Misunderestimate

Underestimating Donald Trump Is Dangerous

Donald Trump 47 is a very different man from Trump 45. He learned many lessons in his first term and has forgotten none. He is not practicing vengeance; he is simply playing the level of hardball played against him in his first term. He thought there was some level of concern for the country. He now knows better. Everyone is playing organizational politics. Whatever is best for my part of the bureaucracy must be best for everyone. There is no morality beyond that.

Trump learned in the 2016 campaign not to trust anything he heard from the so-called experts in the defense and intelligence establishments in Washington. They were not only wrong, but they also deliberately lied and lied about him. His campaign and term were tied up by the lie about "Russian collusion" and a fictional episode in a hotel room. These stories have been told so often that many still think they're true.

Washington Post reporter Jonathan Capehart may be one of those believers. He recently said:

I thought the low point for America on the world stage was the Trump‑Putin press conference in Helsinki in 2017, when the president of the United States sided with the president of Russia against his own national intelligence apparatus.

It is easy to understand why Trump would believe almost anyone other than people he knows to be liars. That is why he named Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence. She doesn't trust them either.

Trump has a clear plan and goal for resolving the Ukraine problem. He understands that Putin did not create Russia's requirements vis-à-vis Ukraine. They were described in an internal U. S. State Department document before Putin was born in 1952. That paper was written in 1948 by George Kennan, a former ambassador to Moscow and the author of the famous "X" paper in Foreign Affairs, which was influential in setting our containment policy against the Soviets.

A Foreign Policy magazine article by Frank Costigliola in early 2023 explained Russia's views on Ukraine and his warnings over time. In 1948, Kennan wrote:

"[T]here is no clear dividing line between Russia and Ukraine, and it would be impossible to establish one." Second, the Russian and Ukrainian economies were intertwined. Setting up an independent Ukraine "would be as artificial and as destructive as an attempt to separate the Corn Belt, including the Great Lakes industrial area, from the economy of the United States."

* * *

Again, Kennan likened the Russian view of Ukraine to the American view of the Midwest. A separate, independent Ukraine could "be maintained, in the last analysis, only by force." For all these reasons, a hypothetical triumphant United States should not seek to impose Ukrainian independence on a prostrate Russia.

Trump understands the arrogant view that NATO can expand right up to Russia's border is a primary point of contention. NATO has no right to insist that Russia trust its motives are now and always will be pure. Russia's view is simple. NATO is a military alliance built to protect against the Soviet Union, which no longer exists. It has no purpose now other than to threaten a much smaller and weaker Russia. Having all the countries on its borders a part of NATO and able to launch attacks and missiles with virtually no notice is unacceptable. Russia will not accept Ukraine as a member of NATO.

Americans aren't used to living in a world where invasions are a frequent part of their history. For Russians, it has been, "How have we been invaded? Let us count the ways!" Russia will insist on keeping Crimea to have a warm water port at Sevastopol and to ensure it doesn't become a NATO port. They will also refuse to yield the provinces or oblasts in the eastern area of Ukraine known as Donbas.

Trump is determined to reduce the spending and risk involved in having our troops deployed all over the world. He is willing to have Americans as a buffer in Ukraine if they are unarmed civilians and America is making money instead of spending it. A mineral rights commercial deal does that. They will not be a threat to Russia but will still serve as a "tripwire" to let the Ukrainians know that we will be unhappy if the Russians attack and harm our people. Troops cost us a lot of money, and we get nothing. Mineral rights are profitable.

Trump is also getting tired of being lectured by a bunch of self-righteous, arrogant, cheap-skate European leaders who haven't noticed their countries no longer lead the world. He is trying to determine what to do about international organizations and courts that issue arrogant rulings they can't enforce but cause PR issues.

NATO is causing all kinds of grief. The latest is an episode in Norway. After the recent tiff in the Oval Office with Zelenskyy, an arrogant Norwegian fuel company, Haltbakk Bunkers, decided to stop refueling U.S. military ships. We don't need this grief. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) had the correct answer. Let's leave NATO.

Trump is also determined to prevent the outbreak of World War III. Britain and France are talking about a "coalition of the willing" to keep killing young Slavic men. Oops. I mean to keep fighting a losing war to try to win back territory from Russia. They are doing this even though their economies are in chaos, and fuel costs are disastrously higher. They could use the money to help their people, and ending the sanctions would help economies worldwide.

They are also talking about putting their troops on the ground in Ukraine. That's another reason to leave NATO or be very clear about our understanding of Article 5, which says that an attack on one requires a response from all. Putin has been clear that if Russia itself is harmed by missiles made in a NATO country, such as France or Britain, he will consider it as an attack by that country even if rockets were launched from Ukraine.

If a pugnacious France tries to fight Russia by sending its missiles into Russia from Ukrainian sites, Russia will feel free to attack France directly. Trump must either withdraw from NATO or let these folks know how he will interpret Article 5 if the so-called "coalition of the willing" insists on continuing a war Trump is determined to stop. He must be clear that provoking Russia into an attack doesn't trigger Article 5 and World War III.