View from America

By M.R. Josse GAITHERSBURG, MD: Like so much else in the United States of America, the popularity of the head of state keeps wavering virtually from week to week. In the case of the current incumbent, President Joe Biden, even though majorities of Americans support his $ 1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure package and a pending bill that would spend nearly $ 2 trillion on social programmes and climate initiatives, his approval rating has trickled down to a new low. That has been driven largely by more negative views among Democrats and independents, according to a just-published Washington Post-ABC News poll. Indeed, although in today’s Post, (15 November, 2021) there is a full-page ad from the Business Roundtable lauding the infrastructure package as “historic, bipartisan legislation” which it describes as “a victory for the American people”, the same daily carries on its front page a news story that identifies inflation as “Biden’s top test” asserting that, as middle-class voters begin to feel the pinch of inflation, many have begun to blame the president for the price hikes. APPROVAL RATINGS PLUMMET The aforementioned news item, opined: “Overall, the survey offers a set of harsh judgments about the president’s performance and the state of the economy. Together, they send a stark warning to Democrats about their prospects in the 2022 midterm contests.” Moreover, the survey finds that, if elections were held today, 46 percent of adults overall would back the Republican candidate for Congress and 43 percent would support the Democratic candidate. Furthermore, one is informed that, as per the abovementioned poll, “about half of Americans overall, and political independents blame Biden for fast-rising inflation, and more than 6 in 10 Americans say he has not accomplished much after 10 months in office, including 71 percent of independents.” On an altogether different front, there are indications of expanding political woes for the Biden administration. Indeed, as per a major CNN news story, 15 November, “the White House dove into damage control this week after reports of dysfunction and infighting in Vice President Kamala Harris’ office, with the administration trying to stop a drama-filled narrative from taking hold, according to five people who spoke to CNN about the dynamics within Harris’ office.” In the meantime, the ripple effects of former President Donald Trump-inspired 6 January 2021 insurrection continues to remind most thoughtful Americans – and interested foreign observers such as yours truly – of the parlous state of the health of American democracy. The latter continues to be buffeted by forces that are, as one analyst put it, “religious-like, not political” and which have seemingly accepted a new “patriotic religion” that fueled the 6 January riots at the U.S. Capitol. One of the flag-bearers of this new Trump-inspired political religion or crusade is none other than Steve Bannon, a former Trump adviser who has just turned himself into the FBI after being indicted on criminal contempt charges for refusing to cooperate with the House committee investigating the 6 January insurrection.

Steve Bannon to face contempt charges

According to a CNN report just in, Bannon was defiant while addressing TV cameras outside the FBI building saying, “We’re taking down the Biden regime.” PUZZLING America, of course, puzzles as much as it seems, ever so often, to swing pendulum-like from one extreme to the other. Puzzling to most non-Americans observing/reporting the American political landscape, too, is how many prominent political leaders repeatedly place party over country. Only the other day, for example, the Post in a strong editorial lamented that tendency focusing, in particular, on how “House Republicans embrace extremism and condemn those who act on conscience.” The editorial in question bemoaned that “on one hand, a growing list of Republicans seeks to punish 13 of their colleagues who broke ranks to vote for an infrastructure bill…On the other hand, Rep. Paul A. Gosar (R-Arizona) has encountered no such pushback after posting an anime video that depicts him killing Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and attacking the president. Mr. Gosar claimed, absurdly, that the video symbolized the debate over immigration policy. This is not a joke: A recent Public Religion Research Institute polls show that 30 percent of Republicans believe that violence may be necessary to solve the nation’s problems.” Befuddling to many like me, are instances, as reported in the Post, such as: “The Oklahoma National Guard has rejected the Defense Department’s requirement for all service members to receive coronavirus vaccinations and will now allow personnel to sidestep the policy, with no repercussions, an order from the governor that could serve as a blueprint for other Republican-led states that have challenged Biden administration mandates.” While most people in developing countries, and many in enlightened developed societies, are rushing to get vaccinated against the Covid-19 virus, here where there is a super-abundance of vaccines there is, among some people, a hostile resistance to vaccination mandates, which by all accounts have very significantly contributed to getting the virulent virus largely under control. Many argue that such mandates violate their personal “freedom”. Incidentally, there are umpteen Nepali visitors here who, practically after landing in America, have resolutely and immediately sought to obtain such vaccinations, including the fairly recently introduced booster-shots. To quote another story from the Post: “Now officials are worried that waning protection from the vaccines, combined with Americans spending more time indoors amid colder weather, will send the United States into a fifth wave of spiking cases. Some top U.S. health officials are renewing their push for an immediate expansion of booster shots, but they are facing some skepticism from the head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Some state officials are so concerned about the potential for a new wave that they are moving forward and urging all adults to seek out boosters – even as federal health officials continue to debate any new guidance.” BIDEN AND CHINA As this columnist has pointed out from time to time, the country that most prominently and regularly figures in American discourse in politics, the media and academia is China. Not surprising: China has become not only the world’s second biggest economy, after America, but stands on the threshold of challenging the United States’ overall pre-eminence, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region.

Xi and Biden hold a virtual meeting on Monday

After this is emailed for publication later today, Biden will convene a virtual meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. As explained by White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, according to the Post, “President Biden will make clear U.S. intentions and be clear and candid about our concerns with China.” She also disclosed that the two leaders would discuss how “to work together where our interests align.” The meeting – the third direct engagement between them – is not expected to issue a joint statement at its conclusion. It has been noted here, as elsewhere, that Xi has not left China since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic and was conspicuously absent from recent high-profile global summits in Rome and Glasgow. So, too, that “China this week cleared a resolution that would allow Xi to stay in power until at least 2027, underlining his formidable role as a powerful leader of the increasingly influential country.” Notably, though Biden publicly criticized Xi for being absent from the global conferences, what is significant is that on 10 November, “the United States and China jolted the United Nations climate conference in Glasgow, pledging that the two countries would work together to slow global warming during this decade and ensure that the Glasgow talks result in meaningful progress.” While we will know, soon enough, what transpired during the virtual Biden-Xi summit, in the interregnum, I believe it will be helpful to take heed, among other considerations, of two key aspects of the current Sino-American relations equation: first, America’s distaste for the prospect of an even more powerful Chinese leader; and secondly, Washington’s reluctance, despite some noises to the contrary, to commit herself to frontally taking on China, if Beijing were to indeed invade Taiwan. Both of the afore-mentioned chapters of the America-China saga have, incidentally, been highlighted in a recent Post editorial, entitled ‘Mr. Xi’s dangerous revisionism’ with the thrust of the leading article being: ‘His leadership presents perils to China and the rest of the world’. This is hardly the place for an exhaustive or substantive discussion on the above. However, I do wish to leave with the reader a few lingering thoughts. One has reference to this excerpt of the Post editorial: “As for the international sphere, Mr. Xi is raising pressure – including military pressure – on Taiwan, the democratic island whose seizure by China could trigger geopolitical crisis throughout East Asia possibly drawing in the United States…” To my mind, the use of the evocative qualifiers ‘could’ and ‘possibly’ only reinforces my belief that America will not allow itself to be sucked into a prolonged and costly war with China which is, after all, within a stone throw’s distance from Taiwan, while America is thousands of miles away. Furthermore, however intense the rhetoric from Washington maybe, hard historical realities cannot be sidestepped: one, America has studiously avoided war with China during Mao’s takeover, and later despite their being on opposing sides during the Korean and Vietnam wars; two, Taiwan’s return to the mainland – or not – is an issue to be settled by the Chinese, on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, not by others; and three, today’s divided and vulnerable America, licking its wounds from ‘forever wars’, such as the one that just concluded in Afghanistan, has demonstrated it has no appetite for immensely pricey military adventures abroad. And the world knows it. There is a cardinal geopolitical lesson to be drawn by Nepal from the above: China is a ‘forever’ neighbour of Nepal, as is India; America is not. India, however, needs to ponder the geopolitical implications for her from America’s shambolic, abrupt withdrawal from Afghanistan, with scant regard for New Delhi’s strategic and other interests. For America, India is a mere subaltern, not an equal, or even quasi-equal, partner. AMERICA DAZZLES Before concluding my valedictory column let me be clear - I am a great admirer of most, not all, things American. This includes its vibrantly independent media; the amazing diversity of her population; the uniqueness of her public library system; her endless museums and eye-catching art galleries; and her awesome architectural creations. I am also enamored of America’s wide array of song, dance and music genres; of her numberless picturesque parks, national reserves and lakes; and her envious repository of scholars and world-class scientists, in every conceivable field. One cannot but be drawn, too, to the sheer beauty and uplifting vastness of America; the warmth and friendliness of most Americans; and to her great Ivy League universities, reputed colleges and schools. Among the attractions of America are her prolix, cutting-edge hospitals, research centres and labs, not to mention her amazing variety of restaurants, hotels and resorts. There are, then, her splendid sports grounds and stadia and the delicious and varied fare that Hollywood movies and Times Square theatres offer to those hooked on them. By other metrics, too, America proffers much that the rest of the world does not, including pathways for lawful immigrants to citizenship, for those who desire it. America has intervened and made a difference in the realization of several historic causes, including epochal ones linked to the two World Wars. She has, to boot, very often led in the advancement of knowledge, in science, and technology, besides ably discharged the role of Good Samaritan, offering generous aid to scores of disadvantaged countries and succor to victims of natural and man-made disasters. One thus hopes that America will be able to overcome her present angry divisions and emerge, once more, as the exemplar of a modern and caring state. That said, I must now wish all readers a fond adieu as I close this column and prepare, shortly, to fly back home to Kathmandu.