by Summary:
The aim of such language and threats is usually to goad the other party into some overt act that can than be used as justification for "retaliation". But none of the countries Trump mentioned is prone to such behavior. They will react calmly - if at all. There was essentially nothing in Trump's threats than the claptrap the last two U.S. presidents also delivered. Trump may be crazy, but the speech today is not a sign of that.The stressing of sovereignty and the nation state in part one was the point where Trump indeed differed from his interventionist predecessors. But its still difficult to judge if that it is something he genuinely believes in. I think Trump genuinely believes in sovereignty and the Westphalian order, as do China and Russia. But President Xi is in charge in China
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: Donald Trump, national soveriegnty, Peace of Westphalia, UN, Westphalian order
This could be interesting, too:
The aim of such language and threats is usually to goad the other party into some overt act that can than be used as justification for "retaliation". But none of the countries Trump mentioned is prone to such behavior. They will react calmly - if at all. There was essentially nothing in Trump's threats than the claptrap the last two U.S. presidents also delivered. Trump may be crazy, but the speech today is not a sign of that.The stressing of sovereignty and the nation state in part one was the point where Trump indeed differed from his interventionist predecessors. But its still difficult to judge if that it is something he genuinely believes in. I think Trump genuinely believes in sovereignty and the Westphalian order, as do China and Russia. But President Xi is in charge in China
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: Donald Trump, national soveriegnty, Peace of Westphalia, UN, Westphalian order
This could be interesting, too:
Joel Eissenberg writes The death of free trade?
Peter Radford writes Election: Take Four
Joel Eissenberg writes “On-the-fence voters” are OK with Trump’s contempt
Joel Eissenberg writes The medium is the message
The aim of such language and threats is usually to goad the other party into some overt act that can than be used as justification for "retaliation". But none of the countries Trump mentioned is prone to such behavior. They will react calmly - if at all.
There was essentially nothing in Trump's threats than the claptrap the last two U.S. presidents also delivered. Trump may be crazy, but the speech today is not a sign of that.
The stressing of sovereignty and the nation state in part one was the point where Trump indeed differed from his interventionist predecessors.
But its still difficult to judge if that it is something he genuinely believes in.
I think Trump genuinely believes in sovereignty and the Westphalian order, as do China and Russia. But President Xi is in charge in China and President Putin is in charge in Russia. President Trump is not in charge in the US, and the people that are charge don't believe in it. US policy ahs been and is international interventionism, and Donald Trump is not a position to change that. So the good portion of the speech rings hollow.
I doubt that anyone in power abroad thinks that the US ruling elite has any intention of backing away from longstanding US interventionist policy, President Trump's words notwithstanding. Previous US presidents mouthed similar "liberal" sentiments, while intervening to "preserve the liberal world order." President Trump's threat in the speech indicate that he is of the same mind, regardless of the hype he dispensed. And no, the US is not going to recognize spheres of influence other than its own, in spite of the danger of not doing so.