Al-Jazeerah History
Archives
Mission & Name
Conflict Terminology
Editorials
Gaza Holocaust
Gulf War
Isdood
Islam
News
News Photos
Opinion
Editorials
US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
www.aljazeerah.info
|
|
|
Hold on Tight to your Safety Belt for the
Roller-Coaster of the Erratic Trump Ride
By
Uri Avnery
Al-Jazeerah, CCUN,
November
21, 2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
The US President-Elect Trump THE
FIRST shock has passed. President-Elect Donald Trump. I am gradually
getting used to the sound of these words. We are entering an era
of complete uncertainty. We Israelis and the entire world. From shoe-shine
boy to head of state. Nobody knows. BUT FIRST we must
say goodbye to Barack Obama. Frankly, I like the guy. There is
something noble about him. Upright. Honest. Idealistic. When the
cameras showed him this week sitting together with Donald Trump, the
contrast could not have been greater. Obama is the anti-Trump. Trump is
the anti-Obama. And yet.... Yet in all the eight long
years of his presidency, President Obama has done nothing, nothing at all,
for peace in our region. In these eight years, the Israeli ulra-right
has flourished. Settlements in the occupied territories have multiplied
and grown larger. After every new settlement expansion, the State
Department has dutifully condemned it. And then given Binyamin Netanyahu
another few billions. And the latest gift was the biggest ever.
When he came into office, Obama made some very beautiful speeches in Cairo
and Jerusalem. Many exquisite words. And they were just that: mere words.
Some people believe that now, when Obama is free of all obligations,
he will use his last two months in power to atone for his sins and do
something meaningful for Israeli-Palestinian peace. I doubt it.
(Years ago, at some European congress, I accused the Spanish Diplomat
Miguel Moratinos of doing nothing for Israeli-Palestinian peace. In his
aggressive reply, he accused me of sheer impertinence. Why should anyone
do anything for the Israeli peace forces, if these forces themselves do
nothing to achieve peace?) Have we heard the last of the Obama
family? I am not sure. Somehow I have the idea that after four or eight
years we will see another Obama running for president: Michelle Obama, the
wildly and rightly popular first lady, who has all the qualities needed:
She is black. She is a woman. She is highly intelligent. She has a
sterling character. (Unless in the New America, these are all negative
qualities.) THERE WAS some comfort in the election results.
Hillary Clinton got more votes than Donald Trump. She lost in the
electoral college. To a foreigner, this institution looks as
obsolete as a dinosaur. It may have had its uses when the United States of
America (in the plural) were really a federation of diverse and different
local entities. These days are long past. We now used the term
"United States" in the singular. The US does. The US thinks. The US votes.
What is the profound difference between a voter in Arizona and a
voter in Montana? Why should the vote of a citizen in Oregon weight more
that the vote of a citizen in New York or California? The
electoral college is undemocratic. It should have been done away with a
long time ago. But political institutions die slowly, if at all. Somebody
always profits from them. This time it is Trump. A SIMILAR
antiquated system is the appointing of Supreme Court judges. The
Supreme Court has immense power, cutting deep into the private life of
every US citizen. Enough to mention abortions and same-sex marriages. It
also influences international relations and much more. Yet the
power to appoint new judges rests solely in the hands of the president. A
new president changes the composition of the court, and lo and behold, the
entire legal and political situation changes. In Israel, the very
opposite prevails. Years ago, new judges were practically appointed by the
old judges, "a friend brings a friend", as popular humor had it.
Later this system was changed a bit – Supreme Court judges are now chosen
by a committee of nine, three of which are sitting judges, two others are
politicians from the Knesset (one each from the government coalition and
from the opposition), two are government ministers and two represent the
bar association. Five of the members of the committee must be
women. One of the judges on the committee is an Arab, appointed by
seniority. But the decisive point of the law is that any
appointment must be made by a majority of seven members – seven of nine.
This means in practice that the three sitting judges on the committee have
a veto power on any appointment. So have the politicians. A judge can only
be appointed by compromise. Until now, this system has worked very
well. No complaints have been registered. But the new Minister of Justice,
a rabid ultra-nationalist woman, wants to change the system: no more
majority of seven, but a simple majority of five. This would give decisive
power to the right-wing politicians and abolish the power of the three
judges to block political appointments. This proposal has aroused
very strong opposition, and the debate is still going on. HOW
TO describe the incoming president, less than two weeks after his
election? The first word that springs to mind is: erratic.
We saw this during the election campaign. He would say two contradictory
things in the same breath. Say something and deny it. Flatter one section
of the voters and then their enemies. OK, OK some people would
say. So what. A candidate will say anything to get elected. True,
but this particular candidate overdid it. He presented a very nasty
personality, devoid of civility, propagating hatred of blacks, Hispanics,
and gays, denigrating women, not rejecting outright anti-Semites and
neo-Nazis. But it worked, right? It got him where he wanted to
be, didn't it? It does not compel him to go on in the same vein, now that
he has reached his goal. So, forget it. Some people are now
dreaming of a completely new Trump, a person who abandons all his old
slogans and declaration and turns out to be a sensible politician, using
his proven talent for deal-making in order to achieve the things necessary
to make America great again. As a candidate he did the things
necessary to get elected. Once in office he will do the things necessary
to govern. Other people pour cold water on these hopes. Trump is
Trump, they say. He will be as nasty a president as he was a nasty
candidate. A far-right hate-monger. His every step will be dictated by his
ugly world of ideas. Look, his first major appointment was of a rabid
anti-Semite as his closest advisor. WELL, I don't know. Nobody
does. I tend to believe that he himself does not either. I think
that we are in for four years of uncertainty. Faced with a problem he
knows nothing about, he will act according to his mood of the moment. He
will take advice from nobody, and nobody will know in advance what will be
his decision. I feel fairly certain about this. Some of his
decisions may be very good. Some may be very bad. Some intelligent. Some
idiotic. As I said: erratic.
The world will have to live with this. It will be highly risky. It
may turn out right. It may also lead to catastrophe. PEOPLE HAVE
compared Trump to Adolf Hitler. But the comparison is quite erroneous.
Apart from their German-Austrian descent, they have nothing in
common. Hitler was no billionaire. He was a real man from the people – an
unemployed nobody, who lived for some time in a public shelter.
Hitler did have a Weltanschauung, a fixed world-view. He was a fanatic.
When he came to power, people deceived themselves into believing that he
would soon give up his demagogic, rabble-rousing ideas. He did not. Until
the day of his suicide, Hitler did not change his ideology one iota. Tens
of millions of victims, including the millions of Jews, estify to that.
Trump is no Hitler. He is no Mussolini. Nor even a Franco. He is a
Trump. And that may be bad enough. May be.
So do up your safety belt and hold on
tight for the roller-coaster ride.
***
Share the link of this article with your facebook friends
|
|
|