World Leaders Facing New Realities (And Opportunities) with U.S. President Donald J. Trump

[livingdeadmoose]

Putin is not a great leader. Look at the state of freedom of speech/press freedom in Russia. As a real American that loves American values, I don't want any of the "great" leadership Putin displays. He's not a liberty guy, and America is all about liberty.

As long as our alliance with Russia benefits us, I don't give a fuck how he rules his country. You don't only build alliances with countries that resemble you. We are are friends with much worse countries (Saudi, Pakistan).

 

[brothir]

My goodness, all the bleeding vaginas in Europe after this election is something to behold. Newspapers in Norway are all "How to deal with this shock", "Europe reeling from US election" and similar soppy bollocks nonsense.

I'm going to have a lot of faces to rub my balls in when it is proven that the US is greater than any single president it may elect.

Also, Juncker can go fuck himself. The recent European schism between those who fear Trump and those who do not is going to result in a lot of tears for me to nourish myself on.

 

[Arkain2K]

Trump, Putin and a nervous NATO
Tue Nov 15, 2016

As Donald Trump takes up residence in the White House next January, one of the most powerful NATO forces in years will be preparing to move into Eastern Europe.

The Alliance is sending four armored battle groupsas part of its strategy to bolster defenses against Russia. Led by Britain, Canada, Germany and the United States respectively, the battalions will go to Poland and the Baltic states of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. The force, which will also draw in troops from multiple other NATO nations, will include armored fighting vehicles and tanks – a dramatic increase in NATO’s eastern presence.

The mission was first announced at the Warsaw Summit in June, just days after Britain’s vote to leave the European Union. What was intended as a strong signal to Vladimir Putin of allied unity, however, now comes against the backdrop of Trump’s surprise win. Some in Europe worry that the Russian president may already be rubbing his hands with glee.

During the 2016 election campaign, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton accused Trump of pledging to pull the United States completely out of NATO. In fact, he never quite said that. He did, however, describe the alliance as “obsolete” and pledged to “take a look” at U.S. membership because it was “costing us a fortune”. His victory is seriously unsettling senior NATO officials, with Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg warning it was no time for Europe or the United States to try to “go it alone”.

This weekend, Kremlin mouthpiece Russia Today enthusiastically picked up on German media reports that NATO officials were preparing contingency plans in case Trump pulls U.S. troops entirely from Europe. Whether the new president will be quite so pliant to Russia’s demands and hopes, however, remains unclear.

Judging from the early signs, however, it appears that – at least to begin with – the U.S.-Russia relationship will be considerably warmer than under the administrations of Barack Obama or George W. Bush.

Russian expectations vary. Some Russian officials have said they believed Trump would swiftly ease sanctions imposed on Moscow over its actions in Ukraine – but Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev this week said he expected them to remain in place for now.

Trump and Putin have yet to meet – and when they do, it will be closely watched for clues as to what kind of relationship they might have. Much will come down to their extremely idiosyncratic personalities – but with the U.S. president-elect in particular renowned for being somewhat thin-skinned, even an early “bromance” is no guarantee of a permanent friendship.

According to the Kremlin, Russian officials remained “in contact” with members of the Trump campaign throughout the election. Some of Trump’s former senior advisers have previously worked for Putin allies such as former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich. But while Trump and Putin paid each other a raft of compliments during the U.S. election campaign, they could equally find themselves testing each other’s strength.

In the immediate aftermath of the election, Russian officials talked in terms of resuming cooperation unilaterally with the United States on a wide number of fronts. Further statements this weekend, however, suggested a true “detente” might be rather more conditional – for example, on scaling back the upcoming NATO deployment.

The Russian leader, of course, faces no shortage of his own challenges. The Russian economy is struggling against the backdrop of slumping energy prices. The 64-year-old Putin’s grip on power remains robust, as does his health – at least for now. But he has no obvious successor, and as the years go by questions will grow about his future.

Still, Putin is riding high for the moment. In Syria, the Russian military intervention has allowed him to dominate the agenda and frustrate any hopes the Obama administration might have had to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and influence a future political settlement.

In Europe, the 2014 annexation of Crimea – and the war that followed in eastern Ukraine – has left Russia isolated, but also much more feared. There are clear limits to its military power: Moscow has so far shown little appetite for pushing militarily beyond the Russian-speaking areas of Ukraine, suggesting it doubts it could hold additional territory. On balance, however, the more muscular approach has succeeded in unsettling Western governments and whipping up pro-Putin sentiment amongst the domestic Russian population.

Russia has clearly been doing what it can to spread disinformation and support the rise of unorthodox politicians, perhaps including Trump himself. The rise of right-wing parties and leaders in mainland Europe and unraveling of support for the European Union – particularly following the migrant crisis – has unquestionably played into his hands. The collapse of Estonia’s pro-western government this week could add to that, potentially bringing a party supported by the Russian-speaking minority population into the governing coalition.

Fear of a U.S. pullback from Europe, however, might well prompt other regional governments to ramp up their defense spending – something the most exposed nations such as Poland and the Baltics have already done. But it might also prompt Moscow to overplay its hand – potentially dangerous, particularly given the somewhat unpredictable nature of the new U.S. leader.

If Clinton had won, it would have been different – although not necessarily safer. The Democratic candidate was by far the most hawkish on Russia since President Ronald Reagan. She and her most senior advisers clearly regarded Putin as an almost existential foe, particularly after allegations of Russian hacking during the campaign. Putin and those around him almost certainly viewed Clinton in a similar way, a legacy of toxic relations while she was secretary of state.

As well as backing Washington’s NATO allies to the hilt, Clinton might well also have escalated the already growing confrontations with Russia in Ukraine and Syria. In the latter, she was openly considering imposing a “no-fly zone”, something that might well have seen U.S. and Russian pilots trying to blast each other from the sky.

That prospect now seems much more remote. For all the uncertainty, it seems likely Trump will be willing to give Putin more room for maneuver in both Syria and non-NATO member Ukraine, where the government in Kiev would have hoped a Clinton administration would be much more likely to ramp up military and diplomatic support.

Avoiding an unnecessary fight with Russia clearly has its upside – no one wants even a limited war, particularly given the risk of nuclear escalation. Still, Moscow seems almost certain to continue to try to assert itself along its borders, sometimes extremely aggressively.

As with so much else from the president-elect, we simply don’t know what his statements will actually mean when he takes office. NATO’s “enhanced forward presence” mission is still likely to go ahead on schedule next year.

A risky face-off in the Baltic between Russia and NATO remains entirely plausible. How it might now play out, however, is now even less predictable.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1391SJ

 

[panamaican]

A couple of our past leaders chime in with quite different views on what Trump's election means for American allies...

This is my biggest concern. Watching foreign leaders decide that they maybe, just maybe, don't need us. We go from being the world leader to just another nation. That's a tremendous problem because we can't regain this lost status. We only have this status because of WWII and there's no other way to create a similar hegemony on the horizon.

I really don't think people realize just how much of our global dominance is predicated on the untested belief that we're needed to keep the world running smoothly. If other countries can go it without us then we lose tons of leverage.

 

[Ruprecht]

This is my biggest concern. Watching foreign leaders decide that they maybe, just maybe, don't need us. We go from being the world leader to just another nation. That's a tremendous problem because we can't regain this lost status. We only have this status because of WWII and there's no other way to create a similar hegemony on the horizon.

I really don't think people realize just how much of our global dominance is predicated on the untested belief that we're needed to keep the world running smoothly. If other countries can go it without us then we lose tons of leverage.

Keating's views aren't the norm here at the moment. Not even within his own (Labor) party. He was pro-republic and very much for Australian independence and regional focus.
Howard is on the other extreme. A reactionary monarchist with a nostalgic policy approach.
I think most views would lie between the two, although probably more towards Howards "wait and see" approach.
Our current (Liberal) Prime Minister Turnbull has said he believes our relationship won't be greatly effected, but it seemed more like something he was hoping for and advocating, rather than something he simply expected to be the case.

 

[WhitebeltXL]

This is my biggest concern. Watching foreign leaders decide that they maybe, just maybe, don't need us. We go from being the world leader to just another nation. That's a tremendous problem because we can't regain this lost status. We only have this status because of WWII and there's no other way to create a similar hegemony on the horizon.

I really don't think people realize just how much of our global dominance is predicated on the untested belief that we're needed to keep the world running smoothly. If other countries can go it without us then we lose tons of leverage.

I wouldn't worry about America's place in the world. From what I've seen from EU leaders, all of them (Tusk, Juncker, May, Merkel etc.,) are falling over themselves to congratulate and deal with Trump as quickly as possible, knowing full well you don't want to be on the wrong side of the US, economically or ideologically.

The UK know America under Trump would be our greatest ally whereas the EU are shitting themselves over the possibility of a confident Putin, if he and Trump are to form a partnership.

Basically, everyone else should be worried...BUT the USA.

 

[panamaican]

Keating's views aren't the norm here at the moment. Not even within his own (Labor) party. He was pro-republic and very much for Australian independence and regional focus.
Howard is on the other extreme. A reactionary monarchist with a nostalgic policy approach.
I think most views would lie between the two, although probably more towards Howards "wait and see" approach.
Our current (Liberal) Prime Minister Turnbull has said he believes our relationship won't be greatly effected, but it seemed more like something he was hoping for and advocating, rather than something he simply expected to be the case.

I agree, I don't think it's the norm anywhere right now. I'm thinking down the road. I think of our position like that of an aging champ. People beat themselves before they get in the ring/cage because of the mystique. But like Tyson, once someone knocks you down then everyone starts seeing you as just another guy with some strengths and some weaknesses. You can't regain that mystique so it has to be protected at all costs.

 

[panamaican]

I wouldn't worry about America's place in the world. From what I've seen from EU leaders, all of them (Tusk, Juncker, May, Merkel etc.,) are falling over themselves to congratulate and deal with Trump as quickly as possible, knowing full well you don't want to be on the wrong side of the US, economically or ideologically.

The UK know America under Trump would be our greatest ally whereas the EU are shitting themselves over the possibility of a confident Putin, if he and Trump are to form a partnership.

Basically, everyone else should be worried...BUT the USA.

I don't see it that way. China has a larger economy and larger population. The EU has a larger economy and larger population. Nothing against the UK but they are a very small nation. Even if we annexed them, they wouldn't change the math in our favor.

When I think forward a decade or so, population and economy sizes largely dictate who makes the rules on the global level. We've managed to be in the top 3 population wise, top 2 economy wise and #1 militarily. But those things are all transient. If they run things properly, the EU doesn't need us and neither does China. That's not a next year or even a next 5 years concern, it's a next 10-15 year concern. But once these things start moving in a given direction, it's very hard to change course.

 

[WhitebeltXL]

I don't see it that way. China has a larger economy and larger population. The EU has a larger economy and larger population. Nothing against the UK but they are a very small nation. Even if we annexed them, they wouldn't change the math in our favor.

When I think forward a decade or so, population and economy sizes largely dictate who makes the rules on the global level. We've managed to be in the top 3 population wise, top 2 economy wise and #1 militarily. But those things are all transient. If they run things properly, the EU doesn't need us and neither does China. That's not a next year or even a next 5 years concern, it's a next 10-15 year concern. But once these things start moving in a given direction, it's very hard to change course.

I can see what your saying but the issue with China will begin to even out as they have to start doing more to meet climate change targets and human rights efforts within the next 20 years, I just think Historically, USA will always be a top ally to have, for anyone. it'd take something pretty destructive to sever that link.

I mean, in my opinion, the UK and Europe will forever be indebted to the US because of World War II and the rebuilding effort they helped fund. Plus, with the EU they are very far from their goal of having all countries competing on the same economic level, Germany and the U.K. are still the majority funders of the project, so they'll always need the US as long as you stay a top economic and military power (which will never end as long as you're competently run)

The USA will always be too big to ignore on a world stage, and who knows if there will even be an EU in 20-30 years with the rise of Nationalism in Germany, France, Holland and Italy on the horizon.

 

[panamaican]

I can see what your saying but the issue with China will begin to even out as they have to start doing more to meet climate change targets and human rights efforts within the next 20 years, I just think Historically, USA will always be a top ally to have, for anyone. it'd take something pretty destructive to sever that link.

I mean, in my opinion, the UK and Europe will forever be indebted to the US because of World War II and the rebuilding effort they helped fund. Plus, with the EU they are very far from their goal of having all countries competing on the same economic level, Germany and the U.K. are still the majority funders of the project, so they'll always need the US as long as you stay a top economic and military power (which will never end as long as you're competently run)

The USA will always be too big to ignore on a world stage, and who knows if there will even be an EU in 20-30 years with the rise of Nationalism in Germany, France, Holland and Italy on the horizon.

If we back off then no one else will force China to meet those targets. Certainly no one in the region has the clout to do so and I doubt Russia will make the effort.

The UK and the EU's indebtedness to us is very far gone. We've been trading on that history but it's not supported by anything ongoing. With each passing year, it has less relevance to why we're on top.

I'm not concerned with being too big to ignore. I'm concerned with not being #1. I think the issues about nationalism and the EU are overblown. In the short run, nationalists will make noise but you can't decouple from the world's economy and maintain the type of lifestyle citizens have become accustomed to, well at least not in prosperous nations that also lack the populations necessary to dictate their own terms and are largely reliant on the goodwill of someone else to provide the muscle for their freedom (who the someone else is is what's subject to change).

 

[WhitebeltXL]

If we back off then no one else will force China to meet those targets. Certainly no one in the region has the clout to do so and I doubt Russia will make the effort.

The UK and the EU's indebtedness to us is very far gone. We've been trading on that history but it's not supported by anything ongoing. With each passing year, it has less relevance to why we're on top.

I'm not concerned with being too big to ignore. I'm concerned with not being #1. I think the issues about nationalism and the EU are overblown. In the short run, nationalists will make noise but you can't decouple from the world's economy and maintain the type of lifestyle citizens have become accustomed to, well at least not in prosperous nations that also lack the populations necessary to dictate their own terms and are largely reliant on the goodwill of someone else to provide the muscle for their freedom (who the someone else is is what's subject to change).

Do you think the US will back off regarding China's human rights and climate change records? I was under the assumption that would increase if anything. China have set lofty targets to meet, and if their incoming financial crisis is all it's cracked up to be, will they even be able to meet those targets?

I honestly think the Eurozone could be headed for choppy waters in the next few years, with German and Italian banks looking like they'll need a sizeable bailout in the future. Greece and Portugal, Italy and Spain looking like needing bailouts within the next few years. if Britain actually leave, they'll have a sizable hole in their budget that no one will want to cough up to cover.

Needless to say, the next few years should be interesting times.

 

[panamaican]

Do you think the US will back off regarding China's human rights and climate change records? I was under the assumption that would increase if anything. China have set lofty targets to meet, and if their incoming financial crisis is all it's cracked up to be, will they even be able to meet those targets?

I honestly think the Eurozone could be headed for choppy waters in the next few years, with German and Italian banks looking like they'll need a sizeable bailout in the future. Greece and Portugal, Italy and Spain looking like needing bailouts within the next few years. if Britain actually leave, they'll have a sizable hole in their budget that no one will want to cough up to cover.

Needless to say, the next few years should be interesting times.

Regarding climate change and human rights, Trump has said taken positions against climate change but I don't remember him saying anything about human rights. His preferred appointee on climate change thinks the problem is overstated (although that's an understatement because I don't want to overstate his position).

I think predicting the outcomes of the Eurozone are actually nowhere near as bad as some believe. I think that the UK is going to learn the same thing here...that none of us are as important as we think we are on the global stage.

We're talking about mature markets trying to find new ways to generate tax revenue, lock down important resources and capture emerging markets. My opinion is that, simplified, size matters. The group bring the most resources to the table can create deals that not only benefit themselves but also create barriers for other nations. It's part of why nationalism is going to be a speed bump, not a new road. Very few individual nations are in a position to out compete combined markets for massive populations representing new consumers.

but we'll have to wait and see.

 

[Arkain2K]

Japan’s prime minister hopes to start building ‘trusting relationship’ with Trump
By Anna Fifield
November 15, 2016

TOKYO — When Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe called President-elect Donald Trump shortly after his victory, he mentioned that he would be passing through New York this week on his way to the APEC summit and suggested a meeting. “That would be awesome,” Trump immediately responded, according to people briefed on the conversation.

It’s happening. Abe will see Trump on Thursday in New York, making him one of the first world leaders to meet with the next American president.

There is much to discuss — not least the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal that Abe just pushed through his parliament and that Trump has vowed to scrap, and the U.S. military bases in Japan that Trump wants more money for.

“I’d like to frankly exchange views on a variety of issues and to express my views on matters like free trade . . . the economy, foreign policy and security in general,” Abe told a parliamentary panel Monday in Tokyo. But Abe, who could be in power through 2020, also said he would use this meeting to “build a trusting relationship.”

Indeed, don’t expect them to get into the nitty-gritty, analysts say.

“The point of this meeting is to develop trust and chemistry on a personal level, to reassure people in both countries that everything is fine,” said Michael Green of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, who worked in the George W. Bush administration and has strong ties to Abe’s team.

Rather than talking substance about trade deals or the countries’ 70-year-old security alliance, Abe should concentrate on building a personal relationship with Trump, Green said.

They already have plenty in common.

For one, Trump sets a tone that Abe, a strong nationalist in his own right, will be comfortable with, Green said. Trump promised to “make America great again,” while Abe is set on turning Japan back into a “beautiful country.” For another, they both have a bromance going on with Vladimir Putin, the unequivocally nationalist Russian leader whom Trump has praised and whom Abe will welcome to Japan next month.

There are jitters in both Japan and South Korea over what Trump might do as president. On the campaign trail, he repeatedly said that Japan and South Korea were not paying enough for their defense and that he would make them pay more — perhaps even all — of the costs of hosting American military bases.

Since his victory, the Japanese government has been taking a wait-and-see approach. “Trump said various things during his campaign, but I will not presuppose what he will do as president,” Tomomi Inada, Japan’s defense minister, said Friday. However, she added that Japan is already paying its fair share toward base costs.

Analysts here are less guarded, hoping that Trump will temper his position once he appoints staff and starts receiving policy briefings.

“We don’t really know whether Trump means what he said during the campaign,” said Akira Sato, a ruling-party lawmaker who served as vice minister of defense until last year. “He’s a businessman, so it’s possible that he’d not be so knowledgeable about security issues.”

Japan allocated $1.9 billion in its last budget for the American bases, which house almost 50,000 U.S. personnel, although its total contribution, including other costs like civilian salaries, is more than double that.

South Korea, which has about 28,500 American troops, pays almost $900 million, or 40 percent of the total cost, for the bases it hosts.

The installations serve as forward operating bases for the U.S. military in the Asia-Pacific region, helping to contain a nuclear-armed North Korea and, increasingly, a more muscular China.

Analysts say that it’s possible that the U.S. government under Trump will charge its allies more for the cost of the military bases, but almost all agree that Trump is unlikely to order them closed.

“Japan shouldn’t take his remarks at face value,” said Masashi Nishihara, president of the Research Institute of Peace and Security in Tokyo, adding that Trump said all sorts of “wild things” on the campaign trail.

“Having American forces in Japan is not only good for Japan but also for the U.S., which needs to keep an eye on North Korea, China and the Indian Ocean,” Nishihara said.

Abe, who made a similar point in parliament Monday, will be able to set this explanation process in motion during Thursday’s meeting, Nishihara said.

But a more immediate issue to tackle will be Russia.

Trump has made his admiration for Putin clear, saying in an NBC forum in September that he “has been a leader far more than our president has been,” and Abe has also been pursuing closer ties with the Russian president.

Putin will travel to Japan in mid-December, visiting a hot-spring resort with Abe in his home prefecture, then holding a day of meetings in Tokyo. Putin is said to be particularly eager to see Japanese companies invest in Russia’s Far East and has requested meetings with big-business representatives.

“Abe will want to know how far and how fast Trump wants to move to reset the relationship with Putin, so that he can be as well-positioned as possible during Putin’s coming visit,” said Sheila Smith, a Japan expert at the Council on Foreign Relations.

This will be an entirely different scenario for Tokyo. While the government here is hoping that Trump was just speaking off the cuff about reviewing the terms of their security alliance, Abe will probably be hoping that the incoming president was speaking the truth when it comes to relations with Russia.

Japan has been somewhat reluctantly going along with the international community when it comes to punishing Russia for its annexation of Crimea and actions in Ukraine.

But at the same time, Abe has been actively been pursuing closer ties with Putin and is hoping to forge a deal next month that would resolve a territorial dispute going back to World War II over a group of four islands known to Russia as the Kurils and Japan as the Northern Territories.

Abe is promoting a deal in which they would have two islands each, enabling Japan and Russia to sign a peace treaty to officially end the war, local media have reported.

Sato, the former vice defense minister, said that, overall, Japan probably doesn’t need to worry as much as it has been about what a President Trump will do: “He seems like a realist and has been successful in the business world, so he will most likely make good judgments.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...10f6f9-1b60-41cd-9c89-f247ec97bfd7_story.html

 

[Arkain2K]

Mexico prepared to take back undocumented immigrants, consul general says
November 15, 2016

SAN DIEGO – President-elect Donald Trump has made bold statements about protecting and changing the border between Mexico and the United States.

In the wake of the presidential election, Marcela Celorio, Mexico’s consul general in San Diego, says Mexico is respectful of President-elect Trump and she is hopeful for communication and dialog.

“We want to approach the transition team and talk with them and negotiate,” Celorio told FOX 5 on Tuesday.

In an interview over the weekend, Trump pledged to focus first on deporting undocumented immigrants who have committed crimes in the United States.

“What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers,” he said. “We have a lot of these people, probably 2 million, it could be even 3 million. We are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate.”

Celorio said Mexico is prepared for anything that could happen.

"We are prepared -- our consular network in the United States -- to protect the Mexicans and their human rights. And also, in Mexico, we are prepared to take them back."

Mexico works on plan to deal with Trump's possible deportations

The Mexican government is working on a plan to deal with possible mass deportations, a presidential spokesman says.

In a news conference Monday, Eduardo Sanchez, spokesman for Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, told reporters deportations would be part of any agenda discussed by Peña Nieto and Trump.

"We will have to see how many of those deportations, usually done by the United States government to the countries where the illegal immigrants are from, are for Mexico," he said.

"Of course this and other matters will be part of the agenda that Mexico brings to the table during the bilateral meetings that will take place with the government-elect of President(-elect) Donald Trump."

Foreign Minister Claudia Ruiz is coordinating the efforts, he added, and plans to have a series of measures ready should the deportations begin.

http://fox5sandiego.com/2016/11/15/...-back-illegal-immigrants-consul-general-says/

 

[Arkain2K]

Trump poses daunting new challenge for Germany's Merkel
By Noah Barkin | BERLIN
Nov 14, 2016

Donald Trump's victory has been a shock for America's major partners around the world. But perhaps nowhere has the blow been more painful than in Germany, a country that under Angela Merkel has come to see itself as a bastion of openness and tolerance.

On virtually every issue of importance to the German chancellor, from confronting Russian aggression and promoting free trade, to combating climate change and tackling the tide of refugees fleeing Syria, Trump seems likely to turn Washington from an ally into an adversary.

He invoked the German chancellor's name to insult his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton during the U.S. campaign, calling her "America's Merkel". And he described her decision last year to open German borders to hundreds of thousands of migrants as "insane".

So although Trump's election is being seen as a rejection of the political establishment and liberal democratic values in general, it represents a very personal blow to Merkel, Europe's most powerful leader.

It heaps more responsibility on her at a time when she is nearing an announcement on whether she will run for a record-tying fourth term as chancellor next autumn.

Despite the toll that 11 years of non-stop crisis fighting has taken on her, Merkel's aides say that Trump's victory and Britain's decision in June to leave the European Union have, if anything, reinforced her determination to continue.

"Given the challenges we face, in Europe and beyond, she can't simply walk off into the sunset. That would look very bad. She has a sense of responsibility," said an adviser.

Germans have been falling out of love with the United States since George W. Bush invaded Iraq more than a dozen years ago. But the election of Barack Obama in 2008 was seen here as proof of America's capacity to correct its "mistakes".

Obama was hailed as the heir to John F. Kennedy, who came to a divided Berlin in 1963, two years after construction of the Berlin Wall began, and reassured Germans with the word "Ich bin ein Berliner". Obama, who developed a close relationship with Merkel in his eight years in office, will make what promises to be a bittersweet farewell visit to Berlin this week.

Trump's win heralds a hard break in a relationship that grew extremely close during the Cold War, before wobbling when Germany refused to go along with Bush's Iraq war and was derided by his Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as "old Europe".

Last week, Germany's Suddeutsche Zeitung published a cartoon of a beaming Trump opening his jacket to reveal the message "Ich bin kein Berliner" (I am not a Berliner) plastered across his chest.

PROVOCATIVE MESSAGE

This won't stop Merkel, a restrained politician who prefers small steps to giant leaps, from trying to work with the brash Trump, who rode to victory on the dreamy promise to "Make America Great Again".

She is a pragmatist who has maintained dialogue with strongmen like Vladimir Putin and Tayyip Erdogan through crises in Germany's relationship with Russia and Turkey.

But Merkel's statement on Wednesday, in the aftermath of Trump's election, was telling. In it, she set conditions for cooperation with Trump, a provocative message from a close ally to the democratically elected leader of the United States.

"Germany and America are connected by values of democracy, freedom and respect for the law and the dignity of man, independent of origin, skin color, religion, gender, sexual orientation or political views," she said. "I offer the next President of the United States close cooperation on the basis of these values."

Merkel's cabinet colleagues have been far more outspoken. Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier has denounced Trump as a "preacher of hate". Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel has called him the pioneer of an international "authoritarian and chauvinist" movement.

The German press has not pulled punches either. The cover of Der Spiegel magazine this weekend showed the head of a grimacing Trump hurtling toward earth like a giant flaming asteroid, above the title "The End of the World (as we know it)".

One of Merkel's biggest foreign policy successes as chancellor was rallying the European Union's disparate 28 member states behind sanctions against Russia in response to its intervention in eastern Ukraine.

If Trump follows through on his promise to forge a closer relationship with Putin, the transatlantic and European front against Russia would crumble, leaving her Putin policy in tatters.


HIGHEST PRICE

Merkel was also the driving force in Europe behind the ambitious trade deal between the EU and United States, known as TTIP (the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership).

That agreement, still in the negotiation phase, seems sure to die under Trump, whose protectionist promises, should they become reality, would hit few countries harder than Germany, whose economic strength depends heavily on the openness of the global trading system.

"Nowhere would a move toward renationalization be more dangerous," former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer wrote this week. Germany, he predicted, would pay "the highest economic and political price" if the wave of populism led to a further weakening, or even a collapse, of the EU.

Trump's presidency will challenge Germany on a number of other fronts, from climate and fiscal policy to defense spending and financial regulation.

Trump has promised to do what Merkel and her veteran Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble have resisted for years: take advantage of an ultra-low interest rate environment to invest vast amounts of public money in modernizing infrastructure.

It was ironic that in the same week Trump was elected, Germany was finalizing a 2017 budget that is a model of fiscal restraint. How long Schaeuble will be able to stick to his cherished "Schwarze Null", or balanced budget, with Trump demanding that Europe shoulder more responsibility for its own defense, is unclear.

But one thing does seem clear: in Trump, Germany faces its biggest test since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

"To suggest that Germany has suddenly become the new leader of the western world is not only absurd but dangerous - because it raises expectations that simply can't ever be met," a senior German official said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-germany-analysis-idUSKBN13924G

 

[Arkain2K]

Trump overshadows final French centre-right primary debate
2016-11-17

The contenders for the French centre-right presidential candidacy clashed in a third and final primary debate on November 17, 2016 in Paris.​

The fallout of Donald Trump’s shock election victory dominated the final French centre-right primary debate Thursday night as contenders for the presidential candidacy clashed on a range of foreign policy issues.

Seven candidates – six men and one woman – faced off in a Paris studio in a decisive debate just days before French voters go to the polls Sunday in the first round of the centre-right primaries, a historic first in French politics.

Thursday night’s debate kicked off with the contenders asked to detail their foreign policy platforms, particularly their policies on US-French relations following Trump’s victory in the November 8 US presidential election.

"Mr. Trump was elected by Americans, it’s the choice of the American people. The choice here concerns the future president of France,” protested former French Prime Minister François Fillon.

But the American president-elect continued to overshadow the debate as the French presidential hopefuls were pressed to discuss the impact of Trump’s victory on foreign policy issues ranging from the Syrian crisis, France’s relations with Russia, and the future of the NATO military alliance.

Frontrunner Alain Juppé – a veteran politician who has served as French prime minister and foreign minister in the past – broke down “the shock” of the Trump win on three policy issues: trade, defence and sustainable development. On trade, Juppé noted that Trump in the White House could see “protectionism in the United States, which would be a regression for Europe". On defence, Juppé noted that “Mr. Trump says Europeans have to pay more. But we have to know who will pay what,” he said. Finally, on sustainable development, the 71-year-old centrist politician said, “There is no question for us to stop fighting against global warming.”

Nevertheless, Juppé stressed that “the people of America have spoken and we have to work with the new US president”.

It was left to the sole female contender for the candidacy, Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet, to condemn Trump’s controversial positions on the campaign trail. “What is detestable about Trump’s discourse, the racism, sexism and homophobia, remains deplorable and is not any more acceptable since he was elected,” stressed Kosciusko-Morizet. “But we have to work with him. The question is how, in this new context, can we defend French interests in the best way.”

Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy predicted an upsurge in "aggressiveness" in the way Americans defend their "interests", and advocated a "buy European act" that would “mark the return of France and Europe on the international scene".

Choosing between ‘suitcase and coffin’ in Syria

The candidates also discussed the Syrian crisis, with Sarkozy affirming that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad “does not represent, in my opinion or in the opinion of humanists, the future of Syria. ," Sarkozy reaffirmed.

But Fillon was more conciliatory toward the Syrian regime, noting that Assad was still in power because he still had support in some quarters, especially among the Alawite and Christian minorities. “Why do the Christians of Syria support Assad?” asked Fillon before answering, “Because they prefer him to Sunni extremism…In case of a fall of the regime", he added, “the Christians of the Middle East will have the choice between the suitcase or the coffin".

The stakes of the final centre-right debate were high, with the winner of the centre-right primary set to be the favourite to become French president next year, given the weakness of the ruling Socialists and the record unpopularity of current President François Hollande, who has yet to declare whether he will run for a second term in office.

Given the poor ratings of the French left, experts widely believe the centre-right candidate will face off against Marine Le Pen, head of the extreme right National Front party, in the second round of the presidential election next year. Traditionally, political parties across the ideological spectrum tend to come together before a second round face off to block a far-right National Front election victory.

Le Pen was among the first European politicians to congratulate Trump on his election victory last week.

Fillon catches up in pre-debate polls

The race for the Les Républicains party nomination is widely viewed as a two-man race between Sarkozy and Juppé. However in recent days, Fillon enjoyed a sudden spike in the poll ratings.

An OpinionWay survey published Tuesday showed Fillon, who had been languishing in a distant third place, taking 25 percent of likely voters, putting him neck and neck with his former boss Sarkozy.

Similarly, an Ifop-Fiducial poll for Sud Radio released earlier Thursday saw Fillon getting 27 percent of votes in Sunday’s first round, versus 31 percent for Juppé and 30 percent for Sarkozy.

French voters will pick the conservative presidential nominee in two rounds of voting scheduled for November 20 and 27. The winner will move on to the general election, also a two-round ballot set for April and May of next year.

http://www.france24.com/en/20161117-france-primary-debate-centre-right-trump-sarkozy-juppe

 

[in the]

Thank GOD ALMIGHTY Trump won.

 

[Bald1]

Thank GOD ALMIGHTY Trump won.

Open borders, undocumented guests, censorship of social and mainstream media, ghettoization of entire neighbourhoods consisting of foreigners, sexual emergencies and being labeled racist for any concerns voiced could all be within your grasp if you follow te Merkel model. What's not to like?

 

[mcveteran81]

It's very peculiar how shakey the world looks at this very moment.

I would say the stage is almost practically set. 2017 will likely be a very volatile year. Hang on everyone, its likely to be a bumpy ride.

 

[Arkain2K]

The EU is over. Farage and Trump are homies. Farage flew out after the first debate to help him prepare for the 2nd and 3rd.

"“If he did offer me a job I would quite like to be his ambassador to the European Union. I think I would do that job very well.”"


AMBASSADOR
TO
THE
EUROPEAN
UNION

What a beautiful turn of events that'd be, especially given how disgracefully they shouted down Farage in the European Parliament. For him to return like that would be nothing short of beautiful.

10/10. would watch.

Hahahaha!!! Will Nigel Farage be the next David Ormsby-Gore??