Political hot news by zetpress.com? As the United States formally proposed tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese products, including flat-screen televisions, medical devices, aircraft parts and batteries, China countered with tariffs on $50 billion worth of American goods from states that overwhelmingly voted for President Trump. While advisers to the president initially tried to mitigate concerns over an impending trade war, Mr. Trump doubled down late Thursday by announcing that he would formally consider additional tariffs on $100 billion worth of Chinese products in response to China’s retaliation. The escalating trade conflict may have given the administration additional motivation to move more quickly to resolve the North American Free Trade Agreement — another trade deal the president has consistently attacked.
By establishing inescapable facts on the ground over the ceaseless objections of critics, President Trump overrides the often meaningless verbiage that constitutes international diplomacy and ends up changing the very terms of the foreign policy conversation. Nowhere has this dynamic been clearer than in U.S. relations with China. Beginning with his surprise call to Taiwanese president Tsai Ing-wen in December 2016 and continuing through his resumption of U.S. Navy freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea the following year, his tariffs on Chinese goods in 2018, his and his administration’s rhetorical barrage against China beginning in earnest in 2019, and culminating in his multiple actions against China this year, from limiting travel to canceling visas to forcing the sale of TikTok to tightening the vise on Huawei to selling an additional $7 billion in arms to Taiwan, Trump has reoriented America’s approach to the People’s Republic. No longer is China encouraged to be a “responsible stakeholder.” It is recognized as a great-power competitor.
US Foreign politics and Brexit 2020 latest : The answer is that it can’t. For the last four and a half decades the United Kingdom hasn’t been a nation-state at all. It’s been the provincial, western outpost of an aspiring Federated European super-state. Ever since the U.K. entered the European Union, EU law and jurisprudence has been supreme over domestic law. Regulations, customs, and trade standards have been set by the EU institutions in Brussels and imposed upon every country in the bloc. In other words, the customs and market regulations that are a foundational prerogative of functional nation-states have been usurped on the European continent by a supra-national pan-continental bureaucracy. Napoleon Bonaparte would be proud.
Republicans have every right to fill the vacancy left by Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. Please save your irate emails accusing me of hypocrisy, because I have never believed or advocated for the “Biden Rule” or the “McConnell Rule” or any other fantastical “rule” regulating the confirmation process, other than the prescribed constitutional method. In March 2016, in the heat of the Merrick Garland debate, I argued that “the Republicans’ claim that the ‘people’ should decide the nominee is kind of a silly formulation,” and the best argument for denying Barack Obama another seat on the court was to stop him from transforming it into a post-constitutional institution that displaces law with “empathy” and ever-changing progressive conceptions of justice. Discover even more information on zetpress.com.