The diplomatic spat with Colombia over the past weekend about the repatriation of its citizens gave Cynical Publius pause for thought. He describes the way it would have gone under the old system, versus how it actually went this time.
To fully understand just how remarkable today’s exchange with Colombia was, you need to understand how Washington DC has traditionally worked through these sorts of issues, and the different way it works now under Trump.
I’ll illustrate.
Traditional Approach:
1. Colombia announces it will not take our repatriation flights.
2. On Monday, the State Department convenes an interagency task force with DoD, NSC, DEA, INS, ICE, Commerce, Treasury and Homeland Security.
3. The task force meets for four days and develops a position paper.
4. The position paper is rejected by the Secretary of State, who is unhappy that insufficient equity considerations are built into the process.
5. The task force reconvenes a week later to redevelop three new, equity-centric courses of action and create a new position paper.
6. The process is delayed a week because Washington DC gets three inches of snow.
7. SecState approves the new position paper for interagency circulation, and considerable input is received from the heads of other departments so the task force must reconvene.
8. The original three proposed responsive courses of action are scrapped in favor of a new, fourth course of action that achieves the worst aspects of the three prior courses of action but satisfies the interagency.
9. Someone in State who disagrees leaks to the Washington Post, who writes a story about how ineffective the Presidential administration is.
10. The White House Chief of Staff sets up a session three days later to brief the President, who approves the new fourth course of action.
11. Over a month after the issue is first raised, the State Department Public Affairs Officer holds a press conference announcing that Colombia has agreed to try to send fewer criminals into the US and everyone declares victory.
Trump Approach:
1. Colombia announces it will not take our repatriation flights.
2. After a par-5 third hole where he goes one under par, Trump uses his iPhone to post on social media as to how the USA will destroy Colombia’s economy if they do not do what the USA demands.
3. By the time Trump gets to the par-4 sixth hole, Colombia’s President has agreed to repatriate all the illegal Colombians in his own plane, which he will pay for.
4. Trump finishes three under par and goes to the clubhouse for a Diet Coke where he posts a gangsta AI image of himself and the new FAFO Doctrine.
5. Winning.
See the difference? It’s called LEADERSHIP.
And so say all of us! The reader comments on that thread are worth your time, too.
Peter
5 comments:
Well, you could read that from one perspective as Trump being a bully.
Or, if you believe Columbia has allowed (I won't say encouraged because I don't know) illegal immigration to the US to reduce its own internal pressures, i.e. making their problems our problems, then this is a just turnaround.
I'm not a fan of foreign aid, we are deeply in debt with plenty of our own problems. But if American citizens which to help Colubmian citizens, donate to a Columbian Charity. Our government has no business spending our tax dollars outside our boarders other than for national security. And the EU and NATO have shown us that other nations are glad to let the US pick up a huge proportion of the tab, so I'm inclined to change my mind on the national security issue.
The thing about that interaction that impressed me the most was that from the time Trump messaged the Columbian president until he said he'd send his own jet to pick them up was 6 minutes. Or so I read.
Having just read Vietnam A History by Stanley Karnow I would believe the timeline for State and the White House is much too ambitious.
Trump was amazing in his first term and learned a lot. He is even more amazing now.
A well reasoned "Beta" take, Xoph.
Colombia (check your spelling Xoph) needing taking to woodshed, not only because they hoisted their trash people (and drugs) stateside, but as a stark example what happens to those who abrogate their international responsibilities.
Holding each other accountable is fair, proper, and exactly what we voted for.
Post a Comment