President Trump and Fairness

A recent article in the Connecticut Mirror, an online newspaper, announced a Navy award of over $22 Billion to Groton’s Electric Boat company to build nine or possibly ten Virginia class attack submarines. The article quoted Connecticut’s Democratic leaders including Second District Congressman Joe Courtney, the State’s two Senators, and even Governor Lamont in praise of the huge boost to the State’s economy.

The article failed to give President Trump or the Trump Administration any credit for the Navy’s award. It quoted Connecticut Democratic politicians but did not even mention the President’s name. After all, the President is Commander-in-Chief of the Navy. 

President Trump referred to this reluctance to give credit or even just report significant news in his recent joint press conference with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. In the course of that press conference, the questioning turned to Korea and the President took the opportunity to point out that in the past year his administration had succeeded in getting South Korea to contribute $500 Million more to the cost of stationing American troops in South Korea.

He asked the reporters if they were even aware of this news, and urged them to tell the story, especially since he was the first President in decades to ask the very prosperous South Koreans to pay their fair share.

No matter what you think of President Trump, you will have to admit that fairness is an important word or concept for him. One of the reasons the NATO meeting turned contentious was that the President repeated his claim that other NATO members were not paying their agreed upon, fair share of the cost of their own defense. For too many years they had been content to leave the lion’s share of the burden to the USA.

The President also uses fairness to describe his position on trade and tariffs.  To the dismay of the Wall Street Journal and other conservatives, he claims to be a “fair” trader and not a “free” trader. If the Chinese insist on putting high tariffs on American cars and motorcycles, he will retaliate by raising tariffs on their manufactured products. 

The economic arguments for or against tariffs don’t seem to concern him. He just argues that he will not play the chump, as his predecessors have done, and give away the store to China or any other country.

Fairness is also at the heart of his treatment of the press. Who can blame him for lashing out at the media or taking to Twitter to make his case. After almost three years in office, few have bothered to discuss or assess what he and his administration have actually done in office so far. There has been a steady flow of vitriolic venom directed against his person, his words and even gestures, but no real discussion or evaluation of his public policies or actions. 

Speaking of the press, I thought the President’s comportment in the press conference with Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO Secretary General, was remarkable in many ways. He did not think it necessary to dominate the conference but listened attentively to his ally’s comments and allowed him plenty of time to participate.

He then took questions that he answered with dignity, calm, and intelligence even when they inevitably swerved off the subject of NATO and on to impeachment. It was a remarkable performance. He spoke off the cuff in striking contrast to his predecessor in the Oval office, who rarely spoke without a teleprompter. 

In the press conference the President came off as a very magnanimous person, in striking contrast to those who are calling for his impeachment. He is not an ordinary politician. How else can one explain the $22 Billion award to a Connecticut company, one of the bluest states in the Country? 

The Senators from Connecticut have been two of his harshest critics over the past three years. My own representative from prosperous Fairfield County is one of the leaders in Congress in the impeachment process. I can’t think of any other President who would have allowed the Navy to award such a contract to a State from which he had nothing to gain politically. 

It’s just not fair to constantly blame and deride the President, and not give him credit for anything, especially when the Navy contract will provide much needed aid to the Nation’s defense, and the Connecticut economy.

### 

Korean Summit 2018

I waited a week to give my observations on the summit meeting between President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. A media frenzy surrounded the summit but now it is off the front pages and web headlines.

Here are the four points that the two leaders agreed upon in the signed communique.

The United States and the DPRK (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, a.k.a. North Korea) commit to establish new U.S.- DPRK relations in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity. 

 The United States and the DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean peninsula.

Reaffirming the April, 27, 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, the DPKR commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.

 The United States and the DPKR commit to recovering POW/MIA remains, including the immediate repatriation of those already identified.

Apparently, there were other items of agreement not included in the communique. It would appear that President Trump committed the United States to guarantee the security of North Korea. What this guarantee means, remains to be seen. I’m sure it does not involve the same kind of guarantee we give to South Korea.

President Trump also agreed to cancel some impending joint military exercises between United States and South Korean forces. He claimed it would save money but also did admit that the exercises could be viewed as “provocative.” Trump critics on both the left and the right in America were shocked at the President’s use of the word, “provocative.” Why is it hard to imagine that a North Korean dictator might regard a display of American military might just a few hundred miles away from his border as provocative? After all, doesn’t the American media routinely claim that Trump is a madman.

On the contrary, I was impressed by President Trump’s behavior both during and after the summit. It must have been a grueling ordeal for a seventy -year old man but he appeared calm, reasonable and statesmanlike.

In the first place, he gave no bragging assurances about the outcome of the summit. He said it would take time and considerable effort to achieve the goals outlined in the communique. The fact that he left the future negotiations in the hands of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was assuring. Pompeo certainly has the qualifications and experience to be an outstanding chief diplomat.

I was also impressed by Trump’s behavior and statements in the press conference that followed the meeting with Kim. I was able to see most of the conference on C-Span and Trump handled himself extremely well. He looked tired but he was confident and assured as he took many questions from a media cohort that resembled a pack of jackals.

If memory serves correctly, I believe that President Obama hardly ever gave press conferences, and that when he did speak in public it was usually with a tele-prompter. Trump answered every question off the cuff with ease and clarity. He felt so confident that he even extended the time allotted for questions.

I can’t remember the questions or his actual replies but he made sense. Before the summit, Democrat critics like Connecticut’s junior senator, Chris Murphy, claimed that Trump was unprepared for such a high level meeting. He hardly seemed unprepared to me and no one seems to be making the charge anymore.

I do vividly remember one statement that really went to the heart of the matter. He noted that there are 28 Million people living in Seoul, the capital of South Korea. For someone who is often portrayed as being heartless, it was very interesting to hear his concern for the people of that city which is three times the size of New York city. Seoul is less than 30 miles from the so-called de-militarized border between North and South. Just across the border are missiles which could annihilate the city and its inhabitants.

In that brief statement Trump indicated what the summit was all about and that other concerns were petty. He seemed to understand that it’s not important that he appears on stage with Kim or what flags are displayed. It’s not important if Trump wins a Nobel Prize. President Obama won one for doing practically nothing. The lives of millions of people are at stake.

The Wall Street Journal did run a lead editorial this week warning that President Trump had given away too much. Only time will tell but it doesn’t seem to me that delaying military exercises while waiting for the outcome of negotiations is giving away that much.

It is not hard to imagine why Kim Jong Un would find these exercises provocative and threatening. He sits on a very precarious throne and must certainly be aware of what happened to Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, and Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

###

Korea 2018

On our annual February visit to Alameda, California we attended an informal talk on North Korea by a retired U.S. Army colonel who had spent most of his career in Army intelligence. Although born in San Francisco, the colonel was of Chinese descent, a factor he claimed led to his being stationed in Asia for most of his career.

His talk on Korea was a real eye-opener. For example, he pointed out that there had never been a peace treaty between North and South Korea. The Korean War came to an end in 1954 with an armistice or cease fire agreement that established a border between the two parties along the 38^th parallel.  The armistice is still in existence 64 years later but the lack of a peace treaty has created what amounts to two armed camps along the demilitarized zone stretching the entire width of the Korean peninsula.

On one side of the border the North Koreans have placed a huge array of non-nuclear missiles all pointed at the South. Seoul, the capitol of South Korea, is in easy striking distance of these missiles. The colonel pointed out that nuclear weapons could not be used in such close proximity. Still, the 20,000,000 million residents of Seoul could easily be more than decimated within minutes.

On the other hand, South Koreans could put up a devastating response. Its army contains around 600000 men, and its air force is equipped with the latest and most sophisticated fighters and bombers. Unlike North Korea, South Korea has become a modern industrial giant definitely able to take care of itself. Nevertheless, since the armistice the United States has maintained a military presence in South Korea. 

There are approximately 40000 U. S. soldiers and their dependents mainly located in a camp only 40 miles south of Seoul. They are also within striking distance of the North Korean missiles. It would seem to me that the presence of this force is more symbolic than military. American troops are a sign that we will have to retaliate if South Korea is attacked. In effect, the American forces are like hostages guaranteeing American commitment.   

A peace treaty between North and South Korea could go a long way to reducing tension in the peninsula. It is hard to know what form the treaty would take but it seems to me that it should be primarily a matter for Koreans to determine. It would be beneficial for both North and South Korea to recognize the right of each other to exist. I also believe that the treaty should call for the gradual removal of all American troops from the peninsula. This move could go hand in hand with de-nuclearization in the North.

In his talk, the colonel also believed that the treaty could include trade relations between North and South Korea as a basic step in reducing the tremendous military arsenal along the de-militarized zone. The DMZ is a powder keg that if ignited, would not only destroy millions of Koreans but also involve super-powers in a terrible confrontation.

Perhaps the Winter Olympic games recently concluded in the mountains of South Korea can give an impetus to a peace treaty. Practically all of the Olympic athletes were symbols of the best in humanity. It was wonderful to see them compete, as well as to see their smiling, healthy faces when interviewed. The Korean athletes were particularly charming. To me the high point of the games was the South Korean Women’s Curling Squad. It will be hard to forget their spirited performances. It is sad to think that the small, garlic producing village they come from is in easy reach of destructive missiles just above the DMZ.

Curling: Silver Medal Winners

Recent news stories have detailed talks between North Korea and South Korea as well as an apparent willingness on the part of the North Koreans to give up their nuclear arms program in exchange for a reduction in the American military presence. The United States has been involved in Korea since 1950. We have helped the South Koreans to become a wealthy nation independent of their former masters in China and Japan. It is time for us to get out, and leave Korea to the Koreans.

###