July 14, 2019

IN FAIRNESS TO DONALD...:

Trump axed Iran deal to spite Obama: How the British ambassador called the President's actions 'diplomatic vandalism' fueled by 'personality reasons' - as revealed in more explosive cables that have sparked a free speech row while Iran tensions mount (ISABEL OAKESHOTT and GLEN OWEN, 7/14/19, THE MAIL ON SUNDAY

Sir Kim's Iran memo was sent in May 2018, after Mr Johnson - who was then Foreign Secretary - had been dispatched to Washington to make a last ditch plea to President Trump not to abandon the nuclear deal with Iran designed to prevent the regime from building an atomic bomb.

Despite a frantic 26 hours of meetings with Trump's closest advisers, it became clear that the President was not going to change his mind.

After Mr Johnson returned to London, Sir Kim told No 10 in a 'diptel' (diplomatic telegram) that Mr Trump's Administration was 'set upon an act of diplomatic vandalism'. The Ambassador wrote that Mr Trump appeared to be abandoning the deal for 'personality reasons' because it had been agreed by his predecessor Barack Obama.

Sir Kim suggested there were splits among the President's closest advisers and said the White House lacked a 'day-after' strategy on what to do following withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, as the deal was called.

...you can't really blame just his racial animus towards the UR when it's matched by his hatred of Muslim democracy.



MORE:
The Prejudice First Model and Foreign Policy Values: Racial and Religious Bias among Conservatives and Liberals (Richard Hanania & Robert Trager, July 5, 2019, SSRN)

Scholars of foreign policy preference formation have accepted what Rathbun et al. (2016) call the "vertical hierarchy model," which says that policy attitudes are determined by more abstract moral ideas about right and wrong. This paper turns this idea on its head by introducing the prejudice first model, arguing that foreign policy preferences and orientations are in part driven by attitudes towards the groups being affected by specific policies. Three experiments are used to test the utility of this framework. First, when conservatives heard about Muslims killing Christians, as opposed to the opposite scenario, they were more likely to support a humanitarian intervention and agree that the United States has a moral obligation to help those persecuted by their governments. Liberals showed no religious preference. When the relevant identity group was race, however, liberals were more likely to want to help blacks persecuted by whites, while conservatives showed no racial bias. In contrast, the degree of persecution mattered relatively little to respondents in either experiment. In another experiment, conservatives adopted more isolationist policies after reading a text about the country becoming more liberal, as opposed to a paragraph that said the United States was a relatively conservative country. The treatment showed the opposite effect on liberals, although the results fell just short of statistical significance. While not necessarily contradicting the vertical hierarchy model, the results indicate that prejudices and biases not only help influence foreign policy attitudes, but moral perceptions of right and wrong in international politics. 

Posted by at July 14, 2019 6:15 AM

  

« YOUR NEXT CAR WILL BE A VOLT: | Main | HE'S A ROY MOORE GUY: »