[ad_1]
Russian president Vladimir Putin’s escalating threats to invade and annex Ukraine have drawn global condemnation. Former president Donald Trump, though, had a different take. Asked to comment on the crisis by conservative talk radio host Buck Sexton, Trump responded with enthusiastic praise for everything Putin. The Russian leader, Trump said, was a “genius.” He was “smart.” He was “savvy.”
Some pundits, analysts, and supporters in the past have argued that Trump’s foreign policy instincts are dovish. They’ve seen in him a proponent of a nationalist isolationism which would reduce US interventionism and conflict worldwide. But Trump’s support of Putin’s aggressive imperialist war demonstrates once again that fantasies about authoritarian absolutism do not create a strong foundation for peace.
Trump has long expressed enthusiastic admiration for Putin, and Putin has praised him right back. Putin called Trump “talented” when he was running for the Republican nomination in 2016; Trump responded by saying that even if Putin killed journalists and invaded other countries, “at least he’s a leader, unlike what we have in this country.” During his campaign against Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, Trump publicly appealed to Russia to hack her accounts. Evidence suggests they did just that. When Putin (unconvincingly) denied any involvement in US election hacking, Trump praised him as “very, very strong.”
It’s tempting to think that Trump defends Putin solely out of self-interest, since Putin has verbally and quite possibly materially supported Trump’s political career. But Trump also praises many authoritarian leaders — like North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, or Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan — who were not involved in US election tampering. “He’s a strong guy, tough guy” Trump said about Chinese president Xi Jinping. Trump admires authoritarians not despite their harsh rule, or their repression of their people, but because of it. The vision of unfettered power, deployed without accountability or restraint, seems to appeal to him.
Again, it’s not news that Trump has dreams of authoritarian rule. His radical efforts to overthrow the results of the 2020 election led directly to the January 6, 2021 coup attempt. But his bizarrely celebratory reaction to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine underlines the connection between authoritarianism and militarism.
Trump was particularly enthusiastic about Putin’s justification of war. Sections of eastern Ukraine that are more supportive of Russia have declared independence. Putin quickly recognized them as a pretext for sending troops to defend these new “independent” states.
Putin’s actions here are transparent and unconvincing. But Trump considers it a masterstroke. “That’s wonderful,” Trump burbled when asked. “…I said, ‘How smart is that?’ And he’s gonna go in and be a peacekeeper….We could use that on our southern border” (italics mine.)
Trump is not just cheering on Putin’s invasion of Ukraine here. He is calling for the US to enact the same tactics in the future. His comments about the southern border can be read as a call for the US to declare northern sections of Mexico independent as a pretext for invading and occupying the country.
Trump’s suggestion that the US invade neighboring states sounds extreme and ludicrous. But it’s in line with Fox right-wing talking points. Tucker Carlson, for example, has mocked critics of Putin. He insists that we should care about America’s border security rather than the border security of Ukraine. Carlson presents himself as anti-war, but like Trump, he’s essentially advocating for militarization everywhere. Abroad, Putin should be encouraged to start a war. At home, the US should increase violent policing of refugees and undocumented people.
Some American anti-war advocates — from across the political spectrum — speak as if opposition to the US and opposition to war are the same thing. The Democratic Socialists of America, for example, issued a statement which called on the US “to reverse its ongoing militarization” in Ukraine. It notably doesn’t call on Russia to do the same. From that perspective, Carlson and Trump, by opposing US pushback against Russia, are on the side of peace.
But of course, if Putin invades Ukraine, armies will start shooting at each other, whatever the US does. Trump, Carlson and their partisans aren’t really anti-war. They aren’t even really isolationist. They want a world in which authoritarians can employ military force without international pushback or condemnation. Such a world wouldn’t be meaningfully more peaceful than the one we have. Quite the opposite. For Trump, it could pave the way for a military invasion of Mexico.
Right-wing authoritarian movements occasionally claim to be opposed to particular wars at particular times. Charles Lindbergh and the fascist America First movement set themselves against US involvement in the First World War, as just one example. But whatever short-term strategic arguments they embrace, authoritarians ultimately believe that “tough” leaders should have no restraints and no accountability in their use of force. Trump doesn’t support Putin because he’s a man of peace. He supports him because he likes the idea of invasion and of unrestrained power.
[ad_2]
Source link
