Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
When Donald Trump assumed the presidency, two allies of the US—Israel and Ukraine—were mired in bloody wars with ancient enemies. Both desperately needed more military aid in the effort to defeat their heavily armed foes.
Biden had granted both only enough military aid to enable them to not lose but not enough to win. Moreover, the arms they received came with the condition that they not be used to inflict serious damage to their enemy. Trump could have helped turn the tide. Instead he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
The Oct. 7 surprise attack by jihadists on innocent Israelis was just the latest in a centuries-long string of atrocities inflicted by Muslim terrorists who devote their lives to killing Jews. Bitter experience had taught Israelis that agreements with terrorists were essentially useless, so, for the safety of his people, President Netanyahu resolved to destroy Hamas.
Soon after hostilities began, the Biden government and other erstwhile friends began demanding a ceasefire, thwarting the original war aims. Grief-stricken Israelis understandably became restive over their families and friends being held hostage and demanded negotiations to secure their release.
Yet for terrorists, hostages are a key tactic in waging successful warfare. Because of the sharp contrast in how the two sides value human life, jihadists are able to command one-sided hostage swaps of up to 100 terrorists returned to duty for each civilian exchanged, plus other concessions.
But help was on the way. Our new president posted that none of this would have happened had he been in office and that he would now personally end the conflict. Ignoring the established wisdom of not negotiating with hostage takers, he vowed to apply his famed dealmaking skills to the problem, earning short-term praise while simultaneously ensuring that there would be more hostages in the future.
So far, the promises aren’t working out. The war hasn’t ended. Hamas shamefully cheated on the hostage swap, retaining live hostages to maintain pressure on Israel. Worse, the Israelis will almost certainly not be free from the threat of attacks by Hamas and other Iranian proxies.
Meanwhile, Ukraine had suffered an unprovoked attack three years earlier by Russian strongman Vladimir Putin, who correctly surmised that the fearful and weak Biden administration would not provide robust aid, without which Ukraine could not win in a prolonged war.
When Trump was elected, victory was at least thinkable with some additional aid because Ukraine’s troops had fought so courageously to defend their nation and their freedom. Trump, however, saw it differently. This was another dealmaking opportunity. In January, he told Putin, “We can do it the easy way or the hard way”. Yet a month later he was putting greater pressure on Kyiv to make concessions than on Moscow.
When Zelenskyy balked at prospectively agreeing to ultimatums produced by the Trump-Putin negotiations, from which he was excluded, his relationship with Trump cratered. Suddenly, according to Trump, Zelensky was a badly dressed “modestly successful comedian” who had talked Biden out of $350 billion in military aid (a huge exaggeration).
Zelensky was charged with showing insufficient “respect” and “gratefulness” to his new masters. More preposterously, Trump wrote that Zelensky shouldn’t have started the war in the first place, which of course he didn’t do.
Luckily, Trump wrote, “We are successfully negotiating an end to the war with Russia, something all admit only ‘TRUMP’ and the Trump administration can do”. To teach Zelensky a lesson, Trump temporarily shut off all munitions and intelligence aid to Ukrainian troops.
Zelensky is being forced into the defeat option, which had been available to him all along. He stands to lose a big chunk of his country and the goals for which his people sacrificed so much.
Netanyahu was also put in a difficult position by Trump’s “rescue," and the relentless pressure to settle with his oppressors. He can now look forward to a future of more jihadist attacks and more hostage-taking. Tehran and Moscow are reportedly happy with the results.
We may come to regret insisting on domination rather than support of our allies. In a changing world, you can’t have too many friends.
Discussion (24)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Back in the Obama era, all us conservatives were condemning the State Department as being full of "Diplomacy Junkies." The Obama administration believed that everything could be solved with diplomacy, whether it was disputes with friendly countries or clashes with terrorists and dictatorships like North Korea, China, and Russia. Remember the "Reset Button" that Hillary Clinton ceremoniously pushed in a photo-op with her Russian counterpart? This was frustrating in contrast with the previous Bush administration who had bluntly made demands of terrorists and dictators, and if they didn't comply, we took matters by force. And it worked!
Now, the Trump administration has become the "Diplomacy Junkies" of the Obama era, believing naively that terrorists and dictators are open to reason and civility. And so far none of it has worked! It has only made the bad guys more confident that they can be more aggressive and manipulate us. It is grossly ironic that Biden, a feeble leader who barely knew what room he was in, was able to be tougher on Russia (and on Hamas if you consider that he never tried negotiating with them) than Trump is.
Maybe the conventional wisdom that "Russia didn't attack because Trump was in office" would not hold water given the circumstances of today. If Putin had known how easy it was to take advantage of Trump, maybe he would have attacked earlier, on his watch. Back then, everybody thought Trump was crazy enough to unleash the dogs of war, so they played cautiously. But Trump was never tested by any serious foes, only rag-tag terrorist groups that were no match for U.S. military. Now that he is up against a more substantial threat like Russia, he is exposing himself as a paper tiger, not much different than when Obama failed to enforce his "line in the sand."
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
"Now that he is up against a more substantial threat like Russia, he is exposing himself as a paper tiger, not much different than when Obama failed to enforce his “line in the sand.”
This was my fear when he posted his All hell will break loose warning. I still hope that somewhere buried in that bluster that there is a real spine. I learned very early in my teaching career to never make a threat you couldn't follow up on. The expression, don't write a check with your mouth that your fists can't cover, was the lesson. Trump showed remarkable courage following his wounding the Pennsylvania. It was big surprise to me. I really didn't think he had it in him. I am still hoping in this situation he demonstrates that he is more than a bag of hot air. If he doesn't we are likely to see more of the aggressive behaviors from our enemies as they realize we just have another Biden in the Oval Office.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Not to demean anything about what Trump did on that day in Pennsylvania, but I have always been a little suspect of the amount of courage it takes to stand up and yell "Fight, fight, fight," when you know that you are surrounded by 100 security personnel with guns that are there specifically to protect you. Maybe it took courage? I don't know. It would have taken immensely more courage to do the same when you are alone and defenseless.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Where is it written that the US should care about the fate of the Ukraine? Or Israel?
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
In the Budapest Memorandum of 1994.
Strictly speaking, nowhere. But where is it written that anybody should care about you or anybody else in the world?
You're seeing five of 24 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.