| | | | Fareed: Trump Must Have Missed His North Korea Briefing | | "The real headline of the Trump-Kim summit," Fareed writes in his latest Washington Post column, "should have been: 'U.S. weakens its 70-year alliance with South Korea.'"
"The most striking elements of Trump's initiative were not simply that he lavished praise on North Korea's dictator, Kim Jong Un, but also that he announced the cancellation of military exercises with South Korea, adopting North Korea's own rhetoric by calling them 'provocative.'"
"In fact, it is North Korea that provokes and threatens South Korea," Fareed points out.
What Trump called South Korea's "war games" with the U.S. military are "necessary defensive exercises undertaken in the shadow of an aggressive adversary."
It's a win for China, Fareed argues, which has been eager "to rid Asia of U.S. troops, especially from the mainland" in pursuit of regional dominance.
"Now the rules of the road are being written in Asia, and they are being written in Mandarin."
| | Trump, China, and the Trade Wars | | Today, Washington declared 25% tariffs on $50 billion of goods from China, triggering what China called a trade war.
So what's behind President Trump's predilection for trade wars? Krishnadev Calamur for The Atlantic writes that the President "really does seem to believe that 'trade wars are good, and easy to win.' His priority is not negotiating, but fighting."
"The variety of Trump's targets, starting with U.S. allies whose trade policies resemble those of the United States, and continuing with China," a country whose policies are widely seen as unfair, means that there's something beyond the aim to "negotiate fairer deals. If that were the goal, China would not be treated similarly to Europe."
Trump's recently imposed heavy tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from Canada, the EU, and Mexico have alienated those countries. "Both Canada and the EU have complaints about China's trade practices similar to those of the U.S., and they could have been reliable allies in persuading Beijing to alter its policies in order to make trade with it more balanced. (Mexico, fearing the demise of NAFTA, is meanwhile cozying up to China.)"
| | Americans Crazy to Call Kim Crazy | | "The most significant development in Singapore was to complete the transformation of Kim himself from a secretive, slightly comical, definitely murderous, and possibly irrational leader of a 'Hermit Kingdom' into a serious and engaged world leader," writes Stephen M. Walt for Foreign Policy.
It's all a result of "America's self-defeating tendency to portray adversaries as irrational, crazy, deluded, risk-seeking, suicidal, or just plain nuts."
"In truth, the Kim family has never been crazy or irrational," Walt suggests. "They've just managed to keep themselves in power in difficult circumstances for seven decades."
This American attitude has a real cost, Walt argues. "Exaggerating an enemy's irrationality thus makes it more likely that potential positive diplomatic deals won't even be contemplated, let alone attempted."
| | Women No Longer Protected Under Human Rights Claims | | | Amid widespread outcry over children separated by force from parents seeking to cross the U.S. border, another "radical decision" was made this week by Attorney General Jeff Sessions, write Caroline Bettinger-López and Rachel Vogelstein in Foreign Affairs.
"Sessions found that a domestic violence victim from El Salvador—perhaps the most dangerous country on earth in which to be a woman—would not qualify for asylum, even though her own country had utterly failed to protect her."
It's a radical break from U.S. policy, say Bettinger-López and Vogelstein.
"Violence against women has come to be understood as a human rights violation," a principle now enshrined in "U.S. law and international human rights standards."
Sessions' decision "will undoubtedly result in death or significant harm to some of the world's most vulnerable women: victims of domestic violence who live in countries that do not, or cannot, protect them from their abusive partners."
| | Europe's Far Right
& The World Cup | | With nationalism on the rise in Europe, the World Cup underway in Russia is turning out to be more than a triumph of "the greatest footballing talent," writes Gary Younge for The Guardian. The games are "also giving free rein to the rawest and deepest anxieties both within nations and between them."
A photograph that "two German-born Premier League footballers of Turkish descent" took with Turkish President Erdoğan caused a major backlash—reasonably so, given Erdoğan's "record of human rights abuses and dictatorial tendencies."
But politicians in Germany's far-right party "Alternative für Deutschland have seized the moment to question not just the players' decision, but their authenticity," reflecting heightened anti-immigrant nationalism.
It's not just Germany's problem, says Younge. Italy's recently elected Deputy PM Matteo Salvini—leader of a far-right populist party—tweeted "Too many foreigners on the field" in reaction to Italy's losses last fall: "#StopInvasion, and more space for Italian guys, also on the soccer field."
Indeed, Europeans' reaction to diversity on the soccer pitch seem to vary depending on whether the teams are winning or losing, the article says.
"When diversity is related to something successful then it is a sign of the nation's genius in allowing, nurturing and managing it," Younge argues. "When it is attached to a national calamity, diversity is the reason for the failure."
| | | | | | |
