For the last two and a half years, we’ve been watching President Trump display incompetence and, allegedly, break multiple laws; I’ll dispense with the less tangible observations.
Most of these have been domestic in nature, or, for those that had international repercussions, they were obscured by Trump’s refusal to share the experiences with relevant White House officials, such as his meetings with Putin, or they were mostly about Trump: Emoluments, allegations of corruption, such as the recent contretemps in Ukraine, etc.
Which is all to say, the Republicans would utter a few words of distress, but do no more.
But the decision to withdraw troops from the border area of Syria and Turkey is a signal event for the Republicans. For those readers unfamiliar with the region (and I’m no expert), the Kurds are an ethnic minority who are mostly concentrated in the area where Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Iraq share borders. For decades, or even centuries, they’ve advocated, sometimes violently, for the re-creation of Kurdistan, carved out from the territories of the aforementioned countries. Those countries take exception to such a potential loss of territory, and Turkey, at least, has labeled the political wings of the Kurds terrorist organizations; the current crop of Turkish leaders seem to have curried hatred of the Kurds as part of their ruling strategy.
In that context, the stabilization of the Syrian / Turkish border included American troops to keep the Kurds, who provide valuable military services, as allies while containing the ambitions of the current Syrian government, which has recently survived a civilian revolt. Our sudden and unexpected withdrawal has left the Kurds, both military and civilians, in the roughly 20 mile strip of land within Syria on the Turkish border, at the mercy of the Turks.
And Turkish President Erdogan has little mercy for the Kurds, who provide a distraction from his economic mismanagement woes at home.
The rest of the world – which is to say, the all-important ruling classes – has seen this Republican President abandon an ally in the field. Obviously, the United States’ immense military and resources makes the Americans an attractive ally, but if you can’t trust them then it’s unwise to cut them the sort of deals which lead to prosperity, because losing the backing of an ally at a key moment is disastrous.
So now – regardless of the announcement that the Turks have agreed to a cease-fire, because they have doubtless achieved their objectives and can throw a bone to Pence, the negotiator, and Trump – the Republicans have to decide:
Do they take their international responsibilities seriously enough to vote to get rid of Trump in an impeachment?
If they don’t, then every other nation in the world will know that whenever the Republicans are in charge, they are not to be trusted. Rather than favorable trade terms, unfavorable. Don’t back them in military conflicts. View their links to the Russians with suspicion.
It’s a great pity that the person who was the closest to being a conscience for the Republicans has passed away. Senator McCain (R-AZ) certainly had one of the finest understandings of foreign relations and the dynamics inherent in same of the current generation of Congressional members on either side of the aisle, and he would be leading the charge to remove the President in the face of this outright betrayal of our allies. McCain would have taken Trump’s irrelevant statement that the Kurds “are no angels” and jammed it right up his ass.
Do the Republicans realize this? They might. When the House offered a resolution to rebuke the Administration over the matter, it passed.
The House on Wednesday voted overwhelmingly in favor of a resolution condemning President Donald Trump‘s decision to end U.S. military support of Kurdish forces in Syria.
The measure received bipartisan support with a 354-60 vote. All those who voted against were Republicans. [UPI]
However, the Senate Republicans may not have the opportunity to display their displeasure, due to the meddling of one Senator Rand Paul (R-KY):
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) blocked an effort to bring a House-passed resolution formally breaking with President Trump’s Syria strategy up for a vote.
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) tried to get consent Thursday to bring up the resolution, arguing that “we’re in real trouble.” …
Paul, a libertarian-leaning GOP senator, objected to Schumer’s request for a vote, arguing that he was trying to sidestep the Constitution.
“He should come to the floor and say that we are ready to declare war. We are ready to authorize force, and we are going to stick our troops in the middle of this messy, messy, five-sided civil war where we would be ostensibly opposed to the Turkish government that has made an incursion,” Paul argued. [The Hill]
A resolution to rebuke the President is just that. Paul is projecting possible consequences on what is essentially a motion to tell the President to stop being an impulsive idiot. Paul has a history of trying to meddle in foreign relations, and, like most libertarian thought on the matter, it’s ill-advised.
For the moment, the Republicans are teetering on the knife’s edge. This is the moment in which they should display leadership by defying the Trump base and voting, at least, to rebuke him. If the base complains, they should be told why the rebuke was necessary, and if an opportunity to remove Trump comes up, they should vote for it as well.
Otherwise, we can only assume their taste for holding power is stronger than their loyalty to the nation.
Those who voted against the House resolution will face hard questions in 2020. Will they still have a shield to hide behind in the person of President Trump? Or will he have been impeached and convicted, and be in hiding from other prosecutions?
Only time will tell.
