Trump Bullies Europe As Daesh Kills


epa05990111 US President Donald J. Trump (L) and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg (R) grab for a seat during a working dinner meeting at the NATO summit in Brussels, Belgium, 25 May 2017. NATO countries' heads of states and governments gather in Brussels for a one-day meeting.  EPA/Matt Dunham / POOL

The thirst for war is ancient. As old as disputatious neighbors or rival tribes, it is enticing — a siren call for the strong, presenting as it does a quick, easy and final solution. That it is often not, has hastened the end of royal dynasties (Hohenzollerns, Hapsburgs and Romanovs after WWI) and empires, including the British. There are cogent arguments both world wars could have been avoided: the first, Europe fell into in accidental haste; the second, an end of a trail leading from the first.

So here we are in the 21st century and a West increasingly subject to violent small scale attack. The latest has 22 killed, 59 wounded, after a pop concert in Manchester, U.K. — the perpetrator, a native-born UK citizen of Libyan descent apparently radicalized by ISIS/Daesh, which has claimed responsibility. A nasty intrusion into the usual comfort and security of life in Europe, it has captured headlines across the world to the delight of Daesh. Like a shattered mirror, it and other such incidents scar our consciousness with jarring images — images not to be … after a concert in Manchester, a marathon in Boston, walking across Westminster bridge in London, or a French promenade (in Nice) on Bastille Day.

But back to another reality: the police in the U.S. kill over a thousand people on average each year in what is termed justifiable homicide; on British roads, 1810 people died in 2016 alone. While none of this is much comfort to the bereaved of Manchester, such mundane statistics like road casualties seldom hit the headlines, although posing at least a hundred times greater probability of occurrence. Also the spate of IRA attacks in the last quarter of the 20th century clearly dwarf those resulting from British involvement in the Middle East and North Africa as a junior U.S. partner — a region so devastated, it is hardly recognizable as the relatively thriving Iraq, Libya and Syria of the past.

From reality to the unreal draws us to the image of Donald Trump, sword in hand, stepping to the rhythms of a Saudi dance. And a King Salman lamenting the destruction of a once advanced Syria, as if he were a mere observer and the devastation divorced absolutely from his own hand. Such amnesia is irrelevant when the whole is oiled by a $350 billion ($110 billion down) arms deal.

The day before Hassan Rouhani had been reelected Iran’s president after a tough battle against hard-liner Ebrahim Raisi who is close to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini. Perhaps it was the exultation of the moment but the usually diplomatic cleric, UK educated lawyer, and architect of the US peace deal could not help reminding Trump of where he was, a country where there has never been an election.

That Mr. Trump is unconcerned about such niceties or freedoms or human rights was clear from his speech. In the end, it was Nawaz Sharif from Pakistan who toned down the belligerence by calling for dialogue as the only way to a sustained peace.

Undeterred, Mr. Trump proceeded to Israel and a repetition of Benjamin Netanyahu’s Iran mantra, of it aiding terrorism because it supports Hizbollah. People forget that the Shia in Lebanon at first cheered the Israeli invasion of the country in the 1980s. They only turned against them when they began to covet the waters of the Litani river and would not leave, leading to Amal and Hizbollah which drove them out.

Onward for Mr. Trump to the Vatican and a frosty reception from the Pope, who presented him with an olive branch embossed medallion and a copy of his encyclical on the environment. The Vatican Foreign Secretary Cardinal Pietro Parolin encouraged Mr. Trump to stay in the Paris Climate Accord.

Then to Brussels and another gaffe: he accused NATO members of not fulfilling the 2 percent of GDP contribution. Well in the first place, the amount is not mandated; second, it is not about a contribution to NATO — NATO’s expenses are paltry, amounting to less than $2 billion. What the 2 percent figure actually represents is a recommended guideline for each member country’s own defense spending so that it can provide adequate support in a time of need. The German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen’s prompt response: Germany doesn’t owe NATO any debt. Mr. Trump’s public shaming was intended actually to bolster him with his own ill-informed voters back home. Of course, some Europeans are voluntarily increasing spending due to deteriorating relations with Russia, spending for which Mr. Trump will no doubt take credit.

So goes the European odyssey of our newly minted warrior president.

Dr Arshad M Khan ( is a former Professor based in the U.S. whose comments over several decades have appeared in a wide-ranging array of print and electronic media. His work has been quoted in the U.S. Congress and published in the Congressional Record.

Support Countercurrents

Countercurrents is answerable only to our readers. Support honest journalism because we have no PLANET B.
Become a Patron at Patreon

Join Our Newsletter


Join our WhatsApp and Telegram Channels

Get CounterCurrents updates on our WhatsApp and Telegram Channels

Related Posts

Trump’s Justice

In 1868, British Prime Minister William Gladstone famously said, “Justice delayed is justice denied.” The phrase has often been repeated here in the United States, most famously by the Reverend…

Hitler Would Be Proud!

It has become sacrilegious to ever use Adolph Hitler in any comparison of a current political person or group. Sorry children, but we need to give careful scrutiny to our…

Join Our Newsletter

Annual Subscription

Join Countercurrents Annual Fund Raising Campaign and help us

Latest News