Friendship trump and Putin

About friends trump told different. Some political information, you should consider if we want to get an idea about what will be the US foreign policy after January 20.

Trump said and carried out, in practice, the thesis: what’s good for General Motors is good for the USA. Bad for Mexico, will add. If to speak about General Motors, what’s good for big high-tech companies is good for the US. And all what is good for trump is good for his country. The same can be argued with regard to Spain: everything that is good for Telefónica, Zara, la Caixa, Santander Bank or supermarket chain El Corte Inglés is good for our country. Every country has its own set of interests, it in varying degrees protects.

At Aznar was a very bad relationship with Yeltsin, Putin’s predecessor. But when the latter became President of Russia in 1999 and Bush in early 2001, he became President of the United States, everything changed. He contributed to establishing good relations between Spain and Russia, which still exist. After the fall of the Berlin wall all presidents-Republicans (Reagan, both Bush’s, and now trump) carried out against Russia similar policy in which oil played a significant role. Kissinger called it Realpolitik of the us, which had already led the Republican Nixon to end the war in Vietnam (started by Democrat Kennedy) and begin the process of rapprochement with China.

It is possible that a new President will eventually curb their antics. Reagan, who had a little more political experience, too, was inclined to joke. I remember the ballyhoo in the summer of 1984, when he (assuming that the microphone is muted) stated in the open air that gave the order to strike nuclear missiles at the USSR. The joke is not very liked Chernenko, and in Moscow, where that summer I was passing through Irkutsk, only talked about it. Trump yet such freedom does not allow.

Foreign policy the new us administration will undergo a few changes in relation to their Republican predecessors. Henry Kissinger has written an excellent analytical article titled “World order”, published last year in Spanish. I think it charted the main directions in the development of U.S. foreign policy. And what is this direction? Yes, in General, the same in which it has evolved in the past decade: strengthening relations with the UK (not associated with EU), Russia and China. As well as with Israel. The final output of the energy dependence on Arab countries. And a ruthless struggle —together with Russia – Islamic terrorism to the bitter end, no matter what it takes. This war began on 11 September 2001, and its decisive battles yet to come.

And what role for the EU and Japan? This is a big question only we can answer. It is obvious that the modern world, which we call the global influence of major powers on the election results is crucial. This is what caused friction between the CIA and Russia. This year France is entering a period of uncertainty in connection with the presidential election. There is no assurance that they will choose marine Le Pen, but just to say one thing: the future President will be similar to the visit — the strong and strong beliefs.

What happened in the UK and the USA, opened the eyes of many, were in a state of hibernation. Policy, which seemingly declined after the departure of “friends Aznar” (Bush, Berlusconi and Blair), reiterated itself on the world stage. It is carried out in the life the other characters, perhaps not so refined and cultured. Although gone from the scene players examples of refinement not name. Is this bad? This causes frustration in the world who call themselves “progressive”. But if the so-called “conservatives” will not make such horrible mistakes like the Iraq war, perhaps this new historic stage will even bring some cleaning.