Isn’t it better to be thought shallow and that the rivals did not take you seriously, when really you are talented, ambitious and ready to strike? You thought confused, when in fact you have a clear plan of action?
Let’s for a moment think here over what: what if the President-elect Donald trump plays with Russian President Vladimir Putin as successfully as he played the American media for 2015 and 2016?
If coming into office the US President has a strategic vision in which China, Iran and radical Sunni Islamists seem to be far more serious threats to U.S. national security than Russia? Even if the position of Russia is considered true — as said Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (Mitch McConnell) after Obama announced the extension of sanctions, Russia has “no friend,” and she’s “guilty, guilty, guilty” meddling in our elections and intimidate our diplomats, agree with what I and most conservatives.
I understand that many people now laugh out loud. I on own experience was convinced that our new President is not too well informed on such matters as the nuclear triad, or the difference between Hamas and Hezbollah. A deeply and perhaps unshakable conviction that he knows almost nothing about most aspects of national security. Taking this position is quite easy — and dangerous — to jump to the conviction that “he has no strategy, he is able to learn and interested to learn.”
That might be true. Or perhaps it was the fact that trump is first and foremost an entrepreneur in the field of real estate, which will be able to effectively use the strengths and skills of an entrepreneur as President.
I worked for a construction company involved in the implementation of giant projects in the past three decades. My main task was to help them understand the complex regulatory framework and commercial law and to implement their projects in accordance with them, and explain to them how the Agency of environmental protection, corps of engineers of the U.S. armed forces and the Service of protection of fish resources and wild animals of the United States.
“How and when will I be able to get the permit and what will it cost me?” — these are questions that often hear lawyers dealing with the issues of saving natural resources from their clients-landowners, each of whom could understand the intricacies yourself, but don’t want to do it or sees the need. They want to implement their project. They want it was built yesterday.
To become a successful developer, you need to act quickly, to be able to take risks and constantly look for new opportunities and new contracts. Sometimes you need to dramatically change course and to enter into a partnership with his former rival, even with those with whom before you had serious conflicts. The new deal is always more important than the old fights. Not bound by old quarrels and precedents — this is strategy.
For eight years, we have constantly been told that in the time of the inauguration of President Obama was a great strategy. “Leadership from behind” was one of the first in its wording. Whatever the final determination of this long demonstration of carelessness, which in future memoirs will be called “the Obama doctrine”, we can now identify the key milestones along the way: failure to deploy elements of a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic; button “reset” of relations with Russia; the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq in 2011; ineffective reaction to the establishment of the Beijing artificial Islands in the South China sea; the failure to uphold the “red line” in Syria; Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea; Iran and Bashar al-Assad, turned Aleppo into ruins; Europe, choked with refugees; lack of process of peaceful settlement of the conflict involving Israel and Palestine; a splintered Libya; Venezuela in ruins; Cuba rewarded for their commitment to a despotic regime without any hint of reform. This list of “achievements” can continue for a very long time, even if we try to limit North Korea’s nuclear “agreement” with Iran.
If it is called “the great strategy”, then perhaps the absence of any strategy is a good start. Of course, everyone who believes that retired marine General James Mattis (James N. Mattis) proposed by trump to the post of Minister of defence, not thinking about the possibility of solving large-scale complex problems in the context of a Grand strategy aimed at a slow and consistent recovery of strength and leadership of America will not pay attention to it.
Richard Nixon took office as President, having a strong reputation of anti-Communist, which he did for over 20 years. Then it’s safe to say that this reputation will not allow him to cooperate with the Soviet Union and especially with the Maoists, including Mao. Four years later he and Henry Kissinger (Henry Kissinger) has managed to achieve détente in relations with the Soviet Union and to establish partnerships with the Maoists in opposition to all expectations and forecasts of experts and analysts.
Think for a moment, at least, on the fact that the most pessimistic reporters and experts can be wrong about trump’s ability to manage America effectively and in accordance with the Constitution, just as they were wrong about his ability to win elections. In the past, the media, public opinion erred not so often.