Trump is looking for a BIG success on foreign policy

Trump must be getting desperate. He needs a BIG success overseas to shore up his power base which at home is being daily chipped away by Nancy Pelosi and her majority Democrats in the House of Representatives. Trump needs China or Syria or Afghanistan or North Korea to give him a triumph that will propel him towards reelection in 2020. I stick to my prediction that Trump will be a one-term president because there are so many things that could go wrong for him between now and 2020. The Mexico wall is clearly not going to happen unless he declares a state of emergency because Pelosi has once again said there will be no money for his wall. She is content for extra fencing where required, perhaps even a more solid barrier here and there but not a full-length Trump wall. So, the president who by the way MAY still declare a national emergency to get his wall built, is looking elsewhere for his headline-making breakthrough triumph. He is hinting that the negotiations on trade with China are going well and he and President Xi Zinping, his "friend", will meet to sort out all the really tough bits. But if that fails, where else can he turn to get his victory? Not Syria, his policy is going to produce no triumphs for the US. If all the US troops are withdrawn, and the pull-out has already begun, Russia and Turkey and Iran will benefit. Iran is a mess. Trump claims his intelligence chiefs know nothing and need to be reschooled in the art of spying. He believes Iran is still intent on having a nuclear weapon and are secretly getting on with it. The CIA and others say the opposite. How long will Gina Haspel, CIA director appointed by Trump, last I wonder! Iraq is never going to be a success story for Trump because Iran is in the lead on that one, so where else is there? The answer is Venezuela. I think Trump has deep deep plans to get Nicolas Maduro OUT. Because if the US succeeds in getting rid of the ghastly Maduro, everyone, except Russia and China, will be pleased. Whether it will be done by military intervention or massive new sanctions or covert CIA action Trump has yet to decide. Trump has initially gone for sanctions against the oil industry which could bring Maduro to his knees. But Moscow will help out. So that's when Trump might turn to something more covert. He must be itching to send in the Marines, to hell with his friend Putin. I don't think there will be a full-scale military intervention but I reckon Trump will turn to his intelligence people - yes the same ones he has just been maligning - and tell them it's time for some clandestine activity.

Theresa May will get a bloody nose in Brussels and Berlin

You get the feeling that the 27 nations of the European Union are sick to death of the UK and Theresa May and the whole of the House of Commons. It's hardly surprising. The EU thought they had got a deal, it was approved and signed by Prime Minister May, then agreed by her cabinet. All neatly wrapped up and done. Then the whole thing was thrown up into the air, the Conservative Party split into battle factions, each as obstinate as the other, Labour didn't know what the hell it wanted, the Northern Ireland Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) just stuck out their formidable chins and said no whenever asked any question about Brexit and the dreaded backstop to avoid a hard border between north and south, and Theresa May sailed through with her Brexit boat pointing in exactly the same direction whatever the windy conditions. Now who knows what's going to happen. Theresa bless her sort of won most of the arguments in the House of Commons last night, shaking off the threat of different amendments to her Brexit deal which would have taken control out of her hands. But in reality nothing really changed. We still have her Brexit deal or no deal or no Brexit. The only difference is that one amendment stipulated that the word "backstop" be replaced by "other arrangements" - which was passed - giving Theresa a mandate, or so she claimed, to go back to Brussels and say, "Now I have the Commons backing me, you must change your ways and get rid of the Northern Ireland backstop idea and find another way of keeping the border open between north and south without your backstop insurance policy which the DUP hates". But the EU leaders and negotiators have already said they will NOT change the backstop. In fact they won't change anything. All they might do is ADD a few words to appease anyone who thinks the EU plot is to ensure that whatever happens in the future, there will be no border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland - ie the North will be like a member of the EU inside the EU customs union and thus be different from any other part of the UK after we have left the European Union. And the DUP doesn't want to be different. This isn't a plot, this the reality. I do not see what formula of words can be found that will resolve this issue and be legally binding. The EU bureaucrats tried before and failed. Also the UK government still talks about a technological solution to border checks but there isn't one apparently. Everyone has looked into it and according to the deputy EU negotiator, Sabine Weyand, no such thing exists on any border in the whole wide world. In this era of artificial intelligence, landings on Mars and weapons that can travel at 15 times the speed of sound, no clever dick has managed to come up with a device that technologically checks stuff going across a border without anyone knowing about it!! Unbelievable. Theresa May presumably knows this, so why does she go on and on about it as if somewhere in a small high-tech shop in Outer Mongolia, such a piece of kit is just waiting to be found. So, Theresa will head off yet again to meet with the stony-faced EU chiefs who will say, "Hello, Theresa, nice to see you, but please go home, we have nothing to talk about". It's 27 against 1. Of course the EU will win. However, the only other amendment which was approved yesterday by the Commons was one that said a no-deal Brexit was out of the question. Everyone, or most people, seem to agree with this, but the amendment is not binding on the government. So it's still on the table if the EU refuses to change or add to the Brexit deal text. The EU lot are being brutal. Yet none of them want a no-deal Brexit because it would be almost as disastrous for the whole of the EU as it would be for the UK. So, Mr Bureacrats, get your finger out, stop being so stubborn and give a little. For God's sake let's have a deal. Time is running out.

Another ex-White House flunky reveals all to piss off Trump

I've never heard of him, nor has Donald Trump apparently, but a former White House official "close" to the president called Cliff Sims is bursting into print with the now-familiar description of a chaotic administration. Trump is going around saying "Who is this guy?" One of his officials, no doubt also planning a future blockbuster, came up with the wonderful remark, as revealed by Politico, when he advised Trump not to bust a gut over the Sims' memoir: "It's beneath you, you barely remember him. Go run the world." I love it. Go run the world hahahaha! I bet that brought a smile to Trump's face. Meanwhile this bloke Cliff Sims is causing all kinds of anger inside the White House. In fact, for once, his revelations have so pissed off everyone that they are united in condemning him and supporting the president. Sims, some sort of adviser who apparently helped Trump make videos, claims to have been at every meeting that counts and has exposed the disarray around the president. There have been so many books already on the same theme that this latest version deserves to die a death. But no doubt Sims will get his pound (or dollar) of flesh and can retire on the royalties. There is no such thing as loyalty in the Trump camp. All his best mates have either been fired or resigned and the little fish in the Trump pond have been ousted or resigned and rushed straight to the publishers. Bob Woodward has probably written the best inside account of life in the White House so far, having interviewed pretty well everyone and acquired marvellous snippets of gossip about who said what at which moment, like the time Jim Mattis allegedly called Trump a fifth or sixth-grader on foreign policy matters. Embarrassingly for Trump, when Sims resigned from his job at the White House, Sarah Sanders, the press secretary, said everyone was sorry to see him go because he was such a good chap and a loyal and trusted member of the team. Ooops. She even said she trusted Sims would be a loyal supporter of Trump in the future wherever he was working. Ooops ooops. Sims has had his 15 minutes of fame. Well, a bit longer because he has already appeared on a couple of TV shows. But in the end, the canny White House official quoted in Politico probably got it right. Trump should ignore the former videographer and go rule the world!

A draft peace framework with the Taliban but huge obstacles remain

Before Trump and co start celebrating with the news that the US and the Taliban have agreed a framework peace formula there remains a grave danger that it will still all go wrong. And what if there is a long-term deal? What will it mean for the people of Afghanistan, especially women who have nightmare memories of life under the Taliban when the militants were in power in Kabul? How many concessions will have to be made with the black-turbaned insurgents and can they ever be trusted? Under the framework agreement the Taliban have already won their first big concession from the Americans. The US will agree to a timetable to withdraw all troops, in return for the Taliban promising never again to give sanctuary to al-Qaeda or other terrorist groups. This is more important to the US than anything else. The presence of al-Qaeda's leader, Osama bin Laden, and hundreds of fighters living and training in Afghanistan under the protection of the Taliban was the reason for the US-led invasion in 2001, post the 9/11 terrorist attacks in America. But al-Qaeda still exists to this day in Afghanistan, albeit in much smaller numbers. And then there is the relatively new presence of Isis militants also in the country. Who will be responsible for eliminating them if the US withdraws all troops? The Taliban? They have clashed with Isis in northern Afghanistan but will they take over the role from the US of ensuring Isis is prevented from plotting bomb attacks in the West from their refuges in Afghanistan? I think not. The Pentagon would argue that even if the majority of US troops are withdrawn - currently about 14,000 - a force of counter-terrorist special operations units would have to stay to keep monitoring and attacking Isis and al-Qaeda elements. But the Taliban will never allow this, not if they agree to a peace deal that stops the war in Afghanistan after 17 years. They have always made clear they want ALL foreign troops out of Afghanistan. Still, the announcement of a framework peace deal - a long way from being a final settlement - is encouraging and may at last be a sign that the Taliban are as fed up with the war as the Americans and other coalition partners are. The Taliban's new chief negotiator is Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar who is a legendary figure in the insurgency. He is one of the founding members of the Taliban and was a trusted associate of the late Mullah Mohammed Omar, the original leader of the Taliban when it was set up in 1994. He is also a veteran fighter and commander and is respected throughout the insurgency movement. His appointment as chief negotiator for the talks with the Americans is another encouraging sign. The US team is headed by Zalmay Khalilzad, an Afghan-born American diplomat who was appointed as Trump's special adviser on reconciliation in Afghanistan. Khalilzad has decades of experience in dealing with the world's toughest problems, notably in Iraq and Afghanistan, and he and Mullah Baradar can sort out a deal if anyone can. But the future talks are still fraught with dangers. The two biggest stumbling blocks are that the Taliban refuse to consider a ceasefire until all US troops have left and will not talk to the Afghan government because they regard the Kabul administration as a puppet organisation of the Americans. The US negotiators cannot give ground on either of these Taliban demands. The Taliban will have to deal with President Ashraf Ghani, the Afghan president, and they will have to stop the killings and bombings and shootings and intimidation BEFORE the last US soldier has left. So it's very early days. But at least there is a sense of optimism following six days of talks between Khalilzad and the Taliban in Doha, capital of Qatar.

Donald Trump is not going to be reelected

Donald Trump is going to have to face up to the possibility that he will fail to win reelection in 2020. It's looking more and more likely that a revolt within the Republican Party as well as the change in fortune for the Democratic Party following the success of Nancy Pelosi in defeating the president in the shutdown drama, will mean the end of the Trump administration in 2020, not the beginning of another four years. Who would have thought it only a few months ago when Trump seemed to be enjoying good economic news and potential foreign policy successes. Now, the Syria story has gone crazy with his decision to pull out US troops, Afghanistan is still awash with Taliban massacres of Afghan troops (peace? What peace?), the 35-day government shutdown has ended very badly for him, a lot of people, supporters included, are turning against him, and the Russian collusion investigation is getting more and more serious and closer and closer to the president himself. What chances are there for Trump to turn this all around to put himself ahead of the campaign game for 2020? If he fails to get his money for the Mexico wall and even hints at another shutdown, there will be total disillusion within the Republican Party and even a plot to find a new candidate for 2020. That really would be the ultimate humiliation for Trump. I never thought I'd say this, but the Democrats will probably have a better chance of winning the 2020 election if Trump IS the Republican candidate as the incumbent president. Meanwhile, the next few weeks in Washington promise to be lively. The deadline for another potential shutdown will be here before we know it, and if there is no concession from Nancy Pelosi on border wall funding, Trump's presidency is going to go into free fall. It's bizarre but his administration may now rest on successes overseas. So a huge breakthrough with Kim Jong-un, the North Korea leader, for example, would help the Trump cause. But that, I predict, is unlikely to happen. Or a peace settlement with the Taliban followed by the withdrawal of US troops in Afghanistan would be a big bonus for his political fortunes. But, again, that's probably pie in the sky. A peace-loving Taliban is an oxymoron. In my view, and experience. So this year is going to be the defining period of Trump's presidency. If things continue to go against him throughout 2019, 2020 could be a lame duck year for him before he leaves the White House for ever.

One of Trump's worst weeks

Donald Trump has suffered some pretty bad periods in his two-year presidency. But this last week has probably been the worst. Not only was he forced to surrender and agree to end the government shutdown without any promise of money for his cherished border wall, but he was attacked by his most conservative supporters who accused him of being weak, AND a key player in the Trump presidential campaign, Roger Stone, was arrested and indicted for allegedly dodgy links with Russians and WikiLeaks as part of the Russia collusion investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller. Stone was a close associate of Trump's and if he is convicted of some deal with WikiLeaks involving the leak of emails about Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party which had been stolen/hacked by Russians, it is bound to be bad news for the president's own survival. The White House summarily dismissed the Stone arrest as having nothing to do with the Trump administration. But who's kidding? I bet Trump himself is not feeling remotely sanguine about his old friend's indictment. But his worst moment came when he had to declare that he, after all, was going to sign the federal budget so all the 800,000 workers who had been on unpaid furlough could get their back pay. Whatever way you look at this, it was the one thing he had pledged he wasn't going to do, UNLESS he got his $5.7 billion for the border wall. But then there he was agreeing to do the opposite. He got nothing for his surrender except political humiliation. It's tough being president, Mr President, even when you think you are the cleverest and smartest person in town. He was outmanouevred by Nancy Pelosi, and even though Trump has threatened to return to his border wall demands over the next three weeks he is not going to get the money he needs. If he then declares a national emergency or forces another shutdown he will become one of the most unpopular presidents in US history. How he will hate that! The irony is that during the 35-day shutdown the US economy lost $6 billion, the same amount Trump wanted for his wall. What a cruel world it is but in the game of politics, there are very few happy days. None at all for Donald Trump.

The Queen says let's all be nice to each other

Such a rumpus has been caused by a little speech given by Her Majesty The Queen at the Sandringham Women's Institute. She basically called on everyone to be nice to each other and to respect each other's views. Well, you would have thought she had said, "Down with my government, down with Trump and go to hell Brexit!" She didn't say anything like that but all the know-all commentators have claimed the Queen seriously breached royal protocol - ie rules - by appealing for a compromise on Brexit so we can all get on with our nice lives. Some commentators, one in particular, said the Queen was wrong wrong wrong. For speaking out at all and for hinting that compromise on Brexit was the right thing to do. What poppycock!! The Queen, first of all, didn't mention Brexit. She may have been thinking Brexit in her mind and why not. But what she actually said was, "hey let's do it the old-fashioned way and be calm and gentle". The Queen is the most stabilising person in the whole of the United Kingdom, people like to hear her views. She is not supposed to get involved in politics, but she IS entitled to put across her views about life and how we should all behave. She has been Queen since 1952 and knows more about how British prime ministers go about their business than anyone in the universe. I personally would love to know everything she thinks about Brexit, to hell with royal protocol. But to accuse her of some sort of treason for hinting at her Brexit views is just rude and rubbish. Here is actually what she said: "As we look for new answers in the modern age, I for one prefer the tried and tested recipes like speaking well of each other and respecting different points of view; coming together to seek out the common ground; and never losing sight of the bigger picture. To me these approaches are timeless and I commend them to everyone." Well said, Queenie. OK she may have had Brexit in mind when she made the remarks. I bet she did because like everyone else in this country she must be fed up to the teeth with all the MPs and the Cabinet rowing against each other and not being sensible and getting Brexit sorted out with everyone involved. This is about the future of this country. Surely what the Queen said is what the head of state should say. She could have said "Stop bickering and get this fixed once and for all". But all she said was sometimes the old ways work best. I can't stand the pomposity of commentators who think they KNOW what the Queen was thinking. The only treason here is us lot interpreting what we think the Queen meant. I say, good for you Your Majesty and keep going. Perhaps you and only you can solve the Brexit problem for us all by just reminding the politicians to stop feuding and unselfishly do what's best for the nation and its future.