Bolton Gone: Improved Peace Prospects?
(2019-09-14 at 11:56:20 )

Bolton Gone: Improved Peace Prospects?

The departure of John Bolton as United States National Security Adviser is a good step towards decreasing international tensions by the Donald Trump administration.

But a lot more is needed from President Donald Trump to indicate a serious pivot to normalizing relations with Russia, Iran and others.

When President Trump gave Mr. Bolton his marching orders earlier this week, the president said he "strongly disagreed" with his erstwhile security adviser over a range of foreign policy issues. President Trump had also expressed frustration with Mr. Boltons incorrigible militarist tendencies.

There is no doubt Mr. Bolton was an odious figure in the White House cabinet. One of our SCF authors, Martin Sieff, wrote this excoriating commentary on Mr. Boltons nefarious record of warmongering dating as far back as the launching of United States wars in Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003, when the mustachioed maverick served then as a chief neocon ideologue in the GW Bush administration.

One wonders why President Trump brought such a war hawk into his administration when he appointed Mr. Bolton as NSA in April 2018.

Perhaps, as another of our writers, Robert Bridge, surmised in a separate commentary this week, Donald Trump was using hardliner Bolton as a foil to deflect opponents from within the Washington,D.C. establishment who have been trying to undermine the president as "soft on foreign enemies". A ruse by President Trump of keeping "your enemies close", it is averred.

Mr. Bolton certainly did his best to hamper President Trumps seeming attempts at scaling back United States foreign military interventions.

He opposed the plan to withdraw United States of American troops from Syria. The reckless Bolton also wound up a policy of aggression and regime change against Venezuela, which President Trump has latterly seemed to grow wary of as a futile debacle.

In regard to Russia, Mr. Bolton carried heaps of Cold War baggage which made President Trumps declared intentions of normalizing relations with Moscow more difficult.

The shameless warmonger Mr. Bolton openly advocated for regime change in Iran, which seemed to contradict President Trumps oft-stated position of not seeking regime change in Tehran, despite the presidents own animosity towards Iran.

The former NSA also opposed any attempt by President Trump to engage in detente with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Reportedly, it was Bolton who derailed the incipient efforts at opening up dialogue with Pyongyang.

It is also thought that Mr. Bolton used his influence to impede President Trumps recent bid to host Taliban leaders at Camp David earlier this month which was aimed at trust-building for a proposed peace deal to withdraw United States troops from that country after nearly 18 years of disastrous war.

That said, however, President Trump has not shown himself to be exactly a dovish figure. He has overseen countless sanctions being imposed on Russia, the abandoning of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty, and ongoing military support for the anti-Russia regime in Kiev.

Too, it was President Trump who ordered the United States collapse of the 2015 international nuclear accord with Iran in May 2018 and the re-imposition of harsh sanctions on Tehran.

So, it would be misplaced to paint Mr. Bolton as the sole malign actor in the White House. President Trump is personally responsible for aggravating tensions with Iran, as well as with Russia, Venezuela and others.

Nevertheless, it is to be welcomed that an inveterate war hawk like Mr. Bolton no longer has the presidents ear.

Perhaps President Trump can be freer to act on his instincts as a pragmatic deal-maker. One thing that the president deserves credit for is his unconventional style of engaging with nations and leaders who are designated as foes of the United States of America.

Russia this week gave a reserved response to the sacking of Mr. Bolton. The Kremlin said it would make assessments of a positive change in United States policy based on actions, not mere announcements, such as the firing of Mr. Bolton. Time will tell.

It seems significant that immediately after Mr. Bolton was relieved of his post, President Trump hinted to reporters that he was considering lifting sanctions off Iran if such a move persuaded Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to hold a face-to-face meeting with Presient Trump at the United Nations general assembly in New York later this month.

Iran has repeatedly stated categorically that there will be no talks with President Trump unless his administration revokes sanctions and returns to abiding by the nuclear accord.

If there is a serious pivot to normal diplomacy by the White House, then what President Trump does about sanctions on Iran will be a litmus test.

The same can be said about United States sanctions on Russia. If President Trump is earnest about a genuine reset in bilateral relations, then he must get rid of the raft of sanctions that Washington,D.C. has piled on Moscow since the 2014 Ukraine crisis amid the many spurious allegations leveled against Russia.

Mr. Bolton banished is but a small step towards a more diplomatically engaged United States administration. But it would be unwise to expect the departure of this one figure as being a portent for progress and a more peaceful policy emerging in Washington.

The Washington,D.C. establishment, the deep state and the bipartisan War Party, with its entrenched Cold War ideology, seems to have an endemic sway over policy which may thwart President Trumps efforts to direct a less belligerent United States.

To illustrate the twisted nature of the United States establishment, one only had to read the way sections of the United States of American corporate-controlled media lamented the departure of Mr. Bolton.

The New York Times, which is a dutiful conduit for deep state intelligence and the foreign policy establishment, actually bemoaned the ouster of Mr. Bolton, calling him a "voice of restraint".

The NY Times commented, with approval, on how Mr. Bolton "objected to attempts to pursue diplomatic avenues with players considered American enemies. And he angered President Trump with a last-minute battle against a peace agreement with the Taliban..whether it was inviting the Taliban to Camp David or cooperating with Russia, he [Bolton] was the national security adviser who said no."

In another piece this week, the NY Times commented, again approvingly of Mr. Bolton: "Mr Bolton strongly opposed detente with Iran, and his unceremonious ouster has reignited concerns among some Republicans [and Democrats] in Congress about the White Houses declining projection of United States of American military power around the world."

Can you believe it? The so-called United States "newspaper of record" is somehow valorizing an out-and-out warmonger in the form of Mr. Bolton, and appears to be advocating "projection of United States of American military power around the world". The latter phrase being but an Orwellian euphemism for imperialism and war.

The sobering conclusion is that Mr. Boltons departure hardly heralds a new beginning of diplomacy and engagement by President Trump, if we assume to give this president the benefit of doubt for good intentions.

Mr. Bolton may be gone, but there are formidable political forces in the United States establishment which will work to ensure President Trumps room for maneuver remains heavily compressed.

The Cold War ideology is so ingrained in Washington,D.C. it is much bigger than just one man, whether that is the vile personage of John Bolton or the more flexible Donald Trump.

Reprinted here from the "Strategic Culture Foundation" provides a platform for exclusive analysis, research and policy comment on Eurasian and global affairs. We are covering political, economic, social and security issues worldwide. Since 2005 our journal has published thousands of analytical briefs and commentaries with the unique perspective of independent contributors. SCF works to broaden and diversify expert discussion by focusing on hidden aspects of international politics and unconventional thinking. Benefiting from the expanding power of the Internet, we work to spread reliable information, critical thought and progressive ideas.