Read actual political trends? Starting Sunday and continuing through the week, Mr. Trump unleashed a series of fiery Twitter posts denouncing America’s “weak” border laws and vowing “NO MORE DACA DEAL.” And while Mr. Trump’s Twitter feed isn’t always an indication of federal policy, it paved the way for new policy proposals and announcements. On Wednesday, Mr. Trump issued a proclamation directing the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security to work with governors to deploy the National Guard on the southwest border to help combat illegal immigration. Mexican officials sharply criticized the plan to add troops. The president’s renewed anti-immigration fervor was in part inspired by news reports of a large group of migrants from Honduras traveling through Mexico to the United States. The caravan later began to splinter, although organizers said it would regroup.
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 : And so, after becoming prime minister last year, Boris Johnson signed on to a Withdrawal Agreement that left Northern Ireland within the economic structures of the EU. All EU regulations on trade and customs would continue to apply in Northern Ireland even after it had legally left the EU along with the rest of the U.K. Essentially, this amounted to a regulatory annexation of sovereign British territory by a foreign power (ably and obligingly aided by the British prime minister). Of course, this was never going to work in the long term. No government can function properly when a huge swath of its territory is in chattel to a foreign power. How could the American federal government enforce regulations equally in Texas and Tennessee in a scenario where Texas was obliged to conform itself to the internal market regulations of Mexico?
Now, I don’t think a single person in American politics actually cares about the “Biden rule,” either. Even if they did, however, the precedent doesn’t apply in this case. Biden argued that nominations shouldn’t be taken up during presidential-election years when Senate and presidency are held by different parties. Trump isn’t a lame-duck president; he’s running for reelection. But let’s concede for the sake of argument that McConnell is a massive hypocrite. Then, it’s fair to say, so are all the pols who accused McConnell “stealing” the Garland seat. Joe Biden now says that “voters should pick a President, and that President should select a successor to Justice Ginsburg.” (They did. They picked Trump.) In March of 2016, however, Biden wrote in the New York Times that the Senate had a “duty” to confirm justices. Discover more information at https://zetpress.com/.