Read recent geopolitical analysis? Russia pressed Mr. Trump to meet with President Vladimir V. Putin after the tense exchange of diplomatic expulsions last week. Mr. Trump had floated the idea of meeting with Mr. Putin at the White House in a March 20 phone call, a Russian official said. At the time, Mr. Trump had told reporters that he expected to “be seeing President Putin in the not-too-distant future.” But on Friday, the Trump administration imposed sanctions on seven of Russia’s richest men and 17 top government officials, penalties designed to punish Mr. Putin’s inner circle for Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and other global transgressions. It was another indication that as Congress and much of the administration pushes for increased pressure in response to Mr. Putin’s aggressions, Mr. Trump continues to advocate good relations with his Russian counterpart.
Just as remarkable as the deal itself is the bipartisan applause that greeted it in the United States. No one needs reminding that domestic politics is polarized and paranoid. Each party is convinced that the other one will extinguish democracy at the first opportunity. The past three presidencies have been jarringly discontinuous in style, temperament, and policy. But the same Democrats who sometimes appear eager to remove Donald Trump from office by any means necessary treated this foreign-policy accomplishment with equanimity and acquiescence. “It is good to see others in the Middle East recognizing Israel and even welcoming it as a partner,” Joe Biden said in a statement, adding that “a Biden-Harris administration will build on these steps.” Senator Chris Coons of Delaware told Jewish Insider that the agreement is “a very positive thing.”
US Foreign politics and Brexit 2020 latest : Joe Biden is famously proud of his Irish roots, so it’s likely that he has inherited this Irish American preference for romantic myth over gruesome reality to some extent. But if he would care to look more closely at the issues in question, he would learn that the European annexation of Northern Ireland was never necessary in order to preserve peace in Northern Ireland. In fact, it amounts to a far more egregious violation of the Good Friday Agreement than the Internal Markets Bill. First of all, the EU is well aware that the necessary technology exists for frictionless trade to continue between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic even under two entirely different regulatory regimes. The EU Parliament published an entire study in 2017 detailing how this could be done. The study is called “Smart Border 2.0: Avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland for Customs control and the free movement of persons,” and is publicly available. The EU’s aggressive stance towards Northern Ireland is not born of any concern to avert the need for border infrastructure. It has always been political. Dominic Raab, the current British Foreign Secretary and former Brexit negotiator, said as much in an interview for the Sunday Times in 2018. Raab is hardly a neutral observer, but the account of a man who was at the center of negotiations cannot be dismissed out of hand.
And all the same people who advised Republicans against refusing a Garland confirmation will again warn that the party is engaged in political suicide. There’s no knowing how these fights will play out. But are moderate voters, or Republicans on the fence about Trump, really going to be happy to hear Democrats threatening to blow up the system? Maybe a fight over the future of the Court will remind many conservatives what’s at stake beyond Trump. Let Democrats make their arguments against women such as Amy Coney Barrett or Barbara Lagoa, whom Trump is reportedly leaning towards nominating. Then again, even if Trump loses in November, you can be confident that keeping his promise to appoint constitutionalists to the nation’s top court won’t be among the top 1,000 reasons why. See additional details on https://zetpress.com/.