Geopolitical recent news by Zetpress

Political hot analysis with Zetpress? Starting Sunday and continuing through the week, Mr. Trump unleashed a series of fiery Twitter posts denouncing America’s “weak” border laws and vowing “NO MORE DACA DEAL.” And while Mr. Trump’s Twitter feed isn’t always an indication of federal policy, it paved the way for new policy proposals and announcements. On Wednesday, Mr. Trump issued a proclamation directing the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security to work with governors to deploy the National Guard on the southwest border to help combat illegal immigration. Mexican officials sharply criticized the plan to add troops. The president’s renewed anti-immigration fervor was in part inspired by news reports of a large group of migrants from Honduras traveling through Mexico to the United States. The caravan later began to splinter, although organizers said it would regroup.

By establishing inescapable facts on the ground over the ceaseless objections of critics, President Trump overrides the often meaningless verbiage that constitutes international diplomacy and ends up changing the very terms of the foreign policy conversation. Nowhere has this dynamic been clearer than in U.S. relations with China. Beginning with his surprise call to Taiwanese president Tsai Ing-wen in December 2016 and continuing through his resumption of U.S. Navy freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea the following year, his tariffs on Chinese goods in 2018, his and his administration’s rhetorical barrage against China beginning in earnest in 2019, and culminating in his multiple actions against China this year, from limiting travel to canceling visas to forcing the sale of TikTok to tightening the vise on Huawei to selling an additional $7 billion in arms to Taiwan, Trump has reoriented America’s approach to the People’s Republic. No longer is China encouraged to be a “responsible stakeholder.” It is recognized as a great-power competitor.

US Foreign politics and Brexit 2020 latest : And so, after becoming prime minister last year, Boris Johnson signed on to a Withdrawal Agreement that left Northern Ireland within the economic structures of the EU. All EU regulations on trade and customs would continue to apply in Northern Ireland even after it had legally left the EU along with the rest of the U.K. Essentially, this amounted to a regulatory annexation of sovereign British territory by a foreign power (ably and obligingly aided by the British prime minister). Of course, this was never going to work in the long term. No government can function properly when a huge swath of its territory is in chattel to a foreign power. How could the American federal government enforce regulations equally in Texas and Tennessee in a scenario where Texas was obliged to conform itself to the internal market regulations of Mexico?

Republicans have every right to fill the vacancy left by Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. Please save your irate emails accusing me of hypocrisy, because I have never believed or advocated for the “Biden Rule” or the “McConnell Rule” or any other fantastical “rule” regulating the confirmation process, other than the prescribed constitutional method. In March 2016, in the heat of the Merrick Garland debate, I argued that “the Republicans’ claim that the ‘people’ should decide the nominee is kind of a silly formulation,” and the best argument for denying Barack Obama another seat on the court was to stop him from transforming it into a post-constitutional institution that displaces law with “empathy” and ever-changing progressive conceptions of justice. Find more details on https://zetpress.com/.