The Power of Words

Alyssa Hirsch

Dr. Muck

PSC 222

01/14/18

The Power of Words

“A warm good morning to everyone except Donald Trump. Love to everyone from "shithole" South Africa”. The presence of the South African flag icon followed by a classic yellow smiling face just served as the cherry on top of this beautifully crafted tweet from attorney and self-proclaimed “politics junkie”, Grant Caswell. This post, while superbly witty and full of grit, highlights a terrifying presence amongst American elites of prejudice and racism that should strike fury in the hearts of anyone who has even the remotest grasp on history, which clearly, the president of the United States does not.This, unlike other things you hear about, is not just “news”. This comment rumored to be stated by President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, on January 11th during a meeting in the White House to discuss immigration matters, serves to glorify a nation that single handedly brought misery to an entire continent during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The repercussions of this statement will no doubt affect the United States socially, economically and politically in the future.

The key to conducting international relations in an effective way is to first have courtesy and respect for the other individual or individuals. In some way and in some mode, everyone comes into contact with someone at the international level, whether it be via social media, person-to-person contact, or e-business. The point is, everyone serves as a mini ambassador to their country and the key to being a good representative is to display an air of both interest for the other culture and humility regarding the fact that every state has its share of problems and whether or not one agrees to it, someone may be in the mood to air that dirty laundry. Beyond just showing mere interest however, it is important to have what is known as “cultural literacy”, or the knowledge to work effectively with or within another culture. This is way more crucial than what people in past decades have been bred to think, specifically that taking time to get to know and interact with other countries will destroy the sovereignty of the United States. I believe that the term “sovereignty” is continuously being taken out of context. The United States is perfectly capable of self rule; there is no doubt in my mind about this. However, people seem to equate sharing territory to loss of hegemony. This is perhaps, out of the realization that this is the method used by the Puritans in the settling of this God-given land in the first place.  

The United States is the second largest exporter of goods in the world. This does not just happen overnight. This is the product of learning about the resources that other countries have to offer and respectfully making trade deals with them that ultimately satisfy both economies. This is subjective at the moment, however, given that the United States is a flourishing industrial economy and the citizens of Bangladesh are still recovering from the 2013 collapse of the Savar clothing factory and are thus living in poverty. While it is not fair to be of the mindset that the United States has to come to the rescue of every nation in the world, it is still necessary to be aware of what is happening internationally so as to be understanding of the lack of cooperation from the country, as well as the opportunity to offer support. Nowhere is the alternative to sit back and refer to the nation, or in this case, continent, in a derogatory manner.

The most severe consequence resulting from these words is no doubt the potential political ramifications. Politics is the ability to make choices to help people get what they want. To perform this at an international level is no easy task, but with the help of other like minded countries, alliances will be made that can last a lifetime. No one, I repeat, no one, wants to be insulted. The best solution I can offer to our Mr. President is to actually travel to these “shithole” countries and do some sightseeing. Take in the beauty. Make some new friends. He is definitely going to need some.

Why Presidents Should Not Use Social Media

Why Presidents Should Not Use Social Media

            Technology has been a great boon to us in the past few decades. It’s allowed us to do much more than we ever could before. One way it’s improved our lives is allowing us to communicate with anyone across the world in real-time. However, as that old adage about the internet states, “once it’s out there, it can’t be deleted.” Although sites like Twitter allow us to share our thoughts to the rest of the world in short messages, some people feel the need to use it as their soapbox, like our current President, Donald Trump.

           

Twitter is something that hasn’t been around that long, and so, not many people of high power have had the opportunity to use it. Former President Barack Obama was the first President to make use of it, and he used it conservatively; usually to promote bills or movements he supported. Donald Trump, on the other hand, has used it nearly every day; all it takes is one look at his personal Twitter to know that Trump speaks his mind on Twitter like he does in public; often no filter, with whatever comes to his mind as fair game.

In fact, Trump uses Twitter so much, that he is sometimes coined the “Twitter-in-Chief”, and there are many jokes of how he’ll be up at 3 o’clock in the morning tweeting. Trump’s tweets are featured prominently on late night shows like The Daily Show with Trevor Noah, and The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. This, of course, exposes many of Trump’s twitter-tantrums to the TV audience, and is one of the many ways that those in foreign countries see just how deranged our President is.

Whether he’s calling out news outlets as “fake news” for disagreeing with him, bashing politicians (on both sides) for disagreeing with him, or insulting other world leaders for disagreeing with him, social media sites like Twitter have allowed Trump to show the world who he really is; someone who isn’t fit for the Presidency (or, at the very least, not fit to use Twitter properly.)
           

It is true that the media likes to hound on Trump, and they may do it quite a bit, but that’s mainly because Trump provides so much ammunition with which the news media and other such outlets use to blast him when he does something wrong. It also doesn’t help that Trump resorts to pulling the “fake news” card whenever there’s a news story that portray him in a negative light, and he is very quick in letting his Twitter followers know. Yes, even the President has the right to free speech, but only if he lets other speak freely, as well, along with the point that free speech does not give one the right to demean others.

           

I think the easiest thing to do would be for Trump to not be allowed on Twitter. Failing that, I would hope that someone at the White House takes over his Twitter for him; at least this way, it could be given to someone who knows what to say and what not to say, and much less likely to tweet profanities and insults to the very people he swore he would serve.

Trumped Up Isolationism

American isolationism. The United States has held a large role as a world leader since World War II, and with so many countries’ economies and politics being intertwined; the idea of the United States ever returning to the isolated state it once was would, in my opinion, impact America negatively.

Unfortunately, throughout 2017, I found that we must face that, in our current situation, it is very possible that we could be pushed off the world stage if the relationship we have with our allies continues to be strained by the current President’s take on diplomacy.

During his campaign while running in the 2016 Presidential election, President Trump made his goals extremely clear. President Trump was going to “Make America Great Again,” by putting “America First.” Whether this is still Donald Trump’s goal or not, I believe his unconventional way of dealing with other governing States could lead us into a very disastrous situation on the global front. A situation where the United States is no longer welcomed at the table of international affairs.

Throughout this year, I’ve found that President Trump’s decisions, when it comes to American foreign policy, is causing a negative backlash on The United States’ reputation as a global leader. Especially, based off of what has been coming up in the news lately, such as creating an uproar in the Middle East by naming Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. The United Nations response to his racist comments on Africa, and his antagonistic Twitter remarks at Kim Jong Un.

While people’s view on the President’s use of Twitter differs, I still believe that using it for anything but to inform as an issue. Using it for discussing sensitive issues can cause problems. Twitting at other world leaders, such as Kim Jong Un, creates a very public platform of global discussions, for the rest of the world to see, but I also think it leaves room for there to be miscommunications and words taken out of context and put strain on the relationship.

The President’s behavior in failing to filter himself can make other countries and their governments view our Commander-in-Chief negatively. The movement to ban Trump from entering the United Kingdom is an example of the deteriorating relationship of the United States and their allies. By not respecting the President, it can devalue the office that he represents.

I found this issue with the United Kingdom to be extremely distressful, not only because I hold so much respect for the nation, but also because of the “Special Relationship” we’ve shared with the United Kingdom for many decades. The fact that the Queen isn’t planning to meet Donald Trump anytime soon, shows that it is very possible that the bond we had with the United Kingdom will not be as strong as it once while Trump holds office.

The President might see his bluntness as being beneficial to America’s needs, but what the United States needs in this day and age is to hold on and strengthen our bonds with other nations and earn their respect while, simultaneously putting our country’s needs first. It is not impossible to do both.

Dairy, Forestry, and Canada Oh My!

Recently in the news Canada has gone after the United States about violating international trade rules. This isn’t the first time that Canada and the U.S. haven’t seen eye to eye in the last year in terms of trade. It seems to me that this back and forth over trade will only continue between President Trump and Prime Minister Trudeau. However, the underlying issue is more than just trade violations. This is about diary, forestry, and  North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) all ultimately and potentially affecting more necessary goods for both countries.

Canada filed a 32 page complaint with the World Trade Organization (WTO) accusing the United States of breaking international trade rules dating back to 1996. The complaint challenges the way that the U.S. investigates products for subsidies and below-cost sales. I do not find Canada taking this action surprising given the trade conversation in the last year and the United States unwillingness to negotiate. However, there is more to the complaint according to Canada, which is using it to preserve forestry jobs.

Last spring there was tension between the United States and Canada that was initially started by President Trump. He was unhappy about how Canadian prices were hurting the Midwest dairy industry. Now that dairy appears to be have been settled due to the specific type of milk not pertaining to NAFTA, forestry is the next industry of contention. The United States currently is imposing a sanction on imported Canadian softwood lumber.

Both economies but more specifically the people in these sectors are going to continue to be used as bait to get the other country to bend. President Trump is keen on isolating the United States in terms of trade and backing out of NAFTA. I find it obvious that Prime Minister Trudeau stills feels the best action is to push back at the United States. This must seem more beneficial to him given the filed complaint. Naturally, the US is calling the claims to be unproven.

The only way Canada comes out ahead with this drastic action is if it leads to conversing with the United States and lower lumber sanctions at a minimum. I see this to be unlikely, especially if the United States is found to be in the wrong by the WTO. Given President’s Trump actions and rhetoric up to this point if that’s the case then I foresee him doubling down on Canadian sanctions and backing out of NAFTA as soon as possible. On the opposite side, Canada may get what they want and a little more if the United States is in the wrong. If the United States hasn’t violated anything then I am expecting President Trump to hold this ordeal over Canada’s head until he either wants something or uses it to solidify his backing out of NAFTA.

Since both countries are key components of  NAFTA and heavily intertwined in each other’s trade, I hope they can reach a compromise. If milk and lumber are unable to able to bring both leaders to the table to come up with a balanced trade agreement the future isn’t looking good. I only see NAFTA slipping further away with tensions rising and the situation worsening for both countries.

Trump and the Iran Nuclear Deal

Once again, President Trump is trying to back out of a vital deal that could hurt relations on the world stage. Were he to scrap the deal, he would not be helping America or its safety. This decision could severely damage our relationships with our European allies. That being said, there's an opportunity for China and Russia to become stronger in international affairs. If we back out, they'd be united together against the USA supporting a deal to slow development of a nuclear arms race near and within Iran. We'd become a global pariah being one of very few countries to disagree with this deal. 

Western European companies could perhaps become willing beneficiaries to the Iran deal for which Iran has been seeking. President Hasan Rouhani and President Putin signed agreements to collaborate on energy deals valued at $30 billion. There are some valued at $20 billion that are on schedule this year all with Russian oil and gas companies. 

China, alongside Russia, France, Germany, Britain, and the EU, is ready to take advantage of any Trump action withdrawing from the pact. "Reactivation of sanctions may cause Iran to export oil using the Chinese Yuan denominated contract, which launches on 18 January," Bjarne Schieldrop, Chief Commodities Analyst at SEB to OilPrice.com. "This may spark a move away from the present long-established US Dollar denominated oil trading regime." 

Action as such is what China has been aiming for: a change in dominance of the power of the US dollar. If an opening like this were to arise, the Chinese would no doubt take advantage. At the very least, with oil prices again already well above $60 a barrel, any new sanctions on the sale of 500,000 barrels a day of Iranian crude oil that have just begun to hit world markets, is likely to raise the price of crude by at least $5 a barrel, according to Citigroup's global commodities unit.

The most immediate effect of any American withdrawal, or addition of broader sanctions by us, would be to give new ammunition to the already powerful mullahs in Iran. They place blame for recent demonstrations across the country at the feet of Western, Israeli and especially American intervention, with the need to be suppressed at all costs. Revolutionary Guard forces have ended the first round of protests that spread to 80+ cities/towns around the country and left 2 dozen people dead and almost 1,000 people arrested or jailed. 

Any addition of sanctions could re-develop support for the return of democracy in Iran. There are still strong powers within Iran restless to bring a swift end to the nuclear pact at any (financial) cost and begin to climb toward creating a store of nuclear weapons. So the inclination of Iran and other forces, led by Rouhani, to remain in the accord, could be tried by any sanctions the US might reestablish now as a price for endorsing and holding the agreement. Individuals and companies that might suddenly find themselves on an even larger blacklist (that had been thinned out under the original agreement) could only add their voices to the anti-agreement forces. Thus creating new pressure for Iran itself to verify that these new sanctions effectively solidify the agreement null and void.

In short, the only practical choice for Trump is simply to choose the high road again this time around, with the sad certainty that we'll simply revisit the question again three months from now.

https://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/International/Iran-Sanctions-Will-Help-Chinas-Petro-Yuan.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/24/petro-yuan-china-wants-to-dethrone-dollar-rmb-denominated-oil-contracts.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/11/us-president-trump-could-pull-out-of-iran-nuclear-deal.html 

Op-Ed: The Affliction of Isolationism

Op-Ed: The Affliction of Isolationism

By Kel Goff

   In 2016, the most prominent catchphrase in the political sphere was Donald Trump’s “Build a Wall!” One of his largest platforms for the presidential election revolved around immigration reform. As we have all heard in regards to Mexico, “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” TIME Magazine even has a running list of every time Trump has insulted Mexico and its people. On the other hand, his voters adored his desires for stronger borders, billions of dollars of concrete lining the South, as walls with barbed wire no longer cut it. However, it is no longer just Mexicans serving as targets for Trump. 

   This month, the president announced that nearly 200,000 immigrants from Salvador had to leave the United States. A program that was instituted in 1990 by President Bush, called the Temporary Protected Status, was put in place to allow Salvadoreans who were pummeled by earthquakes a chance to live in America. They were granted legal protections and were able to work in the US for the last 17 years with little conflict. However, Trump has decided that now is the time for them to leave and return to a country many have not been to in years. Typically, Trump has attacked illegal immigrants, as they are the ones we place the blame for our failed economy and lack of available jobs. 

   While many Americans are adamant in their beliefs about whether they think amnesty should be granted to immigrants who came here illegally, the case of the Salvadoreans is regarding immigrants who were granted legal protection just to have them retracted. It is very easy for a president to pledge that he will fix a country’s economy. A candidate will never be elected if they admit that the task of putting all of the pieces back together is monumentally harder than simply creating more jobs. Trump cited illegal immigration as the primary cause for unemployment in America. If that is true, what have hundreds of thousands of Salvadorians who came here legally with protection from the government done to negatively impact our country? 

   Here is the most problematic aspect of Trump’s rhetoric: his promotion of an isolationist agenda. While most Americans would love to say we are the best nation all by ourselves, that simply is not true. We need multiple nations and their people being involved in trade, communications and even God forbid, them living in our country. Without people of varying “s**thole” nations and cultures, we would not be able to export or import goods, maintain alliances with other countries, or help one another out in times of need. Trump’s platform revolved around nationalism and the belief that America can do it all without anyone else. As an extremely paranoid government official, it has been seen throughout his tenure that he perceives other countries are out to get us, so we must get them first. Whether it be Russians, Chinese, Koreans, or apparently now Salvadoreans, we cannot allow them to continue to impair our nation’s economy. 

   Deporting thousands of legal immigrants does not prove a point to other nations to prevent them from sending their people to the US. It merely makes us appear as though we are as intolerant as we were in our days of the Chinese Exclusion Acts of the 1850s. While there are economic and security implications involved in allowing illegal immigration to persist in America, deterrence of legal immigration is downright asinine. Promotion of a nationalist regime that ensures only “our kind” are allowed in greatly reduces the quality of relationships you can have with other countries. It is fiscally responsible legislating to allow people of all creeds within your borders. A national debt serves as evidence of amity with other nations, serving as insurance that neither of you will attack one another anytime soon. 

   Isolationism is a dangerous lifestyle to embrace if you want to maintain your role as the most powerful nation in the world. No country can succeed without the help of others, despite what many nationalists want to believe. By kicking out legal immigrants within our walls, we present to the world how we have devolved into a nation afraid of “outsiders” that are bound to steal American money. This immigration issue is painfully concerning in the fact that it is not wise to attack other nations and their people if you want to maintain your role as the most powerful ally on the globe.

The Paris Climate Agreement

The Paris Agreement 

On the first of June in 2017, President Donald Trump made what I personally believe to be his biggest and worst mistake. President Trump announced that the United States would be pulling out of the Paris climate agreement. In the agreement each country would plan and report their efforts to combat climate change. President Trump pulled out of the agreement, claiming it harmed the American economy and put us at a disadvantage. As of November of 2017, America is the only country to not sign the agreement. 

First of all, signing the agreement would have been a good decision from a purely political stand point. It shows that America is willing to do its part along with the rest of the world to combat climate change. Refusing to sign it because it might harm the economy just makes America look selfish and greedy. Refusing to sign also makes Trump, and therefore America, look foolish. Scientist almost unanimously agree that climate change is happening and that humans are a direct cause of it. Refusing to sign the agreement along with Trumps past remarks denying the existence of climate change makes us look stupid. It's made even worse with Trumps whole campaign being about fighting "fake news". I do not think I need to explain why looking stupid is bad politically. 

Many of the people who support president Trump's decision will say that they agree with him, that the Paris agreement puts all of the burden on America and puts us at a disadvantage. This claim is quite simply moronic. First off, the agreement isn't binding. Everything the United States and every other country says it will do is completely voluntary. Sure, not fulfilling a promise might make us look bad to the rest of the world but as I have already mentioned, so does pulling out of the agreement. It is also absurd to think that the burden is not placed on any other country. In Early 2017 China had agreed to halt the construction of 103 coal fired power plants and their energy agency announced plans to pour over $360 billion into clean and renewable energy by the end of the decade to show their dedication to combating climate change. If the agreement really did hurt the economy like the president claims then simply make a new promise. One that does not cause as much damage to the economy but also shows our willingness to fight climate change. 

Climate change is becoming more and more of a threat to everyone. This can be seen by the numerous hurricanes that have devastated parts of America. Puerto Rico is still crippled because of its hurricane. It is also shown in the massive wildfires in California. While these disasters may not have been directly cause by climate change, scientists agree that climate change will make these events more and more common. The fact that we refuse to sign an agreement even while its effects are ravaging our country is both foolish and mind boggling to me. By refusing to sign the agreement, Donald Trump has shown that he has no intention to fight climate change. 

Thomas Semanic

1-14-18

Dr. Muck

Trump & The Iran Nuclear Deal

            In the 2016 presidential campaign Donald Trump frequently hammered the Iran Nuclear Deal calling it one of the worst deals in American history and threatened to destroy it if he was elected president. He does not like the fact that Iran has nuclear power and the ability to make nuclear weapon if they wanted too. Before the deal, Iran had more enriched uranium that allowed them to make a nuclear weapon within three months. Iran has continued to say the only thing they do and want the uranium for is for power purposes, not a nuclear weapon. Of course, international relations is not a trustworthy process especially from a state like Iran whom we have not had the best relations with. Under the Obama administration, a deal was created that only allowed Iran to enrich Uranium to 3.67% which would allow them to make a nuclear weapon within a year instead of three months. Also, sanctions against Iran would be lifted assuming Iran follows through with deal. President Trump hates the idea that Iran could possibly make a nuclear weapon, he does not like the 10-15 year terms that the deal has, and the power balance tilt it can have on the middle eat especially since we have seen a very pro-Israel Trump.

            I understand wanting to be tougher on a country that has the ability to make a nuclear weapon however, I think we need to think of this situation in terms of collective action. We would all love to get more out of negotiations, deals, and agreements but that’s just not how it works. We are obviously a more powerful country than Iran and the fact that we would have a year to react to a situation like this instead of three months is much better. Iran had much more potential to tilt the balance of power or causing chaos before this deal. If the President were to put sanctions back on Iran the deal would he torn up and the likelihood another deal could be put in place is low especially one that would be stronger in favor of what Trump is looking for. As much as we do not like the previous actions of Iran I think this is the best deal that we can get at this time. Tearing up this deal would likely have the opposite effect of what President Trump wants. We need to look at the bigger picture here. In politics, you will never get everything you want and this is one of the issues with somebody in the executive with no government experience. Trump does not understand why America can’t exert their power more to influence others to do what he wants. I hope the president’s cabinet members like Tillerson and Mattis and experienced Republican members of congress can convince Trump to stick with the deal because it is the best we can do for now. In this article on January 12, 2018 from Vox Analysis it explains that legally Trump has to decide every one-hundred and twenty days whether to continue to enforce the deal or not. This time around he has decided to keep it but experts are worried he will not keep the deal next deadline. When announcing his decision, he called for European allies to fix the issues with it otherwise by next deadline he will impose sanctions. Congress could also enact legislation that would deny Iran Nuclear power not just for ten years but forever. I think Trump needs to have good conversations with our European allies to see what they want to do and what they think might be the best course of action. Overall, I hope to see the deal kept and sanctions not imposed on Iran because it would allow Iran to have greater ability to produce a nuclear weapon which I think across both parties is something we do not want.

           

https://www.vox.com/world/2018/1/11/16826786/trump-iran-deal-sanctions-withdraw

DREAMers vs. Trump Administration vs. Congress

DREAMers vs. Trump Administration vs. Congress

            We are going to find out just how bipartisan and effective our government can be. In September, President Trump announced that he would put a stop to DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). Enacted by the Obama administration, DACA protected undocumented immigrants who were brought to the United States as children from being deported. DACA has had a massive effect on these people (an estimated 700,000). DACA has also been controversial for the way it was enacted: without Congress. So, now-President Donald Trump decided that no new DACA applications would be accepted and that the program would end in March. He has stripped away the security these members of our society have needed. The uncertainty for the DREAMers is terrifying. This is not an anti-Trump, president-bashing piece. I just want our government to work correctly and efficiently to help these immigrants. As you and I both know, we are a country built on immigration. And unless lawmakers and the White House can agree on legislation, we will see a huge shift in immigration policy.

            ‘DREAMers’ refers to immigrants who illegally came to the United States as minors. The acronym comes from the proposed DREAM Act, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors. It was first introduced to Congress in 2001, and reintroduced several times after, but has failed to pass. Obama established DACA in 2012 to protect the illegal immigrant student population. Those who entered the country under the age of 16 and were younger than 31 in June of 2012 could avoid deportation and were eligible to obtain renewable two-year work permits upon good behavior. These immigrants grew up in the U.S. and do not really know any other country, culture or society. They are members of the U.S. despite their lack of official citizenship. This program sounds good-natured and beneficial for so many. However, many members of Congress immediately claimed that it was a gross abuse of power. They claimed that the President cannot just make up immigration legislation. And they are very correct.

This immigration issue is not new by any means, but as I have learned, President Trump can add controversy to topics. After rescinding DACA in September, Trump has called for Congress to propose more comprehensive immigration legislation. This could be great, but can the branches of government work together? The Trump administration has already rejected a bipartisan deal over DACA. An agreement proposed by senators on Thursday (January 11) was turned down by the Trump administration. The President wants the bill to include legislation and funds for his wall and claims this proposal did not allocate enough for the wall on the border. Additionally, Trump demands that the discussions include an increase in military budget. The connection between the military and the 700,000 DREAMers is lost on me.

“Do this favor for me, and I’ll do this for you,” is the way this sounds. “I’ll scratch your back if you build my wall.” The Trump administration is using the DACA negotiations to further other agendas. It is a politically savvy move, but ethically it is rather sick. The White House has claimed it wants to preserve DACA in some way. Trump has recently tweeted that the Democrats are to blame for the failure to reach an agreement. Finger pointing will not help the DREAMers, the students, and the members of society who are now afraid of possibly being deported. The President tweeted on Sunday that DACA is probably dead because of the Democrats. I hope that the dreams do not die with it.

Was Obama morally correct in establishing DACA? Yes. Was he legally and constitutionally in the wrong? Very possibly. Is Trump morally correct in rescinding DACA? I do not believe so. Is he legally in the right? Yes. But Trump needs to put aside his other motives to help legally create legislation that upholds our morals. The deportation of thousands of people who grew up here breaks U.S. morals. Other Republican leaders like Paul Ryan have said that they hope to create legislation that protects those immigrants who have done nothing wrong. Trump has stated he wants this to happen too. The desire to cooperate is there. So, a bill needs to be made that focuses on the issue and focuses on helping people. Permanent immigration legislation must be made. Forget walls and other agendas for a minute, and let’s prove that our government can work effectively to help so many people.