Tag Archives: Spectator

HARRY AND MEGHAN DOWN UNDER

SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA – OCTOBER 16: Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex meet a koala during a visit to Taronga Zoo on October 16, 2018 in Sydney, Australia. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are on their official 16-day Autumn tour visiting cities in Australia, Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand. (Photo by Pool/Samir Hussein/WireImage)

One of my earliest memories is of a trip with a friend and his father to the shore of the River Humber in England.   It was twilight and, along with thousands of other people, we tried to position ourselves comfortably on the rocks so that we could watch the famous yacht go by.

The yacht was the Royal Yacht Britannia.   On board were the Queen and Prince Philip who were returning from a royal tour.   Those tours were frequent back then – often to faraway places like Australia and New Zealand or one of the islands in the South Pacific.   I don’t remember where they were returning from on this evening, or why they were sailing up the River Humber.   I remember having a brief look through binoculars, but the yacht was just too far away.

There’s been hundreds of royal tours since then.   The latest in the news is actually the first tour of the new Duke and Duchess of Sussex, formerly known as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, before their marriage five months ago.   They are now on an 18-day tour of Australia, New Zealand, Fiji and Tonga, during which they have 76 engagements.

The tour comes at an interesting time.   In five months time, the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union.   Almost fifty years ago, the country turned its back on the Commonwealth of former British territories; now, it hopes to revive the commercial and other ties it once had with these nations.

At the same time as the British are focused on Brexit, Australians are preparing for a plebiscite on the future of the monarchy in their country.   With an election next year, the Labor (socialist) party is planning an immediate vote on whether to turn the country into a republic, not a republic American style but one where the titular head of state will no longer be a monarch who lives 10,000 miles away, but an Australian figurehead likely chosen by parliament.   The American model is not likely to be adopted as it’s too expensive and politicians don’t like it as it’s too weak.   One member of the Australian parliament warned against adopting the US system lest they, too, have a President Trump!

Even republicans admit the change will lead to some confusion and political instability as 63 laws have to be changed, if the people vote for a republic.   Any change will also be more expensive.

Immediately prior to the arrival of the prince and duchess, the new Australian prime minister, Liberal (in Australia, that’s conservative) Scott Morrison, declared he is a monarchist and had the monarch’s portrait returned to the PM’s official office.   His expressed view is that “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”   Australia’s founders chose to remain loyal to the Crown after achieving independence at the turn of the twentieth century.

Australia’s constitutional monarchy and parliamentary system has been the envy of the world. It has attracted immigrants from all over the world, mostly, in recent decades, from failed states that happen to be republics; it’s likely that most of these immigrants, not knowing the past, will vote for a republic, setting Australia on the path to yet another dysfunctional state run by politicians for politicians.

Before casting their vote, they would do well to watch the Australian documentary, “When the Queen came to town,” a record of the monarch’s first royal tour of Australia in 1954, with many interviews of those who remember the tour, in which 75% of Australians saw the monarch at least once.   She was the first reigning monarch to set foot in the country.   It was a highly successful visit.

After the queen returned to England, Robert Menzies, Prime Minister of Australia, wrote an article that appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald, in which he wrote:

“It is a basic truth that for our Queen we have within us, sometimes unrealized until the moment of expression, the most profound and passionate feelings of loyalty and devotion.   It does not require much imagination to realize that when eight million people spontaneously pour out this feeling they are engaging in a great act of common allegiance and common joy which brings them closer together and is one of the most powerful elements converting them from a mass of individuals to a great cohesive nation.   In brief, the common devotion to the Throne is a part of the very cement of the whole social structure.”

WHAT DAMPENED THE ENTHUSIASM?

Britain’s entry into the EU, then the Common Market, on January 1st, 1973, contributed to the republican movement, as many Australians felt betrayed by the mother country, formerly their biggest trading partner.   In November of 1975, more people turned against the monarchy when the queen’s representative, the Governor-General, Sir John Kerr, dismissed the socialist government of Gough Whitlam for financial improprieties.   As this dismissal was “in the name of the Queen,” it boosted republican feeling.

Australians gave the monarchy “the walkabout,” where members of the royal family walk amongst the people.  This was named after an aboriginal practice.   The term has caught on in the other constitutional monarchies, as well.    It’s a great way for the people to meet their sovereign and other members of her family; and for them to show that they care about local issues.   Politicians only show up at election time; Harry and Meghan are in Australia for the Invictus games and to promote growing concerns about mental health.

Wikipedia has this to say about the Games, which are now being held in Sydney:

“The Invictus Games is an international adaptive multi-sport event, created by Prince Harry, in which wounded, injured or sick war veterans take part in sports including wheelchair basketball, sitting volleyball, and indoor rowing.”

ROYAL MEMORIES

Even with binoculars, we didn’t get to see the Queen or Prince Philip sixty years ago, but I do remember the crowds and the excitement. One other memory from about the same time was of the Queen’s visit to my hometown of Grimsby, a town on the estuary of the Humber.   Again, crowds lined the street. I couldn’t see anything, but a man standing next to me offered to lift me up on his shoulders and my mother consented.   From that vantage point, I remember a couple of people across the road fainted and the Red Cross was called to revive them.   They were suffering from heat stroke (yes, even in England)!

I remember, too, that my father, a republican (not to be confused with Republicans in the US), complained that he could not drive his car through the center of town, where all the crowds were. Ironically, he got the best view of the monarch as she passed by.   It did not lead to his changing his mind on Britain’s constitutional arrangements.  Perhaps Prince Harry and Meghan’s visit will help change the minds of those Australians who are tempted to step into the unknown with a questionable and uncertain republic.

Australia, Britain, Canada, New Zealand, together with a number of small islands in the Caribbean and South Pacific, share a cultural heritage.   A significant part of that heritage is the monarchy, which has provided each nation with a solid foundation and continuous, peaceful political and economic development.   A change in the political system will mean a diversion from that heritage.   First, abolish the monarchy, then change the flag, then something else until Australia becomes just another Asian republic – the kind of republic that new Australians have recently fled from!

Note the following from this week’s Spectator:

“Whether it was intended so or not, the decision by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to choose Australia as the place to announce that they are expecting their first child was a public relations triumph. For years the royal family was criticised for having a tin ear when it came to reading and dealing with the public, but no one could say this now.   The tone of the younger royals’ tour to the southern hemisphere has been one of approachability, without compromising the dignity of the positions which Harry and Meghan hold.

“Their visit also runs counter to the conventional wisdom of some republicans — in Britain as well as Australia — that support for the monarchy is dependent on personal affection for the Queen and that the institution will be doomed upon her death.   Now that Elizabeth II is, for reasons of age, no longer able to conduct long-haul tours, her grandchildren have achieved what her children never quite managed: to show that they have the ability to follow on and capture the support of the public where she leaves off.”  (The Spectator, 19th October).

As the prime minister recently said: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”

—————————————————————–

DEATH OF JAMAL KHASHOGGI

The famous Washington Post columnist was brutally tortured and murdered in the Embassy of Saudi Arabia on October 2nd.   What happened to him was reprehensible.   It‘s not the first time that an Arab government has killed a critic.   At the same time, we should also remember that Mr. Khashoggi was no friend of the West.   His support of the Muslim Brotherhood and his close friendship with Osama bin Laden both illustrate this. 

Khashoggi was a political Islamist to the end.   He did not believe in secularism.   He wanted an alliance of Islamic democratic states. There’s nothing wrong with that, necessarily.   But it is relevant and worth saying, as it helps explain the dynamic by which he found himself on the wrong side of the Saudi regime.”   (Freddie Gray, The Spectator, 19th October)

————————————————————-

700, 000 PROTEST OVER BREXIT

A huge demonstration took place in London on Saturday, calling for a second referendum on Brexit.   They oppose the United Kingdom leaving the European Union, scheduled for March 29th, five months from now.

Referenda in the EU has often followed this path.   A vote is taken on an issue, and when the result is not to the liking of the EU, a second referendum will be called for.   Whereas the demand sounds reasonable, it could lead to further division in the United Kingdom, already seriously divided as it is.

Those who want to Remain in the EU have concerns about leaving the world’s biggest trading bloc.

—————————————————————-

WHAT MULTICULTURALISM HIDES

  • If we bring in highly qualified immigrants to our workforce, we would be taking away from poorer countries the best they have to offer, and the situation in those countries will further deteriorate.   The result will be an even greater flow of unskilled migrants escaping those countries.
  • The proponents of the new multiculturalism want to share their welfare states with masses of refugees who — through no fault of their own — will be unable to participate in financing themselves for a long time to come.

(Jan Keller, a Czech, writing for Gatestone Institute, 16th October)

———————————————————

RESPONSE ON MULTICULTURALISM

Following a comment to my last blog this morning, here is my response:

Multiculturalism was a term first coined by a Royal Commission in Canada in 1971.   It was an attempt to show Canadians a way forward following a significant number of immigrants arriving from Africa, the Caribbean, the Middle East and Asia, peoples of different cultures from the dominant culture of Canada.   The policy was adopted by Canada and then other western nations.   It has not worked well and will lead to further problems ahead.

Jesus Christ prophesied that, at the time of the end, “Nation will rise against nation, kingdom against kingdom” (Matthew 24:7).   The word “nation” comes from the Greek word “ethnos,” from which we get the word “ethnic.”   Ethnic conflict will be common at the end time.   Indeed, it is already, arguably, the biggest cause of conflict around the world.

While we sing “O God of every nation,” and all nations are descended from Noah’s sons, we should also remember the following words spoken by the Apostle Paul, from Acts 17:26:

“And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their pre-appointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings.”   God set the boundaries;  man (mainly western man) is behind mixing, which is the opposite.

We see many problems with multiculturalism.   Tolerance is required for it to work, but this  is sadly lacking in some groups.   Rising conflict in many nations is leading to the rise of populist movements that want to preserve one culture over others.   None of this means that any race is superior to another.   People simply want to preserve their own cultural heritage.   Some cultures are just not compatible.    Comments I have made on the threats from immigration are based on this reality  — that the mixing is going to lead to negative consequences.  It is not meant to imply that any race is superior.

The Apostle Peter said that:   “God is no respecter of persons”   (Acts 10:34)

—————————————————–

CARAVAN PUTS IMMIGRATION BACK IN THE SPOTLIGHT, IN TIME FOR MIDTERMS

“As 4,000 Honduran migrants push north toward the US, President Trump sees an opportunity to help Republicans hang on to the House in the midterm elections.” (Axios, 20th October).

——————————————————

IN RETROSPECT — OF INTEREST TO THE WCG DIASPORA

“Throughout this study two related concepts have been mentioned repeatedly:   authority and government/governance.   We have seen Herbert W. Armstrong imposing his authority, diminishing his son’s authority.   Having his authority challenged, using his authority to change long-held doctrines, and being accused of authoritarianism.   We have seen Joseph W. Tkach and Joe Jr. making use of the strong ethos of obedience to top-down authority in the Worldwide Church of God to revolutionize its teachings, thus precipitating the three major schismatic moves of 1989, 1992-3, and 1995.   We have seen various attitudes to authority in the offshoot churches, from the hardline position of Philadelphia, Restored, and others to the more liberal attitudes found in United and its smaller offshoots and in the GTA group of churches.

“As for church government or governance, for some churches in the Worldwide family this is a crucial part of their beliefs; differing attitudes to governance are a major distinguishing factor between the hardline and the more liberal churches.”   (“Authority in the Churches of God,” chapter 7 of “The Fragmentation of a Sect,” by David V Barrett, 2013, Oxford University Press.)

Philippians 2:12  – “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

REACTION TO MULTICULTURALISM

French President Emmanuel Macron, center, greets Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, right, during a breakfast meeting at an EU summit in Brussels, Friday, June 29, 2018. European Union leaders were set to assess the state of stalled Brexit negotiations on Friday, after British Prime Minister Theresa May warned them that failure to strike a good divorce deal could endanger European security. At rear right is German Chancellor Angela Merkel and left is Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar. (AP Photo/Virginia Mayo)

For the last few decades, the western world has been extolling the virtues of multiculturalism.   Inevitably, there’s a reaction to this and we now see it on both sides of the Atlantic.

In Germany, Angela Merkel has been facing a serious challenge over her migrant policy.   Her Bavarian coalition partners are not happy with her letting in over one million refugees into the country.   Other European countries are scrambling to avoid taking in more migrants, defying EU rules that try to even the distribution of the refugees.   Italy plans on deporting over half a million back to Africa.

EU leaders are meeting in Brussels to try to resolve the migrant crisis.   Germany’s Chancellor Merkel, before leaving for Brussels, said that the summit could decide “Europe’s fate.”   “Europe has many challenges but migration could end up determining Europe’s destiny,” she told German lawmakers.  (the local.de; 28th June)

The British Spectator magazine had this to say the morning of the summit:

“There was a time when Angela Merkel pretty much decided what went on in EU summits.   But she comes to Brussels today as a charity case, says Fredrik Erixon, desperate for Germany’s neighbors to accommodate some of the 1.4 million refugees the country has taken in since 2015.   Her grip over Europe has ended and a new post-Merkel consensus is emerging.”   (Fraser Nelson.   An accompanying article was titled:   “Angela’s Ashes.”)

In the United States, new migrants arrive at the border on an hourly basis.   Some of them have paid up to $9,000 to be smuggled into the country.   Some of the new arrivals in recent years have joined ethnic gangs that are extremely violent, highlighted this week by the gruesome murder of a teen by a gang from central America.

It’s very difficult for the president to do anything as the media is constantly portraying families broken up by immigration officials.   The blatant hypocrisy of people like Elizabeth Warren is astounding – they scream about young children being separated from their parents, while consistently supporting the murder of countless numbers of babies through abortion!

What is taking place in the US, Canada and other western nations is population replacement.   While white people are encouraged to abort their babies and limit the size of their families, non-whites are encouraged to immigrate.   Gradually, slowly, the original inhabitants of the West are being replaced by others of a different ethnic background.

In a small way, this was illustrated by the primary held this week in New York’s 14th Congressional district, where an older white male incumbent lost to a 28-year-old Latina female socialist, in a district heavily populated by immigrants.   Ideals may play a role with some people, but ethnicity is a greater predictor when it comes to voting.   It’s already the case that Democrats have the support of most ethnic groups, while Republicans get their main support from the diminishing number of whites.   This will worsen over time and determine the outcome of future elections.

But a reaction is clearly visible.   Populist movements are gaining in popularity in many of the affected countries and are resisting EU directives.   The Visegrad Group in eastern Europe are opposed to EU policy.   Germany is divided on the issue.   In the US, President Trump is trying to stem the tide of Islamic and Hispanic immigration.

Jesus Christ predicted that ethnic conflict would be a major problem in this age.   Asked about the signs of His coming, He responded with: “Nation shall rise against nation” (Matthew 24:7).   The word “nation” comes from the Greek word “ethnos,” meaning that ethnic conflict will be a big factor in end-time events.

——————————————————————————————

From German Foreign Policy.com (29th June)

“The US-led RIMPAC 2018, the world’s largest naval maneuver, began yesterday with German soldiers participating.   According to the US Navy, the naval exercise will also include operations in the Western Pacific.  The region of the Southwest Pacific islands will thus come into focus, which — even though largely ignored by the European public — has been gaining significant global influence.   On the one hand, the influence of Western countries has shrunk recently, while that of their strategic rivals, such as Russia and China, has significantly grown.   Some Pacific island nations have since then been seeking to pursue a foreign policy independent from the West.   On the other hand, the Southwest Pacific has become even more important also for Australia and the Unites States:             as the political economic backyard for Australia and “gateway to the Indo-Pacific” for the U.S.A.   Germany is also attempting to increase its activities in the region.”

—————————————————————————————-

“Germany is participating in a new European military formation that was launched yesterday.   Originally a French proposal, the European Intervention Initiative (EII) will be open to EU and Non-EU member countries to join.   Expanding the existing EU military cooperation (“PESCO”) with a new operational component, the EII should facilitate rapid decisions on joint military interventions.   A first meeting of military commanders from the hitherto nine participant states is set for September.   The EII includes Great Britain, which plans to continue its military cooperation with the continent, even after Brexit, as well as Denmark.   Since the coordination of military interventions is now officially set outside of the EU framework, Denmark can sidestep the opt-out from EU military policy, it had once granted its population.   Referred to by experts as a European “coalition of the willing,” it goes hand in hand with the EU Commission’s militarization plans worth billions and the high-cost German-French arms projects.” (German Foreign Policy.com 6/28)

——————————————————————————– 

QUEEN SIGNS BREXIT INTO LAW

“The past week has seen big, and potentially confusing, events in Great Britain’s struggle to Brexit—to regain its national independence from the European Union.

The decisive vote came on Wednesday, 319-303.   There is now no doubt:   Britain will be exiting the European Union.

“Britain has had the courage to vote for change, to abide by the results of that vote, and to get out of the EU.   I’d call it democracy. Happy second birthday, Brexit.”   (Theodore Bromund, 6/22)

——————————————————————

From the FT, Brussels Briefing, 6/27

Burka banned 

The Netherlands has joined Denmark, Austria, France, Belgium and Bulgaria in banning the Muslim face veil.   The Dutch law was finally passed yesterday 13 years after it was first proposed by anti-Islam politician Geert Wilders (FT).

——————————————————————————-

EU/US TRADE CONFLICT

Juncker in DC :   Donald Trump has extended an invitation to Jean Claude Juncker to visit the White House and discuss trade (Politico).

—————————————————————–

PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS CONTINUES ACROSS MIDEAST

“[A]re the world Christian bodies denouncing the Islamic forces for the ethnic cleansing, genocide and historic demographic-religious revolution their brethren are suffering?   No.   Christians these days are busy targeting the Israeli Jews.” — Giulio Meotti, Italian journalist.

—————————————————————–

EGYPTIAN PERSECUTION CONTINUES

“From attacks by Muslim mobs to closures by Muslim authorities, the lamentable plight of Coptic Christian churches in Egypt always follows a pattern, one that is unwaveringly only too typical.

Thus, last April 14, a Muslim mob—predictably riled by the previous day’s Friday mosque sermons—attacked the church of the Holy Virgin and Pope Kyrillos in Beni Meinin, Beni Suef.   According to Watani, as with 3,500 other Egyptian churches, after patently waiting for decades to receive a permit, the church “had been used for worship for some 10 years now…   T]he building authority committee had recently [earlier that day] visited the church in preparation for legalising its status, and the attack was waged in retaliation.”

Local authorities’ response was even more typical:   Twenty people were arrested after the attack—eleven Muslims (attackers) and nine Copts (defenders).   At least five of the arrested Christians, whose “crime” was to try to put out fires Muslims started, were illegally incarcerated for over a month.   One lost his job due to this prolonged absence (police refused to admit holding him to his employer).

Thereafter, on May 22, followed the usual “reconciliation” meeting between local Christian and Muslim elders, whereby victims forego their legal rights in an out of court settlement.   In order to release their innocents the Copts had to agree to close the church—no more mass, wedding or funeral services on grounds that it is a “security risk”—and agree that the eleven Muslims who led the violent attack also be acquitted.”   (Middle East Forum, 6/16)

——————————————————————

The Shadow Treasurer of Australia (Chris Bowen) actually said these words:-

“The PBO (Parliamentary Budget Office)  has clearly shown that the unfair Turnbull Government tax cuts offer no benefit to those who don’t pay tax.

This is plainly unfair that people should not get a tax cut just because they don’t pay tax.”

Australians needs serious help if they inherit this level of logic.

 

 

DOES SINGAPORE SUMMIT MEAN PEACE IN OUR TIME?

President Donald Trump meets with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on Sentosa Island, Tuesday, June 12, 2018, in Singapore. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

“The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast.   These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast.   These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and those who are with Him are called, chosen, and faithful.”  (Rev 17:12-14)

For these ten nations to come together, there must be a major upheaval that transforms the nations of the world and their alliances.   President Trump may be the catalyst.

It’s difficult to know at this point what the outcome of the Singapore summit will be.   North Korea’s Kim Jong Un and US President Donald Trump seemed to get along fine and there is hope of an end to almost 70 years of conflict on the Korean peninsula.

“President Donald Trump’s summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un hearkens back to an era of high-risk summits where the outcome was not preordained.”   (“In the past, summits often redrew maps, changed world,” Gregory Korte, USA Today, 6/13)

“ . . . To Trump’s credit, we are surely at a better place than we were a year ago when Kim was testing hydrogen bombs and ICBMs, and he and Trump were trading threats and insults in what seemed the prelude to a new Korean War.

“Whatever one may think of his diplomacy, Trump has, for now, lifted the specter of nuclear war from the Korean peninsula and begun a negotiating process that could lead to tolerable coexistence.”   (“Trump’s Bold Historic Gamble,” Pat Buchanan, 6/15)

For a more critical view, note this paragraph from The Economist:   “In foreign policy, perhaps more than anywhere else, President Donald Trump is doing exactly what he said he would do:   he has pulled out of the Paris climate agreement and the Iran deal, moved America’s embassy in Israel and imposed tariffs on imports.  His supporters, and many business folk, are thrilled.  But though his wrecking-ball approach may bring short-term wins for America, it will cause long-term damage to the world.”  (6/9)

WILL THERE BE PEACE?

In 1938, before the word “summit” was used to describe meetings of world leaders (it was first used by Sir Winston Churchill over ten years later), the two most powerful men in the world met in Munich.   British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and Germany’s leader, Adolf Hitler, worked out a peace “deal” between them.   Mr. Chamberlain was able to return to England and proclaim  “Peace in our time.”   Less than a year later, the two nations were at war.  World War Il was to last six years.

80 years later, the Singapore summit has raised hopes of an end to the threat of nuclear war involving North Korea.   But whether this will mean peace remains to be seen.

“Here is where the crunch comes.   Kim is being told that he must give up the weapons whose very possession by him are the reason why the world powers are paying him heed.”   (PB)

Meanwhile, it is becoming clear that neither North Korea nor the United States are the biggest beneficiaries following the summit.  The nation that benefits the most is China, already the greatest power in the Far East.

A HUGE WIN FOR CHINA

“Kim Jong Un flew into Singapore on a Chinese plane for his summit with US President Donald Trump and left with a prized concession long sought by Beijing:   the suspension of US-South Korean war games.

Not only that, but Trump also teased the possibility of a complete withdrawal of American troops from the Korean Peninsula at some point in the near future.

“It’s a huge win for China,” Bonnie Glaser, director of the China Power Project at CSIS, told CNN.”   (CNN, 6/3)

SAVING MONEY

Mr. Trump clearly wants to reduce the number of US military personnel in South Korea, variously said to be 28,000-32,000.   At a press conference, he said the following:

“I want to get our soldiers out.   I want to bring our soldiers back home.   We have 32,000 soldiers in South Korea.   I would like to be able to bring them back home. . . .   We will stop the war games, which will save us a tremendous amount of money.”

As said on CNN, this statement is exactly what China wants.  Under pressure from Beijing, North Korea will likely take a more peaceful course.   The country will likely open up to some foreign investment, mostly from China, although there is little prospect of an end to authoritarian, communist rule.   China itself has not made any progress in that area.

It may take some time for the world to see clearly that this summit was a big step forward for China and Chinese power in the Asia-Pacific region.   Perhaps mindful of the decline of the European powers in the region following World War II, China is enabling the US to decline gracefully in what is increasingly a Chinese sphere of influence.   Even the summit venue, Singapore, is ethnically Chinese. A friend of mine in the city-state reports an increased sighting of Chinese ships around the strategically important island.

On the day of the summit, the Singapore Straits Times reported:

PARIS (AFP) – “France is increasing its military presence in the Indo-Pacific region, sending warships through the South China Sea and planning air exercises to help counter China’s military build-up in disputed waters.

“In late May, the French assault ship Dixmude and a frigate sailed through the disputed Spratly Islands and around a group of reefs that China has turned into islets, to push back against Beijing’s claim to own most of the resource-rich South China Sea.”

Around the globe, the talk was of peace; but the summit was largely about money, as is so often the case with global power struggles.

Although the US economy is doing well, the country is heavily in debt (more about that later), while China has mountains of cash. Inevitably, the latter is going to overtake the former, at least in Asia, unless things change fast.

EU & NATO  CONCERNS

“Donald Trump’s America-first diplomacy has shaken the foundations of many global institutions and alliances, but its most damaging effects so far have been on the trans-Atlantic relationship. The community of North American and European nations forming the nucleus of the alliance that won the Cold War for the West is closer to breaking up now than any time since the 1940s.”   (“Why Trump clashes with Europe,” by Walter Russell Mead, WSJ, 6/12).

The summit of the G7 nations, meeting in Quebec just a few days ago, ended in disarray when the US president refused to sign the joint communiqué and walked out of the conference.   The future of the organization remains in doubt.   The G7 was sometimes referred to last week as the G6+1; at other times the G4, as only the European countries seemed to be in agreement.

By throwing out the suggestion that all tariffs be abolished, Mr. Trump was undermining the very foundations of the European Union.

Early in July, the US president will be attending the NATO summit in Brussels.   It should become clearer then if he feels any support for the European democracies.   If he doesn’t, Europe will be on its own.

GERMANY’S VIEW

The German news magazine Der Spiegel commented on the “G7 fiasco,” saying “it’s time to isolate Donald Trump:”

“The G-7 summit once again made it clear that U.S. President Donald Trump is intent on treating America’s allies worse than its enemies. Europe must draw the consequences and seek to isolate Trump on the international stage.”

“Germany’s foreign minister called for the European Union to become a more self-confident global actor, prepared to take counter-measures when the United States crosses “red lines” and able to respond to Russian threats and Chinese growth.

“In a Berlin speech, Heiko Maas gave the clearest sign yet that Germany no longer sees its 70-year-old alliance with the United States as unconditional, and threw his weight behind French proposals to make the EU shipshape for a more uncertain world.

“We need a balanced partnership with the US,” he told youth activists in a converted railway station, “where we as Europeans act as a conscious counterweight when the US oversteps red lines.”

“In remarks that drew a line under the post-war German doctrine of close alignment with the United States, Maas listed President Donald Trump’s Washington as a challenge for Europe, alongside more traditional rivals like Russia and China.

“Donald Trump’s egotistical politics of ‘America First’, Russia’s attacks on international law and state sovereignty, the expansion of gigantic China:   the world order we were used to – it no longer exists,” he said.

“The speech is the latest in a flurry of declarations by leading German politicians digesting the implications of the disarray following Trump’s abrupt departure last week from the Quebec G7 summit, long a pillar of the US-led Western global order.

“Earlier this week, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, long known as among Germany’s most committed Atlanticists, effectively demoted the US relationship in a television interview by saying Germany’s second loyalty had to be the EU.

“The first loyalty goes to your own country,” she said.  “But the second should go to the EU.”   For Berlin’s elites, the EU and the transatlantic alliance were long regarded as equal pillars.”  (Euractiv with Reuters 6/14)

Once again, money has played a part in Mr. Trump’s anti-European rhetoric.   Although some European countries do spend more than the required 2% of their GNP on defense, some do not, including Germany.   Mr. Trump feels very strongly that this is wrong and needs to change.   The United States is deeply in debt.   In itself, this poses a grave threat to national security.   Other nations must devote more of their resources to defense.

Did both the Singapore and the Quebec summits have a lot to do with money?   Seemingly so.

ONE SUMMIT STILL TO GO

Here’s a final comment from a British conservative publication, linking all three summits (G7, Singapore and NATO):

“Donald Trump is feeling confident about world peace following his big summit in Singapore with Kim Jong Un.   But . . . western leaders are desperately worried.   Might the US President, inebriated on his own sense of destiny, be about to collapse Nato?   Theresa May is certainly worried:   she knows how hard the British government had to push Trump to officially endorse Nato.   But now, following the fallout over tariffs at last weekend’s G7 summit in Canada, Trump is not feeling well disposed towards the rest of the West.   Next month’s Nato Summit in Brussels will be a tense affair.”   (Spectator, UK, 6/14)

Seventy years after the formation of NATO, could the organization break up?   We will see next month.