Suchergebnisse

The gun culture of my youth is not the same as that in America today. While my dad owns a deer rifle and a couple of shotguns, today I know Americans who have arsenals of hundreds. I know men who own the AR-15 assault rifle that seems to be the weapon of choice for mass murderers. Today, in America there are more guns than people—400 million—and, in some states, it is easier for an 18-year-old to get a military-style assault rifle with high-capacity magazines than it is to buy a dog. In my youth, politicians did not vie for election through brandishing a gun in their tv adverts. Gun manufacturers did not market tragedy to sell more guns.

In February, I wrote that the most compelling reasons that Russian President Vladimir Putin amassed soldiers on the Ukraine border were external. Specifically, Putin wanted to put pressure on the new coalition government in Berlin, to capitalize upon the perceived weaknesses of the current Joe Biden administration in the United States and to stop an increasingly western-facing Ukraine growing in its military cooperation with the U.S. and other NATO members. While these facts explain why Putin acted now, the complex explanation of how we got here must include the internal elements that propel Putin time and again to exert flagrant acts of aggression against sovereign nation states.

Over the last weeks, several people have asked me what I thought about the intensifying standoff between Russia and NATO on the borders of Ukraine. The most asked questions relate to what Russian President Vladimir Putin expects to achieve through his provocative actions and do I think that war is likely?

In mid-April, I took part in a conference entitled New Transatlantic Relations organized by a Romanian university. In my presentation on whether the Joe Biden administration will engage in a "Transatlantic Reset," I talked about the American public's attitude and weariness about fighting "forever wars," in particular, the war in Afghanistan, which will reach the 20-year mark this fall. In the question-and-answer time, members of the audience raised concerns about what will happen in Afghanistan after U.S. forces withdraw. Is America abandoning a loyal ally in the fight against terrorism? Are those many political pundits and politicians who argue that Biden is being foolish and hasty right and should Europeans try to temper Biden's withdrawal plans?

I know that when I am thinking about a topic, I start to see the world through the lens of that topic. Whatever I read or listen to starts to be evaluated from the perspective of that subject sitting in my frontal cortex. I weigh, value, and begin to build an argument based on the fragments coming from all these different sources. The poet in me visualizes it as sewing a patchwork quilt. In fact, I have this mental image of my grandmother, who was a master quilt maker and whose quilts are found throughout my house, when I stitch together ideas to form a new whole. Knowing this about my thought process led to some self-reflection since I realized that I have been thinking about deep divergences in society whether it is about political ideology, demographics, or economics. I want to know the sources of these divisions, who is pushing polarity and why?

Why we're all responsible for Trump's insurrection On the 6th of January my social media went into notification frenzy. Many friends and colleagues wanted to express their shock and revulsion for the events taking place on the Washington Mall and Capitol Hill. Although, I voiced my fears that polarization and Trump's rhetoric would lead to violence in recent interviews, it was still disconcerting to see it play out in real time. However, for Republicans who hitched on Trump's star in order to shepherd and bend his 74 million supporters for political power in places like the state of Georgia, the pact with Trump is proving to be very Faustian—in other words, soul-wrenching.

If he lost, we all expected Trump to accuse the Democrats of trying to steal the election. He did not disappoint us, commencing the false narrative only a few hours after Election Day drew to a close. But the basis for Trump's 3 am version of events did not get much traction, perhaps because he did not bother to provide any evidence of the voting irregularities that he alleged were committed against him. Even in some corners of the Republican Party his hyperbolic accusation machine is wearing thin—it is hard to argue the ballots that re-elected Republicans to the Senate are somehow at the same time invalid for the presidential vote. Moreover, the legal complaints that Trump's campaign is showering the courts with are struggling to find any footing.

Just in time for Labor Day relaxed reading in the U.S., the well-known political journalist Jeffrey Goldberg dropped a bomb on Donald J. Trump's re-election campaign with the head-line, "Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are 'Losers' and 'Suckers.'" While, Goldberg is known for his inside-scoop-intrepid reporting, the timing and the content of his article suggests that other forces are at play—it indicates that the generals are making a tactical move against their commander in chief. It suggests that the generals have had enough of Trump in the White House and want him out.

Listening to Trump's rosy assessments of the covid-19 pandemic, for example, that the U.S. economy could reopen by Easter, made me pull another book off my shelf. This time it was Voltaire's 1759 satire Candide. Trump's constant flow of wishful thinking echoes Voltaire's character Professor Pangloss, who relentlessly proclaims optimistic platitudes mixed with a malign indifference to human suffering. Trump's obvious resemblance had me wondering, what does it mean that a Pangloss is in the White House and how does it affect America's ability to deal with a serious social and economic crisis?

In mid-September I spent some time reformatting an academic article I wrote on Trump's foreign policy that will be published early next year in the journal Politics & Policy. In the process of double-checking all my sources, I discovered that some remarks and speeches on the official White House website were no longer available. Previously working links instead said, "That page cannot be found, or is located on an archived web page." This struck me as odd and annoying. But, most of all, it strikes me as misleading. It appears that Trump wants to erase any evidence of the former members of his administration that he no longer likes. Perhaps he thinks if he deletes them from his official website everyone else will forget.

Opinion article Joe Biden will bring back a degree of internationalism to the U.S. foreign policy, but the Democratic Party has shifted to a more Trumpian view of the world, says Roberta Haar, professor of Foreign Policy Analysis and Transatlantic Relations at UCM, in this opinion piece.

Immigration is the political topic that people in the heartland of America were talking about this summer. I had conversations with Americans on both sides of the partisan spectrum, with the only commonalty being strong emotions. Some were convinced that migrants were freeloading on government handouts while others pointed to the violence asylum seekers were fleeing. Whatever you say about Trump, he has clearly succeeded in escalating the rhetoric and the passions on what Americans feel about immigration. This furor had me reflecting on why this topic raises tempers and at the same time wondering why Congress seems unable to pass effective immigration legislation. And, simply stated, I want to know the truth about migrants and their impact on America's economy and society?

The American public was deeply divided going into the 2018 midterm elections. The unprecedented levels of voter turnout also attest to a public that is energized by antipathy or adoration for the Donald Trump presidency. The election results further confirmed and even reinforced these schisms in the U.S. electorate, with some political pundits arguing that because one part of the divide—the more rural parts of the country—was an obvious winner in the election that today America is in a period of contracting democracy.

Division in the midterms The American public was deeply divided going into the recent midterm elections. The unprecedented levels of voter turnout also attest to a public that is energized by antipathy or adoration for the Donald Trump presidency. The election results further confirmed and even reinforced these schisms in the U.S. electorate, with some political pundits arguing that because one part of the divide—the more rural parts of the country—were obvious winners in the election that today America is in a period of contracting democracy.

Donald J. Trump is campaigning with renewed vigor in the wake of his successful Supreme Court Justice nomination. Moreover, the drama and the salacious details covered in the press or vocalized as testimony in Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, fit his made-for-TV-reality-show presidency. At the same time, his supporters continue to respond to the fear cultivated in his rhetoric and continue to adore Trump's nonconformist methods. What is the party in opposition to do? Should it adopt the Trumpian playbook and his line of attack in the lead-up to the midterm elections or should it follow former First Lady Michelle Obama's advice that "fear is not a proper motivator?"