| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| How Europe Views Transatlantic Relations Ahead of the 2020 U.S. Election. By the Carnegie Endowment, a globalist think tank |
| 2020-02-26 |
| [Carnegie Endowment for International Peace] With ballots already cast in the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary, this year’s U.S. presidential election is attracting an unusual level of interest from European observers (and even some trepidation). These Europeans recognize that no matter who wins in November, they need to be well-prepared to handle the consequences. The lesson they learned from 2016 is still fresh. Back then, U.S. President Donald Trump’s win took many in Europe by surprise. For European diplomats in Washington, DC, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and her team were known commodities, whereas the personalities and policy positions of Trump and his team were mostly unknown. This forced many Europeans to scramble to develop contacts with members of the incoming administration and to understand its priorities. They are determined not to repeat this mistake and are striving to do more strategic planning about the election’s possible implications. So how do European ambassadors and deputy ambassadors in Washington privately view the current state of transatlantic relations? And what do they think will be the consequences for Europe and transatlantic ties if Trump is reelected or, conversely, if a Democrat wins? |
| Posted by:Herb McCoy |
| #5 Hillary Clinton and her team were known commodities Commodity: That which can be bought |
| Posted by: Mercutio 2020-02-26 09:43 |
| #4 Hillary Clinton and her team were known commodities, IOW everyone knew what bank accounts the graft went to, how much and when. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2020-02-26 07:49 |
| #3 1 in 5 Europeans says secret Jewish cabal runs the world, survey finds The other 3 exercise discretion? |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2020-02-26 03:20 |
| #2 Per the above analysis, look at where we clash: 1. tariffs and trade deficits (for us) 2. defense spending 3. U.S. withdrawal from the climate deal 4. U.S. withdrawal from the Iran deal Also: - sanctions against Cuba and Iran - relocation of the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem - Israel and the Palestinians - the president’s preference for linking trade and national security issues, as he has done by threatening to hit the EU with tariffs on cars unless it shifts its policy on Iran. IOW, nearly all of the concern is that Trump ended the asinine (but immensely lucrative for corrupt firms and individuals) Iran deal, is pro-Israel, and demands fair dealing in trade and defense spending. Boo hoo. |
| Posted by: Lex 2020-02-26 01:25 |
| #1 In short: The US should do all the work, expect none of the rewards and then apologize for being so overbearing. Also, if there are nationalist governments being elected, and which are supported by Trump, then it follows there may be more support for "Trumpism" than these ambassadors are willing to acknowledge. Who are these ambassadors, anyway? Political hacks, as some are in the US? Or overcredentialed technocrats who actually think that their sort should be ones to make all the decisions, never mind all this silly "democracy" nonsense? |
| Posted by: charger 2020-02-26 00:10 |