On July 26, 2018, the Wall Street Journal presented rare insight from deep within the bowels of America’s foreign policy makers. Its title, “The Global Order Will Outlast U.S. Leadership,” written by Council on Foreign Relations member James Dobbins, mentions a revision to its priorities as he notes all incurring setbacks from Trump’s continual onslaught.
Dobbins interprets Trump’s demands for equalizing NATO costs to that of criticizing the organization itself. Given its current imbalance, this suggests that America’s heavy financial burden, in addition to providing the bulk of NATO’s military muscle, was just fine from the globalist perspective.
Also cited in Trump’s destructive path was the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, in addition to the United Nations, UN, the World Trade Organization, WTO and the European Union, EU. Dobbins praises all such global creations as being “major multilateral institutions.” Also frowned upon was Trump’s decision to withdrawal America “from the Paris climate accord, the seven-nation nuclear agreement with Iran and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.” This columnist credits all his actions as being “counter to 70 years of U.S. policy.”
From a globalist viewpoint, these initiatives have resulted in major setbacks to the order of things and yet to freedom loving Americans, who placed their trust with businessman, it appears to be their long awaited redemption.
This reversal offers a different course from previous administrations and one which America’s future now brightly shines upon as today’s intention is to preserve the priorities and principles of American greatness. The former path was engineered by the multitudes of both home grown and foreign internationalists who amassed and found refuge and solace within their individual cabals such as Dobbins’ CFR. For too long, the “thought product” from such foundries of secret scheming and planning have forged their policies into the majority of influential circles and are the prime innovators for this sudden globalist craze.
As this pro-globalist writer alludes to, Trump’s withdrawal from the Tran-Pacific Partnership, TPP, was a catastrophic unsettling to its enactment. In reaction, TPP planners have aligned with Japan and now the European Union for strengthening its format. But in the overall scheme, is this development merely reactionary or was this a predesigned order? Also, once being TPP committed, any second thoughts fall into the too late “closing of the barn door” category.
With the carrot of “free trade’ dangling from any and all spiffy promotions, America’s entry would have dashed her ability for determining her rules/conditions of labor, environment and immigration, etc. This projection is not fantasy or hyperbole; rather it’s based upon the in-place European Union’s structure from its European Commission authority, which eventually was cause for the Brexit vote in 2016. I might add that it’s been two years and still Britain voters await a finality.
A simple return to the basic thought of what makes sense, what is best for America and of course, how did all this globalist urgency originate and from where, never gains a seat at the debating table. And for good reason since the American heart originally considered far away “order” to be repressive and antithetical to American individualism and freedom. Finally, American leadership agrees.
While much of history’s revisionist attempts are based upon a “changing world,” the major ingredient which spurred our Founders’ concern were the human frailties which run through us all. I would suggest that power and greed are the two human flaws which have commanded this globalist scheme.
Rebounding from America’s TPP withdrawal, Mr. Dobbins cites that, “The real alternative to an American-led rules-based international order isn’t successful bilateralism. It’s a Chinese-led order.” Such a quick adjustment may have revealed that with or without America, “Chinese order” would have prevailed in the end.
Of course, this last thought is based in supposition but isn’t that what all these new global arrangements operate upon? Dobbins represents the CFR’s dismay but little is heard from other TPP influences such as the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group. With such unknowns in the mix, the TPP, along with those Paris Accords resemble two bullets which this new American sheriff has dodged.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com