Safer
to be feared than loved, advised Machiavelli. Theresa May is neither.
When Donald
Trump began his presidential campaign no one believed he could
possibly be elected. When David Cameron went to the country on EU
membership, he could not imagine 'Remain' losing. So it was with
Theresa May. Ahead in the polls by 21 points she sought an
unassailable majority.
Whatever the
reasons -- and there are many -- she received a drubbing, her party
down by 13 seats. Instead of increasing her majority, she actually
lost it. Yet she has cobbled together a working majority coalition
and will remain prime minister. The real question is how long?
Safer to be
feared than loved, advised Machiavelli. She is neither. Her co-chiefs
of staff Fiona Hill and Nick Timothy have commanded a Fortress May,
resistant to advice, aggressive to the extent of upsetting colleagues
even members, and where reporting bad news is thought disloyal. The
whole reminiscent of the Nixon presidency rather than, say, Ronald
Reagan whose humor often deflected serious issues -- as when he
observed he wasn't worried about the deficit ... it's big enough to
take care of itself.
Shut out as
they were, colleagues left May to run the election campaign -- one of
the worst and notable only in her absence from public view. In
contrast, and to everyone's surprise, Labor leader Jeremy Corbyn ran
a superb campaign. He accepted the fact of Brexit including the
immigration restrictions to follow EU departure even though he had
been opposed to it.
He looked
ahead and focused on ways to help with jobs, housing, etc. As a
result the Labor Party, written off by some commentators as about to
disappear as a viable opposition, actually gained 32 seats, ousting
several government ministers in supposedly safe seats with
comfortable past majorities. His clearly left agenda prompted his
post-election claim, "We've changed the face of British
politics." The Labor Party's showing clearly strengthens the
grip of the left within it.
Meanwhile,
on the other side of the ocean, Donald Trump was entertaining a
leader from Europe. If a reader's thoughts fly to Emmanuel Macron the
new French president, it is perfectly logical. But no. It was
President Klaus Iohannis of Romania. They talked about the 2 percent
of GDP NATO defense spending guideline, which Mr. Trump insists on
labeling a 'contribution?' And Mr. Iohannis desired visa-free travel
to the U.S. for Romanians.
They talked
about NATO's Article 5 referring to common defense, which in
Romania's context can have only one meaning: The U.S. would come to
the aid of Romania in the event of a Russian attack. Not a soul in
the U.S. would support war with Russia (with a possibility of being
blown up) on Romania's behalf. Sad, but true, as the Hungarians
learned in 1956.
If Theresa
May has her troubles, so does Donald Trump. James Comey, the F.B.I.
Director he fired, has been testifying under oath before the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence and called him a liar. Lucky for
Trump, it is not so easy to remove an elected U.S. president as it is
to change a Conservative Party leader in Britain.
Source:
Comments
Post a Comment