Contemporary politics,local and international current affairs, science, music and extracts from the Queensland Newspaper "THE WORKER" documenting the proud history of the Labour Movement.
MAHATMA GANDHI ~ Truth never damages a cause that is just.
Saturday, 10 January 2026
Donald Trump is reshaping American power and the threat to international order is alarming.
Donald Trump has shown contempt for legalities, diplomacy and alliances since his return to the White House.
(Reuters: Scott Morgan)
Link copied
Mark
the first week of 2026 as the one in which the often overblown rhetoric
of the Trump administration took a chilling turn into threats that have
to be seen in the deeply alarming context of its actual actions.
There
have been plenty of examples of a certain contempt for legalities,
diplomacy and alliances until now both domestically and internationally
since Donald Trump returned to the White House.
On
the international stage that has mostly concerned perpetually
unresolved battles over tariffs, backing (or not backing) Ukraine,
alienating Europe, siding with Vladamir Putin, strategic bombings in
Iran.
But
this week Trump and his lieutenants have directly threatened both
democratically and non-democratically elected governments — on the back
of the internationally-illegal capture of now former president Nicolas
Maduro of Venezuela.
Hubris unveiled the real reasons for these actions: Access to oil, but mostly because the United States can.
In
a particularly agitated performance on CNN, White House deputy chief of
staff Stephen Miller said that "we live in a world in which you can
talk all you want about international niceties and everything else".
"But
we live in a world, in the real world … that is governed by strength,
that is governed by force, that is governed by power," Miller said.
"These
are the iron laws of the world. We're a superpower. And under President
Trump, we are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower."
In
a subsequent interview with four journalists from the New York Times,
Trump declared that his power as commander-in-chief is constrained only
by his "own morality".
Asked if
there were any limits on his global powers, Trump said: "Yeah, there is
one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It's the only thing that can
stop me."
"I don't need international law," he added. "I'm not looking to hurt people."
When pressed further by the Times about whether his administration needed to abide by international law, Trump said, "I do".
But he made clear he would be the arbiter when such constraints applied to the United States.
"It depends what your definition of international law is," he said.
Clearly
flushed with the military success of the raid into Caracas, threats had
been made against Colombia, Cuba, Mexico and Greenland (a
semi-autonomous part of Denmark which is a close US ally).
Even
as European leaders and commentators earnestly tried to consider
vaguely legitimate means scenarios by which the US could "take over"
Greenland, Stephen Miller had a straight forward response.
Asked
to rule out the prospect — raised by Trump — of the US taking Greenland
by force, Miller said that "nobody is gonna fight the US militarily
over the future of Greenland".
"The
United States is the power of NATO. For the United States to secure the
Arctic region, to protect and defend NATO and NATO interests,
obviously, Greenland should be part of the United States".
Trump
made clear to the Times that he wouldn't be satisfied with just being
able to, for example, re-open military bases in Greenland,
"Ownership is very important," he said, "because that's what I feel is psychologically needed for success".
The
New York Times interview occurred just hours after, at home in
Minneapolis, a 37-year-old mother of three was shot three times in the
face and killed by ICE agents in front of a phalanx of cameras.
Their actions were defended by Trump and his officials.
Local
police subsequently reported that their efforts to investigate the
incident were being blocked by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Cracks are showing
Both
the developments in foreign policy — and rhetoric — as well as the
shock of Americans and the world seeing the killing of Renee Good in
Minneapolis seem to have produced some serious cracks in Donald Trump's
political base.
Republicans
crossed the Senate floor to support legislation aimed at preventing him
engaging in further military operations in Venezuela (though seems
likely to be more demonstrative than effective), as well as a range of
legislation in the House of Representatives.
State
and city representatives in Minnesota — and other states — signalled
they would both seek to prosecute the ICE agents involved under state
laws, and escalate their attempts to remove from their jurisdictions.
Commentator
Anne Applebaum noted that "if might makes right, if the US gets to do
what it wants using any tools it wants in its own sphere, then there is
no need for transparency, democracy, or legitimacy".
That rule, it seems, applies both domestically and internationally.
Donald
Trump has made clear his contempt for the powers of Congress to stop
his foreign policy actions just as, according to Applebaum, "the
concerns of ordinary people who live in smaller nations don't need to be
taken into account, because they will not be granted any agency".
And what of larger nations? Notably Russia and China with whom Trump sees the world divided into three spheres of influence.
Carnegie Institute analyst Tong Zhao
says the "claim that the erosion of international law and norms does
not affect the behaviour of illiberal states such as China
underestimates the universal human need to feel righteous — and the
particular intensity with which illiberal systems manufacture
self-righteousness".
"Whatever
their public or private statements, he says, "they often sincerely
believe that their government's policies are morally responsible and
legally righteous — sometimes even more so than those of Western
democracies".
"Russian
President Vladimir Putin would not lecture at length on his version of
history — his sense of historical justice and legality — if he did not
feel profoundly self-righteous. Chinese President Xi Jinping likewise
appears genuinely convinced that he stands on the right side of history.
"
"In this context,
controversial US actions such as the Venezuela operation — and the
international community's tacit acceptance — matter greatly.
"They
allow authoritarian leaders to lower their perceived thresholds of
acceptable behaviour. Norms need not disappear entirely for the standard
to become comparative rather than absolute."
The West has been here before
The US — as a superpower — is obviously more conspicuous than others when it flouts the rules.
But
it is not as if the West has not been confronted with other allies who
have behaved in ways regarded as equally illegal in terms of
international law.
Israel's relentless moves to expand its borders from those on which it was originally settled continue.
Even
after the Gaza ceasefire it continues to hold more than 58 per cent of
the Gaza Strip, and around 60 per cent of the West Bank.
It has also continued to occupy around 600 square miles of territory in Syria, as well as a slab of southern Lebanon.
Gaza's Hamas-run health ministry says a further 425 Palestinians have been killed since the ceasefire began.
But the world's interest seems to have moved on.
Australia
has the same direct interest in the dismantling of the international
order we have seen this week as the rest of the world, but also a direct
interest given our close diplomatic and defence ties with the United
States which last month included an announced increase in the number of
US bombers that would be deployed in Northern Australia, and upgraded
facilities to let them operate.
And we have an interest in what happens in Taiwan.
Tong
Zhao says China has shifted the focus of its Taiwan policy from
primarily opposing independence to actively pursuing unification.
"Despite
extensive preparations for military coercion, international reaction
remains a central consideration in Beijing's calculations", he says.
Watching
the international community accept recent US actions, he says, "will
almost certainly convince Beijing that a military move against Taiwan —
potentially beginning with the removal or capture of Taiwanese leaders
in a so-called law enforcement operation — would be far more justifiable
and far easier for the world to swallow than the US attack on
Venezuela."
No comments:
Post a Comment