Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Trump’s foreign policy vision is coming into focus. And it’s worse than we may have imagined.

Published

on

Trump’s foreign policy vision is coming into focus. And it’s worse than we may have imagined.

This is an adapted excerpt from the Feb. 12 episode of “All In with Chris Hayes.”

Donald Trump’s foreign policy vision is starting to come into focus — and it is worse and more dangerous than you may have imagined. The president and his MAGA allies appear poised to rapidly undo the American-led global, democratic order.

The unraveling began Wednesday with an announcement from Trump’s secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, that America was pulling back from defending its allies.

These institutions and orders were established precisely because of the competitive, conquering aspirations of rising empires and fascist regimes.

“We must start by recognizing that returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective,” Hegseth said during a meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in Brussels on Wednesday. “Chasing this illusionary goal will only prolong the war and cause more suffering.”

“The United States does not believe that NATO membership for Ukraine is a realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement,” Hegseth added. “We’re also here today to directly and unambiguously express that stark strategic realities prevent the United States of America from being primarily focused on the security of Europe.”

On Thursday, Hegseth attempted to walk some of those comments back, telling reporters that “everything is on the table” in negotiations between Ukraine and Russia.

But part of the reason this type of rhetoric is so dangerous has to do with what NATO stands for and when it was created. These institutions and orders were established after World War II precisely because of the competitive, conquering aspirations of rising empires and fascist regimes throughout the world. NATO was formed by the U.S. 76 years ago to pledge that an attack on one member was an attack on all — what is known as Article 5. It started with 12 countries and now has 32 members.

The only time Article 5 was invoked was when all the allies joined together in one fight: when they all came to the United States’ aid after Sept. 11, 2001, and pledged their troops and materiel to the war in Afghanistan. Canadians, Italians, Danes, Spaniards, Norwegians, Estonians, Latvians and more gave their lives for the U.S.’ war on terror. Because that is how alliances work. Allies are supposed to have each other’s back. At least they were before Wednesday.

Not long after Hegseth spoke, Senate Republicans voted to confirm Tulsi Gabbard as the next director of national intelligence. Gabbard is a policy lightweight whose greatest foreign policy achievement was visiting Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, along with his top clericwho threatened suicide bombings in the United States. (Last month, Gabbard told senators she was unaware of the cleric’s threat at the time of their meeting.) She’s also been accused of siding with Russia and President Vladimir Putin over the U.S. intelligence consensus. But all that sat just fine with every Republican in the Senate except Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who joined 47 Democrats and independents in voting against Gabbard.

At almost the same moment Gabbard was being confirmed Wednesday, Trump was getting off the phone with another international leader: Putin. Trump took to social media to break the news about what he called a “highly productive” call with Putin, writingin part:

we both agreed, we want to stop the millions of deaths taking place in the War with Russia/Ukraine. President Putin even used my very strong Campaign motto of, ‘COMMON SENSE.’ We both believe very strongly in it. We agreed to work together, very closely, including visiting each other’s Nations.

The glaring thing here is that the country on the receiving end of Russia’s aggression, Ukraine, did not seem to be looped in on developments relating to their future. Trump even dodged a reporter’s question on whether he considered Ukraine an “equal member” in the negotiation process.

We should be clear about what we’re watching: Trump is disassembling the U.S.-led international order to the benefit of the global authoritarians he envies and admires.

Politically, Trump has succeeded in selling isolationism to a lot of Americans. It is true that our leading role in the world has been largely a product of a bipartisan elite consensus and sometimes it feels pretty removed from democratic majorities, who tend to believe America gives out too much foreign aid and “polices” the world. Believe me, I’ve spent two decades critiquing the many shortcomings and downright cruelties of that same order. But however imperfect that order is, what Trump wants to replace it with is far, far worse.

The current international order was created by the U.S. and its allies to prevent the world from the unthinkable. When there were rising tensions between the victorious nuclear superpowers, institutions like NATO and the United Nations were formed in part to prevent the Cold War from becoming a nuclear holocaust.

But there’s another reason Trump is eager to jettison the old order in favor of an anarchic world in which strong countries do what they want. When you hear Putin’s claim that Ukrainians are really just misguided Russians, you can hear echoes of the Nazis’ claim that Austrians and Czechs were just Germans. What Trump is doing now is sending the message to everyone around the world that not only is territorial acquisition by force OK but the U.S. is interested in pursuing it: from Greenland to the Panama Canal to Canada as the 51st state to envisioning the Gaza Strip as an American-owned development project.

The emerging Trump doctrine appears to be that democracies are weak and soft and that we will side with autocracies over them. It’s disastrous. Not just for America’s place in the world but also for the cause of peace.

The emerging Trump doctrine appears to be that democracies are weak and soft and that we will side with autocracies over them.

The idea that the path to peace is to throw overboard democracies in favor of authoritarian regimes is a dangerous idea. And it’s the fundamental throughline of Trump’s worldview. He seems to hate our allies and to love our enemies, possibly because our enemies see the world as he does: transactional and ripe for the picking.

With loyal, morally flexible subordinates like Hegseth and Gabbard, Trump is essentially reorienting American politics as friendly to dictators and authoritarian regimes and fundamentally hostile to democracies. It is shaping up to be the most radical transformation of America’s role in the world since Franklin D. Roosevelt — and it will likely not end well.

Chris Hayes

Chris Hayes hosts “All In with Chris Hayes”at 8 p.m. ET Monday through Friday on BLN. He is the editor-at-large at The Nation. A former fellow at Harvard University’s Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center for Ethics, Hayes was a Bernard Schwartz Fellow at the New America Foundation. His latest book is”A Colony in a Nation” (W. W. Norton).

Allison Detzel

contributed

.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

Appeals court rules against Trump tariffs, but Supreme Court appeal may soon follow

Published

on

Appeals court rules against Trump tariffs, but Supreme Court appeal may soon follow
Image: President Trump Holds
President Donald Trump holds up a chart during a “Make America Wealthy Again” trade announcement at the White House on April 2.Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

A federal appeals court ruled against President Donald Trump’s tariffs on Friday, but the ruling won’t take immediate effect because the court is giving the administration time to appeal to the Supreme Court. So as with nearly every big issue in American life, the justices may have the last word.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said the administration will appeal. The president said in his own social media post that if the ruling stands it would “literally destroy the United States of America.”

The ruling came Friday from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. It dealt with five executive orders imposing tariffs “of unlimited duration on nearly all goods from nearly every country in the world,” as the court put it. The U.S. Court of International Trade had previously ruled in May that the tariffs ran afoul of a federal law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The government appealed to the Federal Circuit, which upheld the trade court on Friday.

“Because we agree that IEEPA’s grant of presidential authority to ‘regulate’ imports does not authorize the tariffs imposed by the Executive Orders, we affirm,” the appeals court said, adding that it wasn’t weighing in on “whether the President’s actions should have been taken as a matter of policy.”

The court also said that further review is needed back in the trade court regarding the universal injunction it granted. The appeals court cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in the birthright citizenship case that dealt with that subject in June, after the trade court ruling came out.

The Federal Circuit’s ruling on Friday split the 11 judges who heard the case 7-4.

The judges also issued an order accompanying the ruling that keeps it from taking effect through Oct. 14. If a Supreme Court appeal is filed by then, the appellate ruling will remain on hold either until the Supreme Court declines review or issues its own ruling.

Four judges added a separate opinion that agreed with the majority, but further expressed their view that IEEPA not only doesn’t authorize Trump to issue the tariffs in these executive orders, but that it doesn’t authorize him to issue any tariffs at all.

Four other judges dissented, writing that they agreed with the majority that the trade court had jurisdiction, that the plaintiffs had standing to bring a lawsuit and that (if the tariffs are unlawful) the case needs to be sent back to the lower court for further review; but they disagreed with the substance of the lower court’s ruling that the tariffs are unlawful.

Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in the Trump administration’s legal cases.

Jordan Rubin

Jordan Rubin is the Deadline: Legal Blog writer. He was a prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan and is the author of “Bizarro,” a book about the secret war on synthetic drugs. Before he joined BLN, he was a legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

A teenager died by suicide after confiding in ChatGPT. That should be a wake-up call.

Published

on

A teenager died by suicide after confiding in ChatGPT. That should be a wake-up call.

In family photos, you can see 16-year-old Adam Raine grinning ear to ear. But the California teen’s prankster personality concealed a deep current of depression and despair. And earlier this year, say his parentsChatGPT — which Adam went to for comfort — helped him take his own life.

Earlier this week, Adam’s mother and father filed the first known wrongful death suit against OpenAI. The lawsuit includes ChatGPT logs from Adam’s phone, which show how completely he was lured in to rely on a Big Tech product for companionship — and how, time after time, that product ignored warning signs and structurally failed him. At first, he turned to AI for homework help. Then, as chronic illness and problems at school narrowed his world, he called on it for comfort. Instead, the lawsuit alleges, it became an accelerator for self-harm and guided him through his death by suicide. (In a statement to NBC News, an OpenAI spokesperson confirmed the authenticity of the logs, but said the lawsuit did not include the full context of ChatGPT’s responses.)

Chatbots are designed to keep kids hooked — even when they need off-ramps for real-world help.

As the mother of two boys, 3 and 5, I can only imagine the pain Adam’s parents are feeling. But I know that families across the country share a fundamental anger that Big Tech companies willingly risk the lives of our kids, an anger that grows every time we hear about the loss of a young person like Adam.

More and more frequently, kids are confiding in Big Tech’s AI chatbots, not just when they want help with homework, but when they’re lonely or in pain. Because AI chatbots are designed to be sycophantic and to adeptly mimic human emotion, children can’t always tell truth from fiction, or distinguish real love and concern from a machine-generated response. That makes kids dangerously vulnerable to forming unhealthy attachments.

After the Raines filed their lawsuit, an OpenAI spokesperson said the company was “deeply saddened by Mr. Raine’s passing.” The company published a blog post listing “some of the things we are working to improve” when ChatGPT’s safeguards fail. That is too little, too late — just like Big Tech’s attitude toward safety in general. Rather than do anything to help address this problem, these companies prioritize hyping up the uses of AI and increasing its “market share” of our kids’ waking hours and mental bandwidth.

Adam Raine.
Adam Raine.Courtesy Raine Family

In fact, Mark Zuckerberg has said he wants his Meta AI companion to fill users’ “demand for meaningfully more” real-world friends. In 2023, The Wall Street Journal reportsthe chatbot’s product managers “told staff that Zuckerberg was upset that the team was playing it too safe,” which led to a loosening of the standards that kept conversations from becoming too sexualized.

Meta’s internal documents allowed their AI chatbots to “engage a child in conversations that are romantic or sensual” until the company was asked about it by Reuters. New research from the family advocacy group Common Sense Media finds that Meta’s chatbot for Instagram and Facebook willingly coaches teens on how to carry out self-harm, disordered eating and violent fantasies.

As AI chatbots become confidantes and even parasitic bosom buddies, many children share secrets they won’t or can’t tell their families. Chatbots, though, are designed to produce engagement and keep kids hooked — even when they need off-ramps for real-world help. Products like ChatGPT — tragically, unspeakably — become abettors and co-conspirators in suicidal plans, with the chatbot, according to the lawsuit, even providing Adam advice on how to tie a noose.

If this were any other industry, lawmakers would have listened to the thousands of parents and young advocates who have been banging down their doors pleading for change.

The scale of the harm wrought by these companies grows by the day.

But Big Tech has big money, which means big lobbying — and so far, that has blocked real safeguards. Instead of working with lawmakers, these companies even pushed for a ludicrous federal moratorium on AI regulation, which would have negated hundreds, if not thousands, of state laws already on the books and blocked any state laws dealing with AI for 10 years. This prompted a nationwide revolt of parents, attorneys general, governors and state legislators on both sides of the aisle.

My two boys haven’t yet begun to ask me for phones, and they don’t know what social media or chatbots are. And still I’m scared to death we won’t get through to lawmakers in time to save them. My eldest is a whip-smart, sensitive kid, who I’m terrified will be destroyed by social media, either preyed upon by an online child predator, or persuaded to do himself harm because his young mind won’t comprehend that the “friend” he is confiding in is actually a machine humming away in a massive data center somewhere, helping him — like it did for Adam — plan a “beautiful suicide.”

Meanwhile, tech giants are buying off academics and whitewashing research about the dangers their products pose to our kids. They’re infiltrating trusted institutions like the PTA, backing “safety” initiatives while fighting to defeat safety reforms, suing organizations they view as threats. They try to silence whistleblowers — even when those whistleblowers are called before Congress. And now they’re even creating political super PACs to intimidate lawmakers into voting their way and ignoring tragedies like Adam’s.

Let me be absolutely clear: Politicians should think twice before accepting donations from these Big Tech super PACs. The scale of the harm wrought by these companies grows by the day. They are not working in good faith with legislators and regulators to ensure that our privacy and our children’s lives are protected.

Thankfully, state legislators don’t have to wait for Washington to act. In California, for instance, state Sen. Steve Padilla introduced SB 243which would establish safety guardrails for “companion” chatbots and make companies track interactions with users in crisis. And AB 1064the LEAD for Kids Act, championed by Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, would ban emotionally manipulative AI companions for kids, require parental consent and more.

These are all sensible measures — and they are under attack by the very companies whose products are harming our children. Just last week, Meta announced a California-specific super PAC to go after such bills.

Meta, Apple, Google, OpenAI and their ilk will never regulate themselves, so we urgently need to do it before more children die and more families are destroyed. In Adam Raine’s memory, we have an opportunity to prevent future tragedies — if lawmakers will listen.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

After the Annunciation school shooting, the gun lobby is counting on our doing nothing

Published

on

After the Annunciation school shooting, the gun lobby is counting on our doing nothing

They showed up to Annunciation Catholic School on the far south side of Minneapolis on Wednesday wearing backpacks and new shoes their parents may have just purchased during back-to-school shopping. They filed into the adjacent yellow brick Catholic church for the annual start-of-the-school-year Mass with adults shushing their giggles and excitement. After all, Annunciation had just got a new principal and a new priestand the older children had been assigned their “buddies” from younger grades who would watch them and learn the scripture and rituals of the Catholic Mass.

A barrage of bullets exploded through the stained glass windows and shattered yet another American community.

And then, during a religious service that was supposed to usher in a school year defined by the phrase “a future filled with HOPE,” a barrage of bullets exploded through the stained glass windows and shattered yet another American community.

Two families that dropped their children off at school will never see them again. There is now an empty chair at each table. Two bedrooms frozen in time. Two futures snatched away by a shooter’s cowardly rage. Eighteen more people are physically injured. Some remain in critical condition. But “in critical condition” could just as well describe the whole Annunciation community, the city of Minneapolis and, really, America in its exhausted entirety.

Those babies — one 8 and the other 10gunned down in the pews at their Catholic school have forced us all to face a sickening lesson about the current state of our country. The people responsible for writing the laws that govern us have developed a tolerance for children being slaughtered in their schools.

Instead of saying, “No more of this,” our society has introduced more attempts to protect kids in places that should be inviolate. Metal detectors. Security guards. Active shooter drills. Thankfully Annunciation had adopted a protocol of locking the church doors before Mass began. Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara said locking the doors likely saved many lives.

We should never ever normalize a scene as horrific as this, but somewhere along the way, mass casualty events have become a grim fact of American Life. It’s hard to admit this, but the unbearable has become unacceptably routine. I hate writing that sentence. These facts should cause us sorrow and even shame. The death and despair. The wounds that last a lifetime. The assault on our sense of security. The targeting of CHILDREN. And the ready access to guns that are essentially weapons of war. All of this should be unacceptable. School shootings are still devastatingly shocking, but history shows that these atrocities do not guarantee change.

People committed to truly creating a safer America must figure out how to stand up to a gun lobby that is counting on a woefully predictable pattern. Shock. Grief. Outrage. Anguish.

Calls for thoughts and prayers. Vigils. Funerals. Editorials.

Pledges for action and change.

All of it falling short of achieving a goal we should have reached years ago — restricting easy access to assault weapons.

Another part of this predictable pattern is a debate over what led the shooter to this kind of unthinkable violence. The motives, lifestyle and so-called manifesto will be studied. Was the shooter a lonely outcast or angry and addled? But no matter the answers to those questions, there is a constant through line in these mass shootings at schools and movie theaters and concerts and clinics: access to war-fighting, high-velocity firearms that have no place among civilians.

I grew up on the south side of Minneapolis, and I attended a Catholic school just a few miles from Annunciation.

Since Republicans will be predictably silent, Democrats and those who can find their way to support reasonable gun safety measures need to figure out how to react to the constant ticktock of violence with a constant amplification of their demand for gun reform.

I grew on the south side of Minneapolis, and I attended a Catholic school just a few miles from Annunciation. I know that parish well. It’s part of a cluster of Catholic church/school campuses that dot the Twin Cities. Annunciation has always been a particularly active congregation, in part because of the stability in its surrounding upper middle-class community.

It’s a thriving hub that hosts fish fries, bingo nights, scout troops and basketball leagues. The buildings buzz all week, even in the summer months when kids learn how to ride bikes on the recess lot and seniors do laps to get their steps in. It’s where south siders buy Christmas trees and the church engages in a Mission Monday program where the first day of the week is dedicated to participating in programs like Meals on Wheels, making goodie bags for seniors living in elder care centers or turning old T-shirts into re-usable diapers for the sister parish Annunciation adopted in Haiti.

Catholic churches throughout the city have sometimes struggled in recent years to maintain active congregations and thriving schools. As the Twin Cities went through a series of changes with demographic shifts, rising poverty rates and conversely pockets where working families were priced out of neighborhoods, Catholic parishes were mandated by the diocese to be not just in the community but of the community. Annunciation, built in 1922 on the far stretch of the city near where the suburbs start, has thrived as a model of that creed.

But now it is the most recent marker in America’s daisy chain of school shootings. The Tudor building that was such a place of pride with its careful plantings and holiday decorations will forever be a monument to grief. No different than Sandy Hook, Columbine, Jonesboro, Uvalde, Parkland and so many more. Too many more.

I hope that Annunciation’s community-strong model will provide both steel and balm.

Eventually the students will return to school. Drivers along 54th Street will once again hear the squeals from the playground and the sound of children’s voices united in sing-song hymns floating through an open classroom window.

“Annunciation” refers to the moment the angel Gabriel told Mary she would conceive a son.

Shoppers visiting the Kowalski’s grocery store across the street or the Holiday gas station just down the road will forever feel a jolt of anguish. How could they not?

The Twin Cities is a place that was already reeling from another large casualty shooting earlier that weekthe shooting of lawmakers and their families in June, and May marked the fifth anniversary of police murdering George Floyd. And with this latest monstrous assault, it has joined the litany of communities forever marked by the pain of schoolchildren being deliberately murdered.

Those communities all figure out how to move forward, but they never really move on. And we should not either.

In religious teaching, “annunciation” refers to the moment the angel Gabriel told Mary she would conceive a son. What if we honored those children who lost their lives and all those families affected by this shooting with a full throttled denunciation of high-velocity assault weapons, followed by swift legislative action, punitive laws and stiff penalties.

The gun lobby is counting on all of us to go back to that predictable pattern after a school shooting in which outrage fails to usher in true change.

Maybe this time we can finally prove them wrong.

Michele Norris

Michele Norris is a senior contributing editor for BLN and the author of “Our Hidden Conversations: What Americans Really Think About Race & Identity.”

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending