Hysteria"

In his annual, multi-hour, Q&A press conference, Russian President Vladimir Putin took questions from a hoard of foreign journalists.

Topics spanned from Syria and Ukraine to China"s One-Belt-One-Road, and from Russian general elections to the US withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, but what most have focused on were his comments on President Trump and the Russiagate debacle...

US based ABC News (of recent infamy for a massive fake news gaffe) asked President Putin about the ongoing ‘Russiagate’ scandal with Donald Trump. The Russian President said the following:

"It’s up to the American people to assess Trump, not me. But look at the markets, they are up, indicating investors trust him. We also respect the US opposition. I don’t know if Trump still has the same desire to cooperate closely with us, but I hope we can work closely on a range of issues.”

Turning to so-called Trump collusion with Russia, Putin said,

“That’s been invented by those aiming to de-legitimize Trump. These people don’t understand they are undermining their own country, they aren’t showing respect for Americans that voted for Trump”.

Finally, turning to contacts between Russian diplomats and Americans, ABC asked "How would you explain the number of contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia... and how would you asses the Trump presidency?"

The Russian President replied:

"It is standard practice for diplomats to talk – what’s so strange about this? Why do you have this "Russia spy hysteria"?"

Of course, as the left would exclaim, he would say that wouldn"t he...

Source: RussiaFeed

Trump Walks A Tightrope with Mideast Peace Plan

Authored by Tom Luongo,

For months I’ve been telling you that the framework for a Middle East Peace Plan is in process.

Donald Trump dropped a nuclear bomb on the world the other day by announcing the U.S. would recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, ending more than 50 years of virtue-signaling over what is, in fact, fact.

And right after that announcement Trump told the Saudi Arabians to end the blockade against Yemen.  And in less then a day Israelis went from cheering Trump’s name to being confused.

I spent a long time on the phone with a Jewish friend of mine who couldn’t understand what this was about.  Saying he couldn’t understand why Trump did this when the Saudis had already done so much.

And he should have known better.

What have the Saudis done to this point that should absolve them of having to do more to right their wrongs.  Mohammed bin Salman’s purge and gangster-esque shakedown of his rivals withing the royal family are a good start.

But, he has a lot of work to do to right his wrongs in Yemen… and Syria… and Qatar.  Because in all of these operations the Saudis were the aggressor, certainly in Yemen and Qatar and they’ve dragged us into these conflicts against our will because he misinterpreted Trump’s pledge to Saudi Arabia during his initial visit this summer.

This call to end the blockade in Yemen was a simple give and take with Iran and the Shia.  It doesn’t balance out the move to recognize Jerusalem but it does move the U.S. in the right direction in  defining the limits to which it will back both Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Follow that up with the report from Reuters this morning that in his phone call to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas that this recognition is only the first step.

Trump told Abbas, a Western-backed moderate, that the final peace blueprint would offer the Palestinians an important settlement that they would be pleased with, but did not provide specifics, the sources said.

 

Abbas told Trump in response that any peace process must result in the Palestinians having their capital in East Jerusalem, a Palestinian official said. Israel captured East Jerusalem in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war and later annexed it in a move not recognized internationally.

Trump’s no dummy.  He knows that concessions will have to be made to get any kind of deal done.  But, Jerusalem was never on the table in any practical sense and it existed as an excuse to continue the conflict indefinitely and eventually grind Israel off the map.

Trump just ended that open wound and took it off the table.  And with that one move he calls everyone’s bluff about what their real intentions are.

“Do you want peace?” “Great.  Let’s make a deal.  But you aren’t going to get everything you want.”

By the way, neither is Israel.  Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his merry band of neocons are going to be just as disappointed as bin Salman was when he was dressed down by both Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson over his blockade of Qatar in June.

For anyone who thinks that Trump just gave Israel the green light to go to war with the Arabs is not thinking this through.  We ultimately guarantee both Israel’s and Saudi Arabia’s security.  And if Trump demonstrates his ability to keep them both on a short leash, the Arabs will come to the table and talk.

The official said the plan, which he described as comprehensive and going beyond frameworks put forth by previous U.S. administrations, would likely be unveiled before the middle of next year.

 

A key test of keeping the peace efforts on track will be whether Abbas goes ahead with a scheduled meeting with U.S. Vice President Mike Pence when he visits the region in mid-December.

He will.  And Israel will stop striking out in every direction, as my friend Halsey English put it the other night, “bombing every truck over the size of an SUV that’s headed from Iran to Lebanon.”

And the U.S., thanks to Trump the U.S. is now publicly committed to Israel in a healthy way for the region, not just the big banks, big oil and AIPAC.

And as Halsey also pointed out, the entire region is scared enough of the Russians that they will have no problem getting the Iranians and Hezbollah to behave.  That’s why Russia isn’t leaving Syria.  And it’s why the Iranian Republican Guard will.

And Trump isn’t leading us into war but rather a rather sophisticated peace deal that will confound every conventional analyst on the subject.

Watch the first 20 minutes of this show to get the whole thing laid out in full.

Russia-Gate Spreads To Europe

Authored by Robert Parry via ConsortiumNews.com,

Ever since the U.S. government dangled $160 million last December to combat Russian propaganda and disinformation, obscure academics and eager think tanks have been lining up for a shot at the loot, an unseemly rush to profit that is spreading the Russia-gate hysteria beyond the United States to Europe...

British Prime Minister Theresa May

Now, it seems that every development, which is unwelcomed by the Establishment – from Brexit to the Catalonia independence referendum – gets blamed on Russia! Russia! Russia!

The methodology of these “studies” is to find some Twitter accounts or Facebook pages somehow “linked” to Russia (although it’s never exactly clear how that is determined) and complain about the “Russian-linked” comments on political developments in the West. The assumption is that the gullible people of the United States, United Kingdom and Catalonia were either waiting for some secret Kremlin guidance to decide how to vote or were easily duped.

Oddly, however, most of this alleged “interference” seems to have come after the event in question. For instance, more than half (56 percent) of the famous $100,000 in Facebook ads in 2015-2017 supposedly to help elect Donald Trump came after last year’s U.S. election (and the total sum compares to Facebook’s annual revenue of $27 billion).

Similarly, a new British study at the University of Edinburgh blaming the Brexit vote on Russia discovered that more than 70 percent of the Brexit-related tweets from allegedly Russian-linked sites came after the referendum on whether the U.K. should leave the European Union. But, hey, don’t let facts and logic get in the way of a useful narrative to suggest that anyone who voted for Trump or favored Brexit or wants independence for Catalonia is Moscow’s “useful idiot”!

This week, British Prime Minister Theresa May accused Russia of seeking to “undermine free societies” and to “sow discord in the West.”

What About Israel?

Yet, another core problem with these “studies” is that they don’t come with any “controls,” i.e., what is used in science to test a hypothesis against some base line to determine if you are finding something unusual or just some normal occurrence.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaking to a joint session of the U.S. Congress on March 3, 2015, in opposition to President Barack Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran. (Screen shot from CNN broadcast)

In this case, for instance, it would be useful to find some other country that, like Russia, has a significant number of English speakers but where English is not the native language – and that has a significant interest in foreign affairs – and then see whether people from that country weigh in on social media with their opinions and perspectives about political events in the U.S., U.K., etc.

Perhaps, the U.S. government could devote some of that $160 million to, say, a study of the Twitter/Facebook behavior of Israelis and whether they jump in on U.S./U.K. controversies that might directly or indirectly affect Israel. We could see how many Twitter/Facebook accounts are “linked” to Israel; we could study whether any Israeli “trolls” harass journalists and news sites that oppose neoconservative policies and politicians in the West; we could check on whether Israel does anything to undermine candidates who are viewed as hostile to Israeli interests; if so, we could calculate how much money these “Israeli-linked” activists and bloggers invest in Facebook ads; and we could track any Twitter bots that might be reinforcing the Israeli-favored message.

No Chance

If we had this Israeli baseline, then perhaps we could judge how unusual it is for Russians to voice their opinions about controversies in the West. It’s true that Israel is a much smaller country with 8.5 million people compared to Russia’s 144 million, but you could adjust for those per capita numbers — and even if you didn’t, it wouldn’t be surprising to find that Israel’s interference in U.S. policymaking still exceeds Russian influence.

Russian President Vladimir Putin with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on May 10, 2015, at the Kremlin. (Photo from Russian government)

It’s also true that Israeli leaders have often advocated policies that have proved disastrous for the United States, such as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s encouragement of  the Iraq War, which Russia opposed. Indeed, although Russia is now regularly called an American enemy, it’s hard to think of any policy that President Vladimir Putin has pushed on the U.S. that is even a fraction as harmful to U.S. interests as the Iraq War has been.

And, while we’re at it, maybe we could have an accounting of how much “U.S.-linked” entities have spent to influence politics and policies in Russia, Ukraine, Syria and other international hot spots.

But, of course, neither of those things will happen. If you even tried to gauge the role of “Israeli-linked” operations in influencing Western decision-making, you’d be accused of anti-Semitism. And if that didn’t stop you, there would be furious editorials in The New York Times, The Washington Post and the rest of the U.S. mainstream media denouncing you as a “conspiracy theorist.” Who could possibly think that Israel would do anything underhanded to shape Western attitudes?

And, if you sought the comparative figures for the West interfering in the affairs of other nations, you’d be faulted for engaging in “false moral equivalence.” After all, whatever the U.S. government and its allies do is good for the world; whereas Russia is the fount of evil.

So, let’s just get back to developing those algorithms to sniff out, isolate and eradicate “Russian propaganda” or other deviant points of view, all the better to make sure that Americans, Britons and Catalonians vote the right way.

How America"s Deep State Operates To Control The Message

Authored by Philip Giraldi via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

It is not possible to overstate the power of certain constituencies and corporate lobbies in the United States.

These pressure groups, joined by powerful government agencies, many of which have secret agendas that focus on national security, constitute what is increasingly being recognized as “Deep State America.” Deep State is the widespread belief that there exists in many countries an entrenched and largely hidden infrastructure that really controls the national narrative and runs things. It explains why, for example, a country like the United States is perpetually at war even though the wars have been disastrous failures ever since Korea and have not made the nation more secure.

To be sure, certain constituencies have benefitted from global instability and conflict, to include defense industries, big government in general, and the national security state. They all work together and hand-in-hand with the corporate media to sustain the narrative that the United States is perpetually under threat, even though it is not.

The recent exchanges over the Russia-US relationship exhibit perfectly how the Deep State operates to control the message. American President Donald Trump briefly met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Vietnam. Putin reportedly told Trump that Russia “absolutely had not meddled” in the 2016 US election and Trump then told reporters that he believed the Russian leader meant what he said, “which is good.” As détente with Russia is not considered desirable by the Deep State, there was an immediate explosion of a contrary narrative, namely that Trump believes a Russian “enemy” and does not trust what his own intelligence agencies have told him about 2016 because he is being "played" by Putin.

This story was repeated both on television news and in all the mainstream newspapers without exception, eventually forcing Trump to recant and say that he does believe in US intelligence.

Not a single major media outlet in the US reported that it just might be possible that Putin was telling the truth and that the intelligence community, which has been wrong many times over the past twenty years, might have to look again at what it considers to be evidence. No journalist had the courage to point out that the claims of the Washington national security team have been remarkably devoid of anything credible to support the conclusions about what the Russian government might or might not have been up to. That is what a good journalist is supposed to do and it has nothing to do with whether or not one admires or loathes either Putin or Trump.

That the relationship between Moscow and Washington should be regarded as important given the capability of either country to incinerate the planet would appear to be a given, but the Washington-New York Establishment, which is euphemism for Deep State, is actually more concerned with maintaining its own power by marginalizing Donald Trump and maintaining the perception that Vladimir Putin is the enemy head of state of a Russia that is out to cripple American democracy.

Beyond twisting narratives, Russiagate is also producing potentially dangerous collateral damage to free speech, as one of the objectives of those in the Deep State is to rein in the current internet driven relatively free access to information. In its most recent manifestations, an anonymous group produced a phony list of 200 websites that were “guilty” of serving up Russian propaganda, a George Soros funded think tank identified thousands of individuals who are alleged to be “useful idiots” for Moscow, and legitimate Russian media outlets will be required to register as foreign agents.

Driven by Russophobia over the 2016 election, a group of leading social media corporations including Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Twitter have been experimenting with ways to self-censor their product to keep out foreign generated or “hate” content.

They even have a label for it: "cyberhate". Congress is also toying with legislation that will make certain viewpoints unacceptable or even illegal, including a so-called Anti-Semitism Awareness Act that would potentially penalize anyone who criticizes Israel and could serve as a model for banning other undesirable speech. “Defamatory speech” could even eventually include any criticism of the government or political leaders, as is now the case in Turkey, which is the country where the “Deep State” was invented.

The Deeper Purpose Of Trump"s Asia Trip

Authored by James Rickards via The Daily Reckoning,

President Trump is wrapping up his historic visit to Asia today. Trump’s journey is the longest overseas trip of his presidency and the longest Asian visit of any president in 25 years.

After a stopover in Hawaii, Trump proceeded to Japan, where he met with Japanese Prime Minister Shinz? Abe, and then to South Korea where he met with President Moon Jae-in.

The capstone of the trip was Trump’s arrival on Nov. 8 in Beijing for meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Trump then headed for Vietnam late in the week and is concluding meetings in the Philippines today.

Much of the reporting on this trip has involved international trade, but it’s a mistake to focus on that. This trip was a prewar gathering of allies (Japan and South Korea) and potential allies (China) in a last-ditch struggle to head off a hot war with North Korea, led by the reckless Kim Jong Un.

At this point, there are only four possible outcomes of the U.S.-North Korea confrontation over nuclear weapons:

1.Kim Jung Un stands down and gives up his nuclear weapons program.

 

2. The U.S. and China combine forces to decapitate the Kim dynasty and force regime change in North Korea.

 

3. Preventive attack on North Korea by the U.S. before March 20, 2018.

 

4. The U.S. accepts a nuclear-armed North Korea and relies on containment and deterrence to constrain its actions.

Based on public statements of U.S. officials, my recent meetings in Washington with the director of the CIA and the national security adviser and other sources, I estimate the degree distribution of those possible outcomes as follows:

• Kim stands down: 10%


• Regime change: 20%


• War: 70%


• U.S. lives with nuclear North Korea: 0%.

Trump’s visits to Japan and South Korea were about leaving the door open to negotiations in the hope that Kim would stand down while also preparing for war.

Trump’s visit to China was about asking for assistance in regime change. Xi is unlikely to agree to help the U.S. in this regard.

This means war. Instead, Trump and Xi no doubt discussed China’s “red lines” in North Korea so that a war between the U.S. and North Korea does not escalate into a war with China.

Almost none of this is fully priced in public markets, although markets seemed to be getting the message last week.

A war between the U.S. and North Korea will cause a global flight to quality assets and currencies at the expense of other asset classes.

Here are the likely market moves as the prospect of war becomes clear: Dollars, euros and Swiss francs will rally at the expense of emerging-market currencies. U.S. Treasury bonds will rally in price, pushing yields lower.

Gold will rally strongly, well past the $1,325 level, and then push higher.

Curiously, U.S. stocks may rally after an initial pullback when the shooting starts. Defense contractors, tech companies, commodities producers, utilities and energy companies should all rally. War is generally good for some sectors of the economy and may finally give the Fed the inflation it’s been looking for in vain the past eight years.

The war is likely coming in a matter of months.

Trump Says Japan Will Shoot North Korean Missiles "Out Of The Sky" After Lockheed Deal

President Donald Trump’s 12-day Asia tour kicked off in Japan last night, where discussions between Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe were punctuated by the deadly mass shooting that claimed 26 lives in a small-town Texas church. But not before Trump could engage in some customary saber-rattling aimed at his favorite verbal sparring partner, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

Trump’s meeting with Abe was the first time the two world leaders have met face to face since late September, when they discussed strategies for containing the North Korean nuclear threat on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, including how to pressure China and Russia to increase economic pressure on their restive neighbor, according to Reuters.

Not much has changed since then; though South Korean and US intelligence have detected signs of movement around some of the North’s missile-launch sites, the country has so far refrained from engaging in any more missile or nuclear tests since it fired a medium-range missile over Japan on Sept. 15.

However, that didn’t stop Trump from repeating his mantra the “era of strategic patience” with North Korea was over, and said the two countries were working to counter the “dangerous aggressions,” during a press conference following a leadership summit between the two men.

“He (Abe) will shoot them out of the sky when he completes the purchase of lots of additional military equipment from the United States,“ Trump said, referring to the North Korean missiles. ”The prime minister is going to be purchasing massive amounts of military equipment, as he should. And we make the best military equipment by far."

Abe, for his part, said Tokyo would shoot down missiles “if necessary”.

Trump was replying to a question that was posed to Abe - namely how he would respond to a quote from Trump from a recent interview in which he said Japan was a “samurai” nation and should have shot down the North Korean missiles.

Japan’s policy is that it would only shoot down a missile if it were falling on Japanese territory or if it were judged to pose an “existential threat” to Japan because it was aimed at a US target, Bloomberg reported.

Trump once again defended his aggressive rhetoric, arguing that passivity in the face of the burgeoning threat posed by North Korea led to today’s diplomatic standoff.

“Most importantly, we’re working to counter the dangerous aggressions of the regime in North Korea,” Trump said, calling Pyongyang’s nuclear tests and recent launches of ballistic missiles over Japan “a threat to the civilized world and to international peace and stability”.

“Some people said that my rhetoric is very strong. But look what’s happened with very weak rhetoric over the last 25 years. Look where we are right now,” he said, adding that "no dictator" should underestimate US resolve.

Trump is on the first stop of a five-nation swing through Asia where he plans to push his message of fair trade and freedom in the region backed by a strong U.S. military presence. The U.S.’s $69 billion trade deficit with Japan is its second-highest behind only China, fueled largely by American imports of cars and electronics.

North Korea’s recent actions have raised the stakes in the most critical international challenge of Trump’s presidency.

The US leader, who will visit South Korea on the trip, has repeatedly promised to “totally destroy” North Korea if it threatens the US, while dismissing North Korean leader Kim Jong Un as a “rocket man” on a suicide mission during a speech before the UN General Assembly in September.

Abe, with whom Trump has bonded through multiple summits and phone calls, repeated at the same news conference that Japan backed Trump’s stance that “all options” are on the table, saying it was time to exert maximum pressure on North Korea and the two countries were “100 percent” together on the issue. Abe said Japan is buying Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35A fighter jets and missile interceptors from Raytheon Co. - deals that had previously been announced. He said Japan would buy more Aegis equipment from the U.S. for its ships.

Abe also discussed improving Japan"s defense capabilities as the country moves further beyond constitutional restrictions on militarism imposed after World War II.

“With the North Korean situation becoming more severe, and the Asia-Pacific security environment becoming harsher, I think we need to improve Japan’s defense capabilities in terms of quality and quantity,” Abe said.

Meanwhile, the North Korean regime is reportedly monitoring Trump’s Asia tour “very closely” and has said that, if he does anything crazy, the North will “respond powerfully.” To wit, in what seems like a deliberate attempt to aggravate the North during Trump’s visit (perhaps in the hope of provoking another missile test that would underscore Trump’s calls for regional cooperation on the issue) three US aircraft carriers and several nuclear submarines are taking part in joint military exercises with the Japanese and South Koreans in the waters off the Korean peninsula.

Trump Asks For $4 Billion To Beef Up US Missile-Defense Systems

President Donald Trump is preparing to head to South Korea where he will meet with the country’s president (and purported “fine gentleman”) Moon Jae-in to strategize about their simmering standoff with North Korea. Meanwhile, back home, his allies in Congress are carrying out his instructions to request another $4 billion to expand the US’s missile-defense capabilities in the face of the growing threat from the North.

 

Getting ready to leave for South Korea and meetings with President Moon, a fine gentleman. We will figure it all out!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 6, 2017

 

“This request supports additional efforts to detect, defeat, and defend against any North Korean use of ballistic missiles against the United States, its deployed forces, allies or partners,” President Trump wrote in a letter to Congress on Monday.

According to the Hill, The supplemental budget request sent to Congress Monday also asks for $1.2 billion more for the administration’s new Afghanistan strategy and almost $700 million to repair the two Navy destroyers that were badly damaged in a series of at-sea collisions this summer.

It also reiterates the president’s desire for Congress to pass $1.6 billion in funding for a wall on the border with Mexico.

“Providing for the safety and security of the American people is my top priority,” Trump wrote in the letter. “That priority is reflected in both the enclosed DOD Budget amendments and the border wall request, which provides the down payment on what [Customs and Border Protection] needs to secure the southwest border."

Spending on ballistic-missile defense enjoys broad bipartisan support (despite providing a false sense of security, at best). Defense hawks have long sought more missile defense in recent years as North Korea’s missile program has steadily advanced.

The administration originally requested $9.9 billion for fiscal 2018 for missile defense, which defense hawks slammed as insufficient and a cut from its current funding level.

Trump himself promised “billions” more for missile defense in August.

“We’re going to be increasing our budget by many billions of dollars because of North Korea and other reasons having to do with the anti-missile [aspect],” Trump told reporters at his golf club in Bedminster, the Hill pointed out.

If approved, the money would probably go toward construction of an additional Ground-Based Interceptor field at Fort Greely, Alaska, as well as initial funding to buy 20 new interceptors for the system.

It would also pay for 16 Standard Missile-3 Block IIA interceptors, 50 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense interceptors, missile detection radar upgrades, intelligence and reconnaissance capabilities, and long-range strike capabilities, among other areas.

About $1.2 billion of the money would go toward Afghanistan and South Asia strategy, including the deployment of 3,500 more troops to Afghanistan, which Trump announced over the summer.

While defense spending requests like this one typically sail through Congress without a hitch, some have raised questions about the efficacy of US missile defense systems, including whether the circumstances under which the ballistic missile intercepts are tested represent an adequate simulation of real-life conditions.

To be sure, America’s existing missile defense systems (overseen by a little-known branch of the military called the Missile Defense Agency) have reportedly been successful, as we pointed out late last month, those tests haven’t been conducted under realistic conditions, suggesting that Trump’s assertion that those systems could intercept a missile with 97% chance of success is way off base.

Furthermore, the North’s ballistic missiles are actually the least of the US’s problems - that is, until the country can successfully build a nuclear warhead small enough to fit on an ICBM. RIght now, the bigger threat would be detonating a hydrogen bomb high in the Earth’s atmosphere, causing an electromagnetic pulse that could knock out power across a broad swath of the US, potentially killing hundreds of thousands - if not millions - of civilians.

Read the request below:

 

2017.11.06request by zerohedge on Scribd

 

British Secretary Of State Refuses to Rule Out A "Preemptive Strike" On North Korea

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

Boris Johnson, the British secretary of state for foreign affairs, has said the option of military action against North Korea “must theoretically remain on the table” in discussions about the country’s nuclear crisis. Johnson refuses to rule out a preemptive strike.

According to The Independent UK, while speaking at Chatham House, the Foreign Secretary said it was “the duty” of United States President Donald Trump to keep the possibility of a preemptive strike against Kim Jong-un’s regime available at all times.

“It is the duty of any president of the US given the threat that his or her country could face from a nuclear-armed North Korea, it is the duty of the President at least to explore those military options and keep them on the table,” he said.

 

“And yet clearly it must remain on the table. The possibility of some kind of military option – there is a spectrum of things that could be done – that possibility must theoretically remain on the table.”

When pressured as to whether or not the United Kingdom would support a preemptive strike against North Korea, Johnson stressed that he preferred the “productive avenue” of talks orchestrated by China. “I don’t think anybody can conceivably want a military solution to this problem, and I know many who have studied the matter find it hard to see how the military solution might play out,” he said. He was also asked if it was now time that the world accepted the hermit nation as among the club of nuclear states. Although it didn’t appear that he answered that question directly, he did make reference to the Cold War.

“The public can be forgiven for genuinely starting to wonder whether the nuclear sword of Damocles is once again held over the head of a trembling human race,” Johnson said. However, the British politician did say the Pyongyang regime’s nuclear ambitions would not make the country safer.

“No one wants any kind of military solution to the problem,” he said.

 

“But Kim and the world need to understand that when the 45th President of the United States contemplates a regime led by a man who not only threatens to reduce New York to ‘ashes’, but who stands on the verge of acquiring the power to make good on his threat, I am afraid that the US president – whoever he or she might be – will have an absolute duty to prepare any option to keep safe not only the American people but all those who have sheltered under the American nuclear umbrella.

 

And I hope Kim will also consider this: that if his objective is to intimidate the US into wholesale withdrawal from East Asia, then it strikes me that his current course might almost be designed to produce the opposite effect.”

Johnson’s comments come on the heels of Donald Trump’s decertification of the 2015 pact with Iran. Trump said that his predecessor Barack Obama was taken advantage of in negotiations, and last week repeated his threat to pull out of the landmark deal entirely. Johnson alleged that the Iran deal proved crucial at a time when the country had been “only months away” from producing a nuclear weapon, which could have triggered an arms race in “one of the most volatile regions of the world.” He said: “Think of the nightmare that deal has avoided.” Johnson also added that Trump had not “junked” the deal and with “determination and courage” the joint comprehensive plan of action deal could be preserved.

Johnson also acknowledged concerns about Iran’s support for Hezbollah, its supply of weapons to Houthi rebels in Yemen and interference in Syria.

“But that does not mean for one minute that we should write Iran off, or that we should refuse to engage with Iran or that we should show disrespect to its people,” he said.

 

“On the contrary, we should continue to work to demonstrate to that population that they will be better off under this deal and the path of re-engagement that it prescribes.”

Washington: The Bleeder Of The 'Free World'?

Authored by Finian Cunningham via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

Among the many self-flattering epithets it gives itself, the US has always claimed to be the “leader of the free world”. It’s a rather patronizing notion that America views itself as a selfless protector and benefactor of its European allies and others. This fairytale depiction of the world is coming to a rude awakening as American power buffets against the reality of a multi-polar world.

Less a world leader and more like a blood-sucking leech on international relations.

We got a clear view of the contradiction in America’s narcissistic mythology with US President Donald Trump’s announcement that he was disavowing the multinational nuclear accord with Iran last Friday.

Trump didn’t axe American participation in the deal just yet, but he has put it on notice that he or the US Congress may terminate the accord over the next two months. How’s that for high-handed arrogance?

However, there was near-unanimous push back around the world to Trump’s disparagement of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which was originally signed in July 2015 by the US, Russia, China, European Union and Iran. All the signatories uniformly rebuked Trump’s attempt to undermine the deal, which is supposed to lift international economic sanctions off Iran in return for curbs on Iran’s nuclear program.

While Trump accused Iran of “multiple violations” of the accord, all the other stakeholders asserted satisfaction that Iran has in fact fully implemented its obligations to restrict uranium enrichment and weaponization of its nuclear program. The UN watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, also responded to Trump’s claims by reaffirming that eight consecutive monitoring reports have found Iran to be fully compliant with the JCPOA.

Britain, France and Germany, as well as Russia and China, have firmly said that the nuclear deal – which took two years to negotiate during Barack Obama’s tenure in the White House – is not for renegotiation. A point which was reiterated too by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani.

The deal is also written into international law, having been ratified unanimously by the UN Security Council back in 2015. In a stinging admonishment to Washington, the EU’s foreign policy chief Federica Morgherini said: “This deal is not a bilateral agreement ... The international community, and the European Union with it, has clearly indicated that the deal is, and will, continue to be in place.”

Russia also denounced Trump’s over-the-top aggressive rhetoric towards Iran. The American president was almost foaming at the mouth when he labelled Iran “the world’s top terror sponsor” and accused Tehran of fueling conflict across the Middle East. Moscow said such rhetoric was unacceptable and inappropriate. Iran dismissed Trump’s accusations as baseless lies.

Evidently, Russia, China and the Europeans do not share America’s debased caricature of Iran. And who in their right mind would? The hackneyed American allegations against Iran are – as usual – not backed up with any evidence. They rely on bombastic assertion repeated ad nauseam. It is especially ironic and odious for Washington to accuse others of sponsoring terrorism, given the litany of illegal wars it has launched across the Middle East and the steadily emerging evidence of US links to terror groups in Syria’s six-year war.

Thus, the commitment by all the signatories – except Washington – to the Iranian nuclear deal is a stunning rejection of Trump’s aggressive stance towards Iran.

Ahead of Trump’s anticipated disavowal of the JCPOA on Friday, Germany’s foreign minister Sigmar Gabriel warned that such a move would “drive a wedge between Europe and the US”. Significantly, Gabriel said that Trump’s spurning of the accord was “driving the EU towards Russia and China”.

France’s finance minister Bruno Le Maire also warned the US not to interfere in Europe’s growing commercial ties with Iran. He was quoted as saying: “The US must not appoint itself as the world’s police man”.

Trump’s hostility towards the Iran nuclear treaty has created dissent within his own cabinet. His secretary of state Rex Tillerson and the defense secretary James Mattis are among those who were urging Trump to uphold the JCPOA. In the Congress, there are also many opponents to Trump’s desire to axe the deal, even among his Republican party. It remains to be seen if the Congress will call for new sanctions on Iran over the next 60 days, as Trump has requested. If Congress does, it will mean the US crashing out of the accord.

In theory, of course, the EU, Russia and China can continue to uphold the nuclear accord with Iran and conduct international trade and investment without the Americans. Russia and China have signed major oil and gas pacts with Iran over the past two years.

The European states have also lined up huge commercial projects and investments with Tehran in sectors of energy, engineering and infrastructure.  Germany and France in particular have seen their exports to Iran soar since the signing of the JCPOA. With Iran’s 80 million population and vast oil and gas reserves, the Persian nation represents lucrative opportunities for Europe, given too the geographical proximity.

But the US is still able to exert tremendous power over international banking to the extent that it is having a chilling effect on other countries doing business with Iran. The European states are particularly vulnerable to American pressure.

In a Bloomberg report, it headlined: ‘Trump"s Iran Decision Throws Uncertainty Into Business Plans’.

The report goes on: “Since a landmark nuclear agreement freed Iran’s economy from crippling economic sanctions, investors eager to tap the country’s energy reserves and its 80 million consumers have waited for signs it was safe to enter the market in full force… Donald Trump is about to signal that they should keep waiting.”

The US view of Iran is so warped – much of it from relentless propaganda demonizing the Islamic Republic – that it is evidently incapable of normalizing relations as it is obligated to do under the multilateral nuclear deal. Trump ironically accused Iran of “not living up to the spirit of the accord” when it is the US that has worked assiduously to undermine it.

Since Trump took office, he has reportedly cancelled all export licenses to Iran. His administration and the Congress have slapped more “secondary sanctions” on Iran over allegations that it is destabilizing the Middle East and for its support to Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad.

These bilateral US sanctions inevitably have a deterrent effect on other nations doing business with Iran out of fear that they may be penalized in the future. Long-term investments over several years are prone to prohibitive risks due to the uncertainty about what Washington’s capricious policy towards Iran will be.

America’s unilateral, hegemonic conduct – accentuated under Trump – is rapidly alienating other nations. This president seems to operate a “withdrawal doctrine”, as Richard Haass, president of the DC-based Council on Foreign Relations, commented. Trump’s contempt for multilateral obligations peaked with his announcement back in June on backing out of the Paris Climate Accord. It has peaked again with his repudiation of the UN-backed Iran nuclear deal.

What is becoming increasingly apparent is that US unilateralism is all about pandering to its own selfish interests. Trump’s administration has hit Russia with more sanctions and has warned that European energy companies involved in developing the Nord Stream 2 gas project with Russia’s Gazprom will also be sanctioned. The flagrant agenda here is for the US to replace Russia as Europe’s gas supplier, selling its own more expensive fuel to Europe.

Likewise US hostility and sanctions on Iran are not just limited to its own perverse policies.

Washington also wants to block others from also doing legitimate business and trade with Iran. For the Europeans struggling to boost their flagging economies, the impediments being thrown in their way by the US over Iran are another source of resentment towards American unilateralism.

This is not the idealized conduct of the self-proclaimed “leader of the free world”. America is increasingly seen as the “bleeder” – a declining power which wants to suck the economic lifeblood from others in order to sustain itself. This untenable American unipolar craving is inevitably hastening the reality of a multipolar world, as Europeans in particular realize that they can no longer afford to prop up America’s economic obesity.

Tillerson: US Diplomacy With North Korea Will Continue Until "The First Bomb Drops"

Two weekends after Trump publicly snubbed and mocked Rex Tillerson"s attempts to achieve a diplomatic resolution with North Korea, when the president tweeted that "I told Rex Tillerson, our wonderful Secretary of State, that he is wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man... Save your energy Rex, we"ll do what has to be done!" just one day after Tillerson revealed for the first time that the US has been in direct, if secret, contact with Pyongyang over its missile and nuclear tests, on Sunday morning the Secretary of State - who remains in hot water with Trump over the recent NBC report that he called the president a "fucking moron" - doubled down and said that Trump had instructed him to continue diplomatic efforts to calm rising tensions with North Korea, saying "those diplomatic efforts will continue until the first bomb drops."

Tillerson says Trump wants diplomacy in North Korea: "Diplomatic efforts will continue until the first bomb drops" https://t.co/TuRBJ51eeJ

— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) October 15, 2017

During an interview on CNN"s "State of the Union," Tillerson said Trump is trying to "motivate action" on North Korea, adding that the president wants to be clear that he has military options on the table.

"The president has also made clear to me that he wants this solved diplomatically," Tillerson said but explained that "[Trump] is not seeking to go to war."

He said Trump has made it clear Tillerson should continue his diplomatic efforts in North Korea. "Those diplomatic efforts will continue until the first bomb drops," Tillerson said while White House National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster said the president would do whatever is necessary to prevent an attack from North Korea on the U.S.

"Our president has been really clear, he"s not going to permit this regime and Kim Jong Un to threaten the United States with a nuclear weapon," McMaster said on Fox News Sunday. "He"s going to do anything necessary to prevent that from happening and what Kim Jong Un should recognize is that if he thinks the development of this nuclear capability is keeping him safer, it"s actually the opposite," he continued.

It remains unclear just what provocative catalyst could prompt the US to launch the "first bomb drop", assuming of course North Korea doesn"t do it first.

Separately, Tillerson also touched on the Iran deal, now in danger of falling apart, and said Sunday he believes staying in the Iran nuclear deal is in the best interest of the U.S. Speaking in the same CNN interview, Tillerson was asked whether he agrees with Defense Secretary James Mattis that he would not want Congress to immediately impose sanctions that would end the multilateral deal.

"I do agree with that," Tillerson said. "And I think the president does as well."  Tillerson said the U.S. will see if it can address the flaws in the Iran nuclear deal by staying within the agreement and working with the country"s friends and allies. "That may come in a secondary agreement as well," Tillerson said. He said the U.S. wants to fully enforce the agreement as it exists and "then begin the process of addressing the flaws."

His comments come after President Trump declared Friday that the Iran nuclear deal, because it is not being strictly enforced, is no longer in the national security interest of the United States. He stopped short of withdrawing from the Obama-era pact and demanded reforms.

“I am announcing today that we cannot and will not make this certification,” Trump said during a speech at the White House. The ball is now in Congress" court for the next 2 months to decide whether to keap the Iran deal or end it.

And finally, talking of balls...Tillerson stated on CNN Sunday that he’s "fully intact" in response to Sen. Bob Corker’s suggestion he’s been "castrated" by Trump.

As DailyCaller.com notes, CNN’s Jake Tapper asked Tillerson, “You have a cattle ranch. You don’t want to say anything about the Senator suggesting you’ve been gelded before the world?”

Secretary Tillerson answered, “I checked. I’m fully intact.”

Tapper laughed and said, “I did not expect that answer.”

Empire-Destroying Wars Are Coming to America Under Trump - Part 3

Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

The first two parts of this series focused on how Trump-specific factors could lead the American empire into another series of foolish and highly destructive wars. Part 1 discussed my concerns regarding Iran deal certification, as well as Trump’s increased coziness with Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton, who appears to get turned on by the use of violent force. Part 2 considered how Trump might sell his wars by promoting an environment of slobbering, superficial patriotism, and also speculated that corporate media might rally behind Trump if the target of his aggression happens to be Iran.

Today’s piece will be slightly different. The prior posts focused on Trump-specific angles with regard to how America’s forthcoming military mistake might play out, but I want to make one thing clear. While Trump carries his own unique risks when it comes to militarism overseas, this is all much bigger than Trump.

In the aftermath of the financial crisis, I’ve become convinced that the U.S. empire will never reform on its own. There’s simply too much money and power at stake, and we already know oligarchs are above the law under our two-tier justice system. The biggest financial criminals of a generation were not only spared prison for their actions, but were handsomely rewarded. Wall Street ran the Obama administration before, and it runs the Trump administration now. It’s become clear to me that these lawless elite crooks and their enablers will continue with their insane and oppressive policies until the whole thing collapses. Whether Trump, Pence or Hillary Clinton run the charade doesn’t change where this train is headed.

I say this because I don’t want people to think I believe everything would work out fine if Trump wasn’t in charge. Our society is extraordinarily corrupt, delusional and systemically abusive. The public no longer has confidence in any of our institutions and for very good reasons. Our institutions exist merely to serve as gatekeepers to protect predatory crooks from the consequences of their actions.

The reason I focus on war leading to a more dangerous phase of imperial collapse is because I think that’s the most likely way this thing will go down. When I look around at those in positions of power or influence in the U.S., I don’t see people who’ve learned lessons from Iraq, Libya and now Yemen. Rather, I see a continued consensus of interventionists who’ll never stop looking for the next country to bomb. As such, it’s likely they’ll eventually pick the wrong fight, and everything will crumble pretty fast after that.

I think the most likely target for such aggression under Trump is Iran, but such a move will not go down the same way as the Iraq war. Back in 2003, U.S. leadership still had some standing in the world and amongst its own people. It was only two years after 9/11, and the American government was still seen as a positive force in the world by many. George W. Bush and his pals used this goodwill to destroy a country that never attacked us, killing hundreds of thousands of people in the process. Even worse, the entire thing was based on lies and media propaganda. A decade and a half later, the U.S. has been involved in plenty of other overseas calamities, but none as major as Iraq. Any new major conflict would happen in a world where the U.S. is far more despised than it was in 2003.

It’s sad to say it, but over the course of the 21st century the U.S. government has exposed itself as a corrupt bully, not just to the outside world, but also to its own people. Moreover, those in positions of power and influence in America either don’t recognize this reality or don’t care. It’s this sort of disconnected hubris combined with rampant internal corruption that is the true graveyard of empires. I think both allies and enemies abroad have had enough, and given the right opportunity, will let the U.S. sink.

As I explained in the post, Prepare for Impact – This is the Beginning of the End for U.S. Empire:

How is all this going to play out? Obviously nobody really knows, but I do think we’ve entered a new period in American history. I think it’s basically a crossing of the Rubicon moment for the American empire. Personally, I don’t expect a strong and visible military response from Russia in the near-term. I don’t think Putin wants to give the U.S. media and newly minted neocon Donald Trump an excuse to do anything truly crazy, which they can blame on Russia in the court of public opinion. I think Putin is too smart for that. Rather, what I think he’ll do is make all sorts of moves behind the scenes to weaken America’s economic power, while at the same time engaging in minor provocations to tempt the imbeciles in charge of U.S. foreign policy to make further mistakes abroad, to which they’ll emphatically oblige.

In other words, Russia will attempt to make the U.S. extend itself further in a region where no real success is possible, at the same time that the American economy deteriorates further. Recall that the current very weak economic “recovery” has been going on for nearly a decade. This cycle is very long in the tooth, and all Russia really needs to do is sit back, make some moves behind the scenes and allow the U.S. to collapse upon itself in its hubris and stupidity. This is precisely what I think is going to happen.

U.S. leadership is so delusional, and quite frankly stupid, that it thinks the answer to grave overseas threats is more aggression.

The exact opposite is true. I’m of the view that both China and Russia are sitting back and just waiting for the U.S. to do something historically idiotic overseas.

Many Americans voted for Trump hoping that he would avoid such a scenario, but this optimism looks increasingly misplaced. As such, I expect a major military mistake in the years ahead which will set off a chain reaction that will ultimately deal a huge and very public blow to the U.S. empire. In other words, if you live another ten years you can expect to live through a period of rapid decay for the country as we know it.

While I believe such a collapse is extremely likely, it doesn’t mean the answer is to cower in fear as events begin to unfold. Rather, the better you understand the risks, the better prepared you’ll be to ride out the times ahead, thus providing a platform to turn a chaotic and dangerous situation into something positive.

So be a better person. Try to help people who need it. Spread ideas of decentralization and promote a worldwide movement away from centralized authoritarian structures wherever and whenever possible. The future is what we make of it, and the future can be very bright. To create a better world we’ll need a more conscious population grounded in decent behavior, and there’s no better place to start than with ourselves.

*  *  *

In the meantime, if you liked this article and enjoy my work, consider becoming a monthly Patron, or visit our Support Page to show your appreciation for independent content creators.

Empire-Destroying Wars Are Coming To America Under Trump - Part 1

Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

There are a variety of reasons Trump supporters voted the way they did in November, but one clear message many found attractive was the idea his administration would be driven by an “America First” doctrine.

America first meant a lot of things to a lot of different people, running the gamut from economic populism and immigration, to an avoidance of barbaric and costly overseas wars. The economic populism part was the biggest ruse from day one, a betrayal which (as we had seen under Obama) became undeniable as soon as he started appointing lifelong swamp-dwelling billionaires and Goldman Sachs partners to run his administration. 

Irrespective of who you elect, Wall Street runs the empire, as Trump proved once again.

The coming massive pivot when it comes to destructive wars abroad will take a little longer, but the writing’s been on the wall for months. I’ve published several posts on the topic, with the most popular one titled, Prepare for Impact – This is the Beginning of the End for U.S. Empire.  Here’s an excerpt:

This is not the sort of thing you see in a confident, brave, and civilized nation, it’s the sort of stuff you’d expect to see toward the end. It’s the stuff of craven war-mongers, of dishonest cowards, of a totally deranged and very dangerous media. The signs are everywhere; imperial decline is set to accelerate rapidly in the coming years…

Expect more of all the above as the U.S. empire enters its most devastating phase of collapse. Think about what it might mean for you and your family and prepare accordingly.

When I compare who Trump currently has advising him and who he’s getting closer to, the future looks increasingly ominous. This is especially true when it comes to the Iran nuclear deal. Irrespective of what you think of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary James Mattis, these two look like a couple of the most sane humans on earth compared to some of the others Trump’s cozying up to. I alluded to this earlier today on Twitter.

You think Tillerson and Mattis are bad?
Wait until Cotton and Haley are in charge.
Empire destroying wars are coming.

— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) October 10, 2017

The key event I believe will set the groundwork for a coming disastrous confrontation with Iran, is Trump’s highly anticipated announcement that the Iran nuclear agreement is against U.S. interests. This wouldn’t immediately end the deal or lead to new U.S. sanctions, but it would represent the first step in heading in that direction. A direction I believe will ultimately lead to US aggression against Iran in a similar fashion as Iraq, except this miscalculation will have even more disastrous consequences for the American empire.

Before we go any further, it’s important to understand what’s going on with regard to Iran and who now has Trump’s ear on foreign policy. Let’s start with some color from a recent New York Times article:

President Trump is expected to overrule his top national security advisers and decline to certify the Iran nuclear agreement, according to people who have been briefed on the matter, a decision that would reopen a volatile political debate on Iran but is likely to leave in place the landmark deal negotiated by the Obama administration.

 

By declining to certify Iran’s compliance, Mr. Trump would essentially kick it to Congress to decide whether to reimpose punitive economic sanctions. Even among Republicans, there appears to be little appetite to do that, at least for now.

If Trump isn’t listening to Tillerson or Mattis, who is he listening to?

Congress will have to decide whether to reimpose sanctions, which could sink the deal, or use the prospect of that to force Iran — and the other parties to the deal — back to the negotiating table to make changes in the agreement.

 

That is the approach favored by Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas, who has emerged as a leading hard-liner on Iran and is working closely with the White House to devise its strategy. On Thursday, Mr. Cotton met with Mr. Trump to discuss Iran and other issues.

 

“Congress and the president, working together, should lay out how the deal must change and, if it doesn’t, the consequences Iran will face,” Mr. Cotton said in a speech on Tuesday at the Council on Foreign Relations. Reimposing sanctions, he said, would be a “backward-looking step.”

 

The deal is also contentious inside the administration. Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis have both urged Mr. Trump not to back out of it, in part because that would free Iran to begin producing uranium and reprocessing plutonium immediately, not after 13 years, as is stipulated in the agreement.

 

But Mr. Trump, after twice certifying the deal, has warned his aides that he would not do so again. As a result, the administration is looking for ways to claim Iran is in violation of the “spirit” of the accord, even if it has complied with inspection criteria. The International Atomic Energy Agency has said that Iran was in compliance; when it has found minor violations, they have been quickly fixed.

Tom Cotton is as dangerous a war hawk as exists in America today. In fact, the guy’s such a total lunatic, I’ve been warning followers on Twitter about him for years. Since most of you probably aren’t caught up on him, definitely take a moment to read the following article published by Alternet  in 2015, 10 Horrifying Facts About GOP Senator Tom Cotton.

We should probably go ahead and update this list as it didn’t even mention how Cotton claims the U.S. has an “under-incarceration” problem even though it has only 5% of the world’s population, yet 25% of its prisoners. Seems like a swell guy.

Jokes aside, Tom Cotton might actually be the most dangerous person in the entire U.S. Senate (which is saying a lot), so the fact he’s become so cozy with Trump on foreign policy is extremely dangerous. Indeed, he’s become so influential, Politico recently conducted an in-depth interview with him where he made his positions quite clear. Here are a few highlights:

This is a moment of truth for President Trump’s national security team. He is set to overrule both his secretaries of State and Defense on the Iran nuclear deal this week, declaring it no longer in the U.S. “national interest” in explicit contradiction to their public position. And if they don’t like it, Senator Tom Cotton says, then they should get out.

Cotton, who has personally advised Trump in recent days about the new Iran strategy he is set to release this week, stopped short of saying either embattled Secretary of State Rex Tillerson or Defense Secretary Jim Mattis should in fact resign. But his comments were nonetheless a striking acknowledgement of the giant rift that has opened up in the midst of the Trump team over foreign policy.

The interview with Cotton took place before this latest explosive twist, but even then it was clear a new rift of significance was opening up inside the Republican foreign policy world. I spoke with Cotton Thursday, the day after Tillerson’s unusual press conference to deny press reports he was considering quitting, and just a couple hours after Cotton was summoned to the White House for a private Oval Office meeting with Trump to discuss the Iran strategy. In the interview, Cotton did not really try to paper over the rift or offer the usual assurances that it would all be papered over. Instead, when I asked him directly whether there would be resignations, Cotton did not say there wouldn’t be, only that he did not believe they were “imminent.”

Because Cotton today is one of the few Senate Republicans who pay close attention to foreign policy who is still out there making Corker’s initial case for engagement with Trump, and he insists it’s paying off with substantive shifts in Trump’s thinking on subjects as varied as how to deal with Russia and the continuation of the war in Afghanistan.

Until now, Trump has shied away from outright confrontation with the experienced hands he’s hired to oversee his national security policy. But the Iran deal now seems to have finally forced a public rupture.

Cotton, who has repeatedly consulted with Trump and other top White House officials in recent days, appears to be on the winning side, pushing Trump to adopt the formula his administration has now settled on of refusing to re-certify the Iran deal to Congress but holding off – for now – asking Congress to blow it up by imposing new sanctions. Iran “is on the president’s mind right now, probably more than anything,” Cotton says, and he says he believes Trump will take the step of not certifying as a way to send “a very important signal to Congress and to our E.U. plus three partners and to Iran that this president is not going to abide by a disastrous nuclear deal.”

Cotton gave a lengthy address at the Council on Foreign Relations the same day as Mattis’ testimony taking the opposite view – and a link to it was soon tweeted out approvingly by an Iran deal hardliner inside the administration, U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley.

I’m glad Nikki Haley came up, as she’s a certified grade-A maniac and bloodthirsty neocon. While she’s dangerous enough at the U.N., there’s talk that she could ultimately replace Tillerson as Secretary of State. Any combination of Cotton and Haley moving into increased prominence within the Trump circle of influence effectively guarantees more disastrous war in the Middle East.

The writing’s on the wall and you can feel free to ignore it at your own risk. Beyond what I outlined in this piece, a key question is how will Trump sell the coming conflicts to his base, and what will the ultimate implications of the coming wars be? I plan to address both those things in tomorrow’s post.

*  *  *

In the meantime, if you liked this article and enjoy my work, consider becoming a monthly Patron, or visit our Support Page to show your appreciation for independent content creators.