Trump Admin. May Provide Europe with Opportunity to Assert Its Own Identity: US Analyst
TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An American political analyst described European nations as age-old “colonies” of the US Empire, noting that policies by the country’s new administration on Europe can give this chance to the 28-member bloc to assert its own “identity” and “independence”.
“Europe faces no threat from the Trump administration. In fact, potential conflicts over various international policies and agreements between the Trump administration and Europe may provide Europe with the opportunity to assert its own identity and independence. The European nations have existed largely as colonies of the American empire under the auspices of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization since the end of World War Two,” Keith Preston, the chief editor and director of attackthesystem.com, told the Tasnim news agency in an interview.
Keith Preston was born in Lynchburg, Virginia, United States. He received degrees in Religious Studies, History, and Sociology from Virginia Commonwealth University. He is the founder and director of American Revolutionary Vanguard and the chief editor of AttacktheSystem.Com. He has also been a contributor to LewRockwell.Com, Antiwar.Com, Anti-State.Com,Taki’s Magazine, Radix Journal, and AlternativeRight.Com . He is the author of six books, and was awarded the 2008 Chris R. Tame Memorial Prize by the United Kingdom’s Libertarian Alliance. Keith has been a featured speaker at conferences of the National Policy Institute, H. L. Mencken Club, and Anarchapulco. He has been interviewed on numerous radio programs and internet broadcasts, and appeared as a guest analyst on Russia Today, Press TV and the BBC.
The following is the full text of the interview.
Tasnim: As you know, US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order that imposes a 90-day entry ban for citizens of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya, and Somalia, blocks refugees from Syria indefinitely, and suspends all refugee admissions for 120 days. What is your take on the move? Do you believe that the decision can be reversed? Kindly explain.
Preston: The travel restrictions have their roots in an assessment that was formulated by the Obama administration, and which identified the nations impacted by the travel ban as unstable regions from which potential terrorist threats might originate. When the Trump administration came into office, this previous assessment was used as a justification for imposing the travel restrictions until a more efficient system for vetting entrants into the United States could be put into place. The administration appears to have acted with excessive haste, and implemented a very poorly conceived plan. The travel ban appears to have been a political prop that was used to demonstrate the Trump administration’s hawkish position with regards to fighting terrorism. Aspects of the travel ban have already been blocked by US courts on constitutional or other grounds. Certainly, the decision can be reversed by court orders, Congressional legislation, executive decision, or some combination of these.
Tasnim: President Trump has excluded Saudi Arabia and certain Persian Gulf states in his order. Back in July 2016, the US government released 28 pages of a congressional report on the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, which show the Saudi government may have had a hand in the attacks. “While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support or assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government…there is information, primarily from FBI sources, that at least two of those individuals were alleged by some to be Saudi intelligence officers,” reads part of the report. What do you think?
Preston: Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States are among the closest allies of the United States even though these nations are responsible for fuelling terrorism throughout the Middle East. However, the seven nations that were impacted by the travel ban are either nations that refuse to be incorporated into the Washington consensus, or failed states whose failures has been aggravated by the effects of US military intervention. This is the reason for the distinction. The travel ban does not constitute a serious effort to combat terrorism, but is instead intended for propaganda purposes. It is not inconceivable that some of the September 11, 2001 hijackers could have had contact with Saudi intelligence given the role of the Saudi government in supporting Wahhabist terrorism. However, connections of these kinds have yet to be fully substantiated.
Tasnim: It is no secret to anyone that President Trump is unpredictable. His stance on global trade, the Paris climate deal and the Iran nuclear deal threaten to unpick key elements of global governance. His back-and-forth on NATO is deeply worrying for the future of European security. And his travel ban has sown chaos, undermining the international management of the refugee crisis and fanning the flames of extremism. What do you think? Do you believe that Trump is destabilizing Europe? With Trump in the White House issuing erratic executive orders, do you believe Europe will remain “whole, free and at peace”? Please explain.
Preston: Europe faces no threat from the Trump administration. In fact, potential conflicts over various international policies and agreements between the Trump administration and Europe may provide Europe with the opportunity to assert its own identity and independence. The European nations have existed largely as colonies of the American empire under the auspices of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization since the end of World War Two. This relationship is anachronistic and serves no necessary purpose in the twenty-first century. Europe is a wealthy and densely populated region that is more than capable of providing for its own needs.
Tasnim: Some US and European officials have been trading barbs in the past month over Trump’s remarks. The recently inaugurated president has not been shy about sharing his views about the world, in general, and Europe, in particular. In numerous occasions before and after his campaign, he described NATO as “obsolete,” called the EU “basically a vehicle for Germany,” and said other countries would follow the UK's lead and leave the bloc. In a recent security conference in Munich, US officials attempted to give assurances to Europeans that their ties with them will remain unchanged. Why is the 28-member bloc worried about Trump and his policies? Kindly explain your idea.
Preston: Trump is correct when he says that NATO is obsolete. NATO is a military alliance that was originally formed to counter the Soviet Union and its hegemony over Eastern Europe which developed as a result of World War Two. It can be reasonably argued that NATO served a legitimate geopolitical purpose during the Cold War. However, the Cold War has been over for nearly three decades at this point, and the Soviet Union was dissolved more than a quarter century ago. NATO is a military alliance that is a relic of the past. Trump is also correct when he suggests that Germany is the dominant political and economic power within the European Union. This has been clearly demonstrated by the relationship between Germany and Greece that developed after the economic crisis emerged in Greece. It is also possible that other European nations will eventually seek to leave the European Union, particularly if Marine Le Pen becomes the president of France. The leadership of the European Union is concerned that the Trump administration will expect the member nations of NATO to cover a greater share of the costs of maintaining the NATO alliance, and that the Trump administration will lend support to anti-EU currents within the internal politics of various European nations thereby undermining or disrupting the trade bloc.
