Trump Gives European Leaders an Excuse to Dump Bad Policies

 

"Not to jinx it, but Donald Trump's second term is off to a good start -- for Europe. Mr. Trump already has created enormous political and economic opportunities for the Continent if, and this is a huge if, any European politicians have the wit to seize their chance.

Amid the blizzard of executive orders and other actions that began on Monday, four matters are of particular relevance across the Atlantic. The Trump administration is withdrawing from the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate, scrapping Biden-era electric-vehicle mandates, ramping up American fossil-fuel production, and killing off a global corporate-tax agreement.

The first instinct of establishment European politicians and their media enablers is to interpret these steps as affronts to Europe. Which they are. Mr. Trump's abandonment of the decade-old global climate agreement is as strong a signal as Washington can send that the new administration doesn't care about an issue that Europeans have come to understand in quasireligious terms. All the promised drilling, and new internal-combustion cars, adds insult to this injury. Withdrawal from the major tax deal negotiated at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development demonstrates that the new administration is indifferent to European governments' desperate search for new revenue sources.

Note, however, that Mr. Trump at least isn't perpetuating the far bigger affront President Biden committed against our European friends: lying to them.

Mr. Biden acted as though there were a political consensus in America in support of the policies Europeans liked, when there was obviously none. The Democrat rejoined the Paris climate deal despite the Senate's refusal over many years to ratify it and Mr. Trump's first attempt to withdraw from it. Biden administration regulations on energy production and electric-vehicle mandates were plainly and predictably unpopular. His Treasury secretary, Janet Yellen, signed the OECD tax deal despite a record of bipartisan opposition in Washington to similar global tax proposals.

In each instance, Team Biden prompted European governments to act on the assumption that these policies would last, supported by U.S. public approval. As a result the Continent embraced a suite of climate-related mandates, subsidies, taxes and the like that make little sense at the best of times and are viable -- possibly, barely -- only if America engages in the same economic self-sabotage. European leaders invested considerable political energy in translating the global tax pact into European law, and they also appear to be counting on the future revenue.

Europeans should have known better than to trust Mr. Biden, but that's beside the point. Public support in Europe for measures to combat climate change and tax big U.S. companies remains high, despite recent weakening on the climate front. Which European politician could withstand those political pressures when European voters thought they saw America acceding to their priorities? And which leader could openly question the honesty of the U.S. officials sitting across the table at global summits?

Mr. Trump, for all his inconstancy as an ally, at least now is telling Europe the truth about America. Which is the best thing any U.S. leader could do for them." [1]

1. Political Economics: Trump Gives European Leaders an Excuse to Dump Bad Policies. Sternberg, Joseph C.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 24 Jan 2025: A15.  

Sensible Strings for California Fire Aid

"President Trump visits California on Friday to survey the wildfire damage, and no doubt he'll hear requests for federal aid. A relevant question is whether this aid should be conditioned on policies that will reduce future damage.

Democrats want a blank check, and they're comparing the fires to hurricanes. The fires are horrific and the damage in property and lives enormous. But the fire damage is worse than it would have been if not for the policy mistakes in Los Angeles and Sacramento on water and forest management.

Washington has in the past tied aid to financially troubled cities and Puerto Rico. New York state established a financial control board to impose fiscal reforms on a city that couldn't muster the political nerve to make changes without outside pressure. The California fires are both a natural and man-made disaster, but California's political leaders seem incapable of reform. What then should Congress and the Trump Administration ask for?

One bad idea is tying a debt-ceiling increase to wildfire relief. Democrats would accuse Republicans of holding suffering Californians hostage for an unrelated GOP priority, and they'd do the same to GOP states after the next disaster. A financial control board to manage state fiscal policy is desirable if probably a political bridge too far.

But reforms directly connected to the wildfires and their severity make sense. Take the bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act, which the House passed Thursday, 279-141. Its co-sponsors include California Democrats Jimmy Panetta, Jim Costa, Ami Bera, John Garamendi and Scott Peters. Their districts have been damaged by wildfires caused in part by decades of fire suppression that have led to a buildup of combustible vegetation. Sixty-four Democrats voted aye.

A permitting thicket impedes proper management on federal lands, including in the Santa Monica Mountains and Angeles National Forest where fires have burned. It takes the U.S. Forest Service on average 4.7 years to begin a prescribed burn -- 9.4 years if an environmental impact statement is challenged in court -- and 3.6 years for tree thinning and brush clearing projects.

The Fix Our Forests Act would clear some of the regulatory overgrowth by prohibiting courts from blocking fire mitigation projects because of technical flaws in environmental reviews. Federal agencies wouldn't have to redo land management plans every time a new species is deemed to be threatened.

The bill would also let utilities clear trees within 150 feet of electric lines on federal land (the current limit is 10 feet), so they'd be less vulnerable to catching fire in heavy winds. Utility vegetation management plans would be automatically approved after four months.

Donald Trump and Congress could also roll back national monuments designated by previous Presidents for "preservation" under the Antiquities Act. Democrats have used such designations to limit logging and mining, but they can also interfere with forest management.

President Biden in his final days established the Sattitla Highlands National Monument on some 224,000 acres of federal land in northern California close to where several forests have recently burned. Last year he expanded Barack Obama's San Gabriel Mountains monument to include areas above Altadena that have been burning.

Mr. Biden cited the need to protect supposedly sacred features such as indigenous artifacts, some five dozen species of plants, trees and critters, "rare anorthosite complex rocks that are 1.2 billion years old," "ruins of grand recreation resorts" (burned by a fire in 1896), and "a missile unit built during the Cold War." Yes, a sacred missile site.

The way for Mr. Trump to present this when he visits California isn't to tell the state the feds will make Los Angeles suffer unless it toes his line. The way to do it is to offer sympathy and help while explaining that the goal should be make the state more resilient to fires and a variable climate. Voters will get that.

Mr. Trump can explain to voters what the state's policy failures are, even if he can't force Sacramento to change them. But Republicans in Washington can at least fix the federal government's blunders that make wildfires more damaging than they need to be." [1]

1. Sensible Strings for California Fire Aid. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 24 Jan 2025: A14.  

Ko nori Rusija?

  „Kalbant apie ilgus metus trukusias viešas diskusijas tarp JAV, Ukrainos ir Rusijos pareigūnų, kai kurie analitikai teigia, kad Putinas naujausią Trumpo įspėjimą, greičiausiai, traktuoja, kaip tik naujojo prezidento gudrybę sustiprinti jo bazę. ir pademonstruoti griežtą poziciją, kurią pažadėjo JAV priešininkų atžvilgiu.

 

 

 "Putinas šiuos pareiškimus laiko politinio žaidimo dalimi. Jis į juos nežiūri rimtai", – sakė Paryžiuje gyvenanti politologė Tatjana Stanovaja, palaikanti ryšius su Kremliui artimais žmonėmis. „Jis pasiruošęs bet kokiam scenarijui ir neturi iliuzijų, kad sandoris bus greitas“.

 

 Stanovaya teigia, kad įtampa Rusijos ekonomikai, nors ir kelia susirūpinimą Putinui, neturės jokios įtakos jo skaičiavimams Ukrainos atžvilgiu.

 

 25 metus valdžioje buvusiam Rusijos prezidentui konfliktas yra istorinė galimybė suvienyti dvi stačiatikių krikščionių šalis ir sulaikyti tai, ką jis jau seniai smerkė, kaip šliaužiančią Vakarų ekspansiją į Rusijos kiemą.

 

 „Žinoma, Putinas nori sustabdyti konfliktą, bet jis nori to išimtinai Rusijos sąlygomis“, – sakė S. Stanovaja. „Konfliktas Ukrainoje yra būdas privesti Vakarus prie derybų stalo dėl Jalta 2.0 derybų.“” [1]

1. World News: Russia Spurns Trump's Push on Conflict Talks --- Moscow believes it has the resources and manpower to keep up the fight. Luxmoore, Matthew; Grove, Thomas.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 24 Jan 2025: A6.