Trump Unbundled

 People deserve the leaders they choose. This is all the more valid for democracies where the assumption is that the electorate is educated and politically astute. Four years ago as Donald Trump created a divisive agenda and embellished a campaign with lies and racist slant one felt the United States of America was getting what it deserved. Even though one knew Trump had hijacked the Republican Party there was an inner voice that hoped he could step in as the 45th President and change by embracing the statesmen like qualities that the Oval Office thrusts upon its incumbents.

Four years later and the circus of the US election is unfolding again. It is obvious that there is a hard core of Trump supporters who continue to embrace President Trump believing in the hyperbole he has been spinning. It is unlikely that die hard core of his base will embrace the truth of Trumps failures as a man and as a President even when faced with his lack of action on the COVID 19 pandemic that has left close to 180,00 Americans dead. The fact he has embraced white supremacists, ridiculed minorities and shunned responsibility for the failures of his office do not matter to them. 

In 2016 the media played into Trumps strategy by giving him more air time each time he made unspeakable remarks and in a sense gave a platform for his views rather than ignoring him. Now the challenge is to unbundle this President even though Trump has a state machinery to defend the agenda and his position. However, one must admit that Trump’s success in 2016 was also on account of the failures of the Hilary Clinton campaign who ignored the states they were traditionally strong in and the Democrats just could not mobilise the voter base who could have titled the balance in their favour.

The challenge will be how to take an electorate who are increasingly apathetic towards the 2020 election to go out an vote? The choice is Trumps dramatic but untrue characterisations versus the Biden camps search of a meaningful message. Trumps assurance is his base, some of whom may have wavered but the question remains if he has marshalled in enough to replace those he lost. Yet it is clear his base also envisions cannot get him elected. In 2016 there was a large blue collar work force who were disgruntled with Hilary Clinton strongly enough to swing to the Trump camp. Biden and his team have to focus on these key segments in addition to the large number of people who did not vote in 2016.

To unbundle Trump is more a matter of focus on his content of his failures rather than a generic denunciation of the man. As we saw in 2016 some of the worst gaffes and revelations (the Hollywood tape, Stormy Daniels etc) did not faze him or his base. Unlike the previous election this time his character flaws can be pitched against his policy failures and this should be the focus of any challenge to Donald Trump.

His Presidency has left a litany of lies, and behavioural flaws most if not all of which have effected policy.  The unbundling of Trump is therefore a unique journey into the mind of a man who can only evoke two emotions; you can either love him or hate him, but ignoring him is no more possible.

Trumpism is to embrace the lies.

There is a plethora lies that can be attributed to Donald Trump, to he point he is labelled as a serial liar. Through this summer he has averaged at over 250 lies a month! What is amazing is that Trump continues to utter his lies over and over based on the dictum that if you utter a lie often enough people will believe it to be the truth. This certainly was the case with his accusation that President Obama was not born in the United States, which some of his followers still believe to be the truth. 

When faced with the gravest threats to US society in the shape of the COVID-19 pandemic Trump continued to lie about the gravity of the crisis and the measures he was taking. Sadly as US citizens died each day at an alarming rate President Trump claimed US was a leading example of fighting the pandemic, so much so that claiming the effects of the virus in the US were minor. At one point he was touting untested remedies for the COVID-19 and consistently denying there was a crisis. It was a clear case of the liar believing his version of reality and anyone who did not buy into that reality was enemy.

Politicians, including Presidents, are prone to stretch the truth, but Donald Trump does not bend the truth he simply creates his own version of the truth through a web of lies. One wonders when his wife, Melania, at the RNC meeting stated that people expect the President to tell the truth was it a tongue in cheek reference to her own husband.

Disavowing his former allies.

In Trumps White House it’s been normal to a cavalcade of officials be appointed and then to exit, some within a few weeks. The exits were either because they fell out with Trump and his inner circle or resigned in the face of criminal investigations. Upon their appointment Donald Trump has espoused lavish praise on the appointees calling them ‘very good’ people and upon their exit calling them losers. In cases where his former associates have been criminally charged Trump has been quick to state that he only knew them fleetingly and distanced himself from them. The most glaring fallout was with Steve Bannon, former chief strategist for Trumps election bit and then and advisor. During the early years of Trumps Presidency Bannon was a permanent fixture at the Oval Office and now discarded and facing a criminal charge Trump can only say that Bannon worked for his administration but he did not know him that well.

It would seem that Trump has no sense of loyalty to the people who have  served his cause. They are as good as their total subservience and submission to Trumps whims is the only barometer of acceptance by the President. Loyalty to Mr. Trump is a one way street and explains why sycophancy is the order of the day and a necessary qualification to work with Mr. Trump. This implies that the President will not necessarily get the best advice since there is a propensity on his part to surround himself with yes men. 

Ego before nation.

 Most people who have known Donald Trump attest to his over grown ego. He does not want to be ignored and resents attention to anyone but himself. This ego also shapes the self image that Trump carries to the extent that he considers himself smarter than anyone else, brighter than the best scientists, and considers his art of the deal implies he can negotiate with anyone, including dictators in North Korea or the NATO leaders. Having an over sized ego is one thing but in Trumps case he holds a vindictive nature against people who may be considered better than him. This explains his benign hatred for President Obama and everything the previous administration achieved. 

The result of this egoistic trait has meant that valuable time and resources have been wasted on proving he can deal with North Korea, when the lack of results shows how his ego cannot be out before the national interest. Trumps position on climate change, Immigration, healthcare and Russia show how one mans ego has been the focal point of a policy that he cannot rationalise. 

Trumps Achilles heel.

In 2016 Trump came under pressure to release his tax returns to which he declared if he won the election he would do so. Four years later not only have the tax filings not been released he and his lawyers have Ben fighting the courts which have ordered their release. What is it that Trump does not want to be disclosed?

Here is a theory, and mind you only a theory. Let’s go back to 2014 and Trump is flirting with the idea of entering the Presidential race. It was no secret amongst top banks that Trump was a risky client and since his earlier bankruptcies top western banks avoided lending to the Trump group. The exception was Duetsche Bank who at one point had an exposure of $2 billion to Trump companies. In addition there were a number of syndicated loans on projects where Trump was a significant minority shareholder in a project.  For instance the developer of 1290 Avenue of America, in which Trump owns 30% equity borrowed from a consortium of banks almost $1billion of which $ 211 m was provided by Bank of China. The loan was signed in November 2012. Around the time of the election in 2016 Bank of China denied it had leant the money however in 2017 its name appeared on listed of banks holding a mortgage on the said development. If it was an arms length transaction why would the bank deny it ever loaned the money? 

Now here is the theory and at the outset one must state that it is entirely conjecture. Prior to the election banks lending to Trump got nervous that a risky client would be impossible to handle if he became President. Some of these banks called in their loans. It is possible that some of these loans were bought by Russian banks and this may explain why Trump has been soft of Mr Putin and Russia. This would explain why the battle for the tax filings is so important as it would reveal the trail of the financial dealings. 

Either way whether true or not it does make an interesting plot for a financial thriller.

As the final run for the election of the next president heats up Americans have to make a moral choice not an emotional choice. One can excuse any number of Trumps failures and indiscretions but forgiving him for his failure to handle the COVID-19 pandemic is something one cannot do.  Jimmy Carter lost the election for the handling of US hostage crisis in Tehran, but today with thousands of Americans having died of the COVID-19 virus Trump not only survives but thrives on laying blame on others or flatly denying that he failed. If Trump is to be judged solely on his handling of the pandemic then he will lose the election. This is where the soul of America will be tested; is a second term for Trump worth more than 179,000 dead Americans?

The Korean Missile Crisis.

In October 1962 a young President J K Kennedy faced the Cuban Missile Crisis which, in the words of some, put the world a blink away from a nuclear war. The 13 day crisis was defused finally but not after a level of brinkmanship which has remained a text book case study of crisis management. Today North Korea's King Jong Un and President Donald Trump are enacting a dance of brinkmanship that, without a doubt, is possibly going to dwarf the Cuban Missile Crisis. There are stark differences between the two conflicts, and yet the similarities are to the extent that a possible nuclear confrontation could get out of hand.

Without discussing the 1962 crisis in too much detail, one thing was clearly obvious in that crisis was that the Russian movement of missiles to Cuba in a sense posturing by Moscow to get the US to roll back its Jupiter missile deployment in Turkey. Indeed, as the crisis rolled out the posturing could have resulted in outbreak of hostilities but one can argue that given the Russian motives there was a line they did not want to cross.

In contrast the current crisis is not something that has suddenly surprised the world. North Korea for some time now has not been secretive about its desire to have both a nuclear weapons capability and to have a credible delivery system. A study of nuclear proliferation shows that once an aspiring nuclear country crosses a certain point in its development system the roll back of the system through pressure and threats begins to fail. We saw this in the case of Israel, India and Pakistan, and North Korea is no exception to that process. Theoretically a nuclear capability is easier to achieve that back during the 1940's Manhattan Project, the two big challenges are to develop a delivery system and to then be able to reduce the size of the nuclear weapon to then be carried as a warhead.

While there is no conclusive evidence that this warhead capability has been developed by North Korea, there is a capability with them to drop a dirty nuclear bomb from conventional means, i.e aircraft or a crude warhead. Irrespective of the effectiveness of such a capability there is no doubt that a dirty bomb or a sophisticated warhead the threat to the world is present and dangerous. So let us assume that North Korea does have the capability to cause considerable trouble.

On the current crisis it is evident that the crisis and the outcomes will be influenced by the personality of the two principal players in the sordid drama; Kim Jong Un and Donald J Trump. Let is first see the Korean leaders stance, personality and posture.

Kim Jung Un is clearly an autocrat who has absolutely no restraint on his actions from within his government or its functioning system. He has demonstrated clearly that he does not tolerate dissent and more often than not will eliminate opposition even on the basis of a hint of discontent towards him. He seems to have a stubborn streak and tends have a tit for tat mentality without regard for the stakes involved in his actions. he is on record to have said recently that he has no issue to attack American military capabilities in the region and even said he soon expects to have an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of hitting mainland United States of America.

To Kim Jung Un the goals seems to be to continue his missile testing without restraint and to continue play a game of brinkmanship with President Trump. The Korean leader is posturing as if in a game of chess and relishing the standoff perhaps believing that without the support of Congress it would seem unlikely that Trump would up the ante to a first strike on North Korea. Kim Jung Un could be making a fatal mistake as it is obvious that President Trump might be impulsive enough to order a first strike without warning. All one could then hope for is that his military brass are correct in assuming a first strike could disable North Korea's entire missile system.

Should such a first strike take place it will have to assume that China, who seems to have agreed to work with Washington to defuse the situation, may step back from being neo-neutral and change its posture. Secondly, one cannot assume that Russia would stand back in the event of a US first strike against North Korea; for them there would be distinction between a missile strike in Syria by the US with an all out first strike against North Korea.

Donald Trump has approached this crisis with a degree of aggression and bravado that is atypical of the Presidents office. The fact that Trump has said he does not rule out hostilities with North Korea is a chilling statement and while it may well be designed to give a strong message to Kim Jung Un, it was greeted with a missile launch by North Korea the very next day. Diplomacy is not one of Trumps strong points and one would imagine sane voices in his Administration would have suggested that China be asked to deliver the message of US resolve.

The danger remains that the two leaders could get embroiled in a ego war the cost of which will be borne in the loss of human life beyond our imagination. The solutions have to be offered for a quick deescalation of crisis and it would seem China's role in this is paramount. Already there is a mixed message out there with Trump saying there is a major risk of war and Secretary Tillerson not ruling out the possibility to sit and talk with the North Koreans. Indeed giving an escape route to the North Koreans to come to their senses is a plausible policy, but then one is not dealing with a rational human being. One additional problem is the maverick personality of President Trump which can only create uncertainty in the current climate.

On a closing note I wonder if Trump is reading up on the 1962 Missile Crisis and if Kim Jung Un is attending his anger management classes. Sad we are close to a stage where in one afternoon we can destroy all what God created on earth.

Trumpism: The Message

Donald J Trump promised he was going to be a 'different' President, none of us quite imagined 'how different?' Born into privilege, and not having held public office and his lack of finesse were givens that were known and not a revelation. Trump is not an avid student of constitutional law, like Obama, or holds a legacy of political inheritance, like Bush, or carries the charisma of a Kennedy, or the vision of Regan, but we all hope, somewhere within him is a philosophy of governance waiting to express itself. Thirty days into the Presidency the Trump administration has just not kicked out of campaign mode, and in more ways than one has shown weaknesses in its administration that wrestle logic.

Yes there is no denying that Trump spoke for the disfranchised workers, mostly white working class, and he spoke to them, during the election, with a political incorrectness that they liked and identified with. To them the ills of their economic and social plight lay with the Chinese and the Mexicans, and their insecurities came from the threat of Islamic terrorism. Trump, a candidate for the highest office, was speaking things they spoke in bars, he was not the smooth talking intellectual who has spoken to them for decades before. The fact his message was rhetoric, lacking in substance and policy, did not matter, the man was going to clean the 'swamp' in Washington and in some miraculous way change their destiny in their little hometown was all that mattered.

I am reminded of a very brilliant politician from my home country, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who in 1970's stepped up and promised everyone, yes everyone, in Pakistan 'roti, capra and makkan, i.e. 'bread, clothes and a house'. He swept to power in the first general election after years of military dictatorship, even though he did not command the majority in then East Pakistan, he worked to ensure he was in power and not the majority party from the East. Bhutto was a brilliant man, but a man who knew that his promise of bread, clothes and a house were false but it did not matter, he was in power. In sense Trump reminds me of that election promise, minus the intellectual power of a Bhutto.

Sadly the message that Trumpism is bringing to the forefront is that wrestling with the values of the constitution, dismantling the edifice of the separation of powers, judging the judiciary are all fine. Yes Presidents have lied before, yes Presidents have not delivered all their promises but never have they attacked the values of what we, from the outside, see as one of America's greatest virtues, the ability to hold people in public office fully accountable. It was these institutional values that brought Nixon and Bill Clinton to face their failures, not only as Presidents but as people in office expected to hold high standards of personal and moral conduct. While it would be unfair to characterize Donald Trump as a dictator in the making, most certainly there are deeply troubling signs of his definition of his own power, without recognizing its limits, that ought to bother the saner voices amongst us.

Having spent hours listening to his election speeches and those since he took office, one cannot see even an iota of an effort for the man to become Presidential! One can excuse his style of oratory, one can excuse his hyperbolic gestures, one can even find some of his utterances, (ala Sweden's terror attack last week, which never happened) as amusing, but then Mr. Trump where are the words that carry not a nation only but the world with you. Everything is not a 'deal' and even when you talk of a new deal between the Israeli's and Palestinians, you tell us what two decades ago was proposed by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and endorsed by the Arab League.

This is where the message from President Trump gets all muddled up. Clearly he has no sense of history and certainly not a man who has read much of history or anything at all. His intake of intellectual stimulus supposedly comes from watching cable TV, and his prowess over words is limited to the 140 character or so that Twitter allows! I do not expect President Trump to be an authority on Plato and Socrates, or even America's own political history, but somewhere in those disjointed words I would expect some words of encouragement that we have a President leading the free world with some vision, some political insight that is more than on offer in a run down bar in the middle of nowhere in America.

If the first 30 days have not seen the man change, we can forgive him that, but then four years is a long time to endure this sort of political leadership. His confrontational style has called the press the 'enemy' the judges 'incompetent' and ensured that America's neighbors do not feel they want to be on the same continent. It is only a matter of time, and not too far down this rocky road, when he will clash with the Republican party itself, it is almost as predictable as the sun rising tomorrow. President Trump only you can change the course of this plane, only you can give it stability and direction that instills confidence and to do that you have to take three days off, sit alone and ponder on the simple question of how do you want to lead the nation and the world, and while doing that shut down your Twitter account.