SYRIA AND BITS AND PIECES ABROAD; TRUMP

The anti-government violence continues to grow in Syria but unlike other rebellions in the Arab world, the focus of demonstrators appears to be focused on rules-of-the-game political change rather than regime change. President Bashar al-Assad has changed his government, an easy bit of window dressing change, and has ended the long-standing and hated emergency law under which Assad and his late presidential father ruled with an iron fist. But given the severity of the crackdown on demonstrators, these changes have altered little or nothing for the protesters.

The Syrian unrest creates another major dilemma for the U.S. in the Middle East. On the one hand the overthrow of Assad would create a big gap in the Shia-based band that has formed, extending from Iran through Iraq and Syria to the Hezbollah in Lebanon. Syria is about 70 percent Sunni but the Assads and the key military leaders have the Alawite sect, a branch of Shia, as their religious base. The Alawites make up about 10 percent of the Syrian population. Breakup of the Shia band by the overthrow of Assad would be a major blow to Iran which has strong ties with Syria and uses Syria for funneling arms to Hezbollah and Hamas.

On the other hand, a U.S. policy goal under President Obama has been one of "engagement" with Assad. That is, seeking through political talks with Syria to achieve greater political stability in the region by weaning Syria away from Iran, ending Damascus support of terrorism, halting interference in Lebanon and Iraq, and making an accomodation between Syria and Israel. The dilemma is in the question: "After Assad, what?"

The Assads, both father and son, had and have the Baath Party, a secular party, as their political base. If Assad is overthrown, it is not at all clear who will emerge as the next political power and whether the secularism of the Baathists would be replaced by a radical Islamic power structure. And that uncertainty about what might come next is what concerns the U.S., as it does Israel also. In a sense, with Assad it's "the devil we know". With all of the uncertainties for U.S. policy flowing from the recent upheavals in the Arab world, adding Syria to the list is hardly what the U.S. needs right now but like unrest in other parts of the Arab world, the U.S. is primarily a spectator rather than a shaper of events. Whatever the dilemma may be, we cannot escalate our rhetoric about Syria in any way that may get us involved in still another intervention or participation in a regime change strategy.

0-0-0-0-0

Speaking of the Middle East and U.S. policy, it is hardly helpful that the Republican party has invited Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to address Congress next month. It has always been something of a source of strain between Republicans and Democrats, both in the White House and Congress, to show which party is more pro-Israel and thus reap the rewards of Jewish votes and campaign contributions. Former President George W. Bush was perceived as a strong pro-Israel supporter. President Obama in seeking a more balanced Arab/Israel policy in the Middle East is perceived as less friendly toward Israel.

What the Republican invitation to Netanyahu does is to blatantly politicize Israeli relations and thus further complicate through partisanship an already difficult and complex Middle East problem. It makes even more laughable the old adage that politics stops at the water's edge.

0-0-0-0-0

Speaking of politics and foreign policy, last week was the 50th anniversary of the Bay of Pigs fiasco where, through the CIA, we supported a failed effort to overthrow Fidel Castro. What is notable about the anniversary to this blogger is that it took only about 25 years to come to terms with communist China after it overthrew Chiang Kai-shek in l948 and just two years later sent a million soldiers to fight the U.S. in the Korean War. It took about 30 years to normalize relations with Vietnam after fighting a bitter, losing war there. Yet domestic politics, meaning the perceived political clout of Cuban-American voters concentrated in south Florida, still prevents us after 50 years and counting from putting aside our differences with Cuba.

0-0-0-0-0

One cannot write a posting without some mention of Donald Trump, a possible presidential aspirant, who made his big pitch to pander to the far right by joining the so-called birthers who question whether President Obama was actually born in the U.S. In the process, he has come to be viewed as a political clown by many including the establishment GOP, while at the same time rising to the top of some polls on Republican preferences for a presidential candidate. And perhaps more significant, Trump was the featured character last week in the Doonesbury cartoon, adding to his "he's a joke" status. Somewhat lost in the birther mirth have been equally absurd simplistic efforts to appeal to a broader base on hot topics such as the price of gasoline and what to do about our trade problem with China.

On gas prices, Trump says simply tell the oil producing nations of OPEC to cut their prices. The problem, according to Trump, is simply the need for a new messenger. Translated: make me President and I'll show you how to deal with OPEC.

On trade with China, it's also simple. Slap a 25 percent tariff on all Chinese imports as a way of stopping the flood of cheap Chinese goods coming into the U.S. Easy solution if you ignore, among other things, what that would mean in terms of a trade war with China, the shutting off of U.S. investments in China, what the tariff would do to the price of so many Chinese-made goods purchased in the U.S. by low and middle income consumers, and how it would sour our always sensitive political relations with China.

Presumably Trump (or Trumpet since he blows his own horn so much and so loudly) will next resolve the woes we have in the Arab world.