Ելակետ լրատվականի նոր կայքը այստեղ
Yerevan
05 / July / 2022


What's America Going to Do Next

Donald Trump’s electoral campaign was a demonstration of the challenges and desires of the “working class” and non-working class where the presidential candidate vowed to isolate America from excessively globalist intentions and bring the country onto a path of an overt social-ethnic egotism.
Those who have visited provincial America and are acquainted with the former industrial areas understand that the country is waiting for renewal and attention. It was enough to suggest reconstruction of the country’s industrial areas and limit immigration for them to elect a person who had no political experience.
Trump’s presidency is a sensitive issue and is related to mistakes in the HR policy. The U.S. administration has not formed yet and this is natural because it is not clear who should implement the ideas and intentions expressed by Trump.
However, America is well established and this is a challenge to not only the competitors of the new president but also America’s diverse external enemies. It is absolutely clear, and Trump has realized this that he personally has no place in foreign policy though he is ready to do everything that his supporters, more exactly the U.S. military and intelligence, demand.
The public at large, both Republicans and Democrats, continue to be dissatisfied. They have concerns that the president has arrived at the White House with extravagant thoughts.
The point is not Trump as much as the former administration which has led the United Sates and the world into pacifism, allowed China to accelerate its development, Russia to behave willfully, enlarge the circle of the Islamist groups, which has become possible in the result of Obama’s policy.
An undeniable merit of Trump’s is that he does not set obstacles to the military and the intelligence who were dissatisfied with the former president’s policy. Not even an intention of silencing these problems is noticed, and there is a visible wish to assign political functions to the military and the intelligence.
The deputy president Mike Pence behaves so as if he is integrated with those circles and is trying to perform a main role in the solution of political-military issues. This is perfect because it would have been worse if the deputy president were indifferent to such issues.
Pence’s visits clearly show the militarization of political issues in two regions on the situation where the global security depends. Those are Europe and Asia Pacific. These two regions determine the main military directions, and a politician who is closely linked to these directions will be the informal head of state.
For the time being, Secretary Tillerson will be dealing with disputable issues, is practically preparing and unfolding a new policy or rather a new political setting.
The militarization of the U.S. foreign policy would remain a game in addressing domestic issues if the second person of the country in the United States had not been nominated directly as a military policy leader, including regional policy, i.e. geopolitics.
However, already a vivid political-military or rather a conservative-republican elite has formed in America with obviously political and military leaders. In fact, not Trump is going to form those circles but the new elite is going to assign to the new president his initiatives and priorities.
No doubt, a lot of countries which were not committed to NATO will have to understand how it is necessary to work under new conditions. In addition, Russian vassals are also facing new challenges and a reform of political elites.
This concerns not only small countries located in more or less remote regions but also the central states of Europe and Far East which recently have preferred positioning themselves as countries which are opposed to the United States and NATO.
With these countries everything will be done without difficulty because obviously the military circles share many of the U.S. views.
More complicated situations will occur in Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and some countries of Latin America. These states are in a sufficiently “revolutionary” situation and will not strengthen the confrontation with the United States and NATO but will try to reach certain conditions and agreements with the United States. Provided this, the U.S. needs new partners along the entire border of these partner states. The Americans are trying to ignore the anti-American moods and intend to involve these countries into their camp.
For this purpose, people are being selected from the government and the opposition. This is being done very fast and without limitations. This is especially visible in Eastern Europe, the Balkans, Central Asia and the Near East.
The United States is facing a core issue: to remain the first global power or not to be the first and gain new problems that require more money and human capital.
Who should try to resolve this problem? It is possible to list more problems, and some of them will come true because only the United States can bring them into being. They are primarily technical military and industrial issues.
However, there is an issue that is in a serious controversy with the United States and the set of values of the western liberal community. Therefore, people have come to government who are called conservative-republicans.
It is worth quoting Samuel Huntington who said America will die if it fails to find out who the owner of the American land is. It is possible that he did not say exactly this or maybe not he said this but this is to the point and relevant, considering the current period.
Soon this issue may become the primary one in the future American history. It is possible to decide in line with Trump’s “concept” whom the Americans see as their friend and whom they consider as enemies of the American policy and lifestyle.
One should not ignore the forgotten and very categorical expressions by American sociologists. Especially the American theory of “direct action” in sociology is typical the author of which is highly demanded in American universities.
If course, the current U.S. president is far from issues of sociology and political science but this is what is needed. The American universities have developed a substantial theoretical basis for not only liberalism but also conservative republicanism.
It is not correct to insist that the American military have nothing to do with these sociological statements. The top popularity of Talcott Parsons’s theory coincided with the political revival of the Democratic Party, during the tenure of Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman. The Americans were waiting for not only a Republican president but also a reliable sociological theory which does not hide the conservaatism of the Republicans.

Source: http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/36993

Seen 1260 times

Moes wiewed
Today
For week
For Month

Gevorg Avetisyan: It is necessary to transfer the national culture to the younger generation living ...

Armenia-Azerbajian friendship platform is Aliev's regime dark project. Vahan Martirosyan

Armenian and Artsakh FM's hold discussion

Where Do The Richest Americans Live?

China says wants 'calm' resolution to U.S. trade war

5G and SMEs: the keys to digital transformation at ITU Telecom World in Budapest