Foreign Digest: Kenya, Somalia, Haiti, Hungary, Taliban, China, Israel-Hamas War

Kenya, Somalia and Haiti: The United States recently concluded a security agreement with Kenya, which is an ally versus al-Qaeda, the Islamist terrorist organization responsible for the deadliest terrorist attacks in history, namely the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks on America. Al-Qaeda’s most powerful affiliate is based in neighboring Somalia, from where it sometimes attacks Kenya. Also, Kenya will lead a police mission to Haiti, backed by the United States and the United Nations, versus armed gangs that effectively act as local governments independent of the State. The most powerful gang even makes demands on the Haitian government. Haiti, which is not a free country, has been even more unstable than usual since the assassination of its President two years ago. Hungary, Taliban and Communist China: Hungary, whose “illiberal” government is a darling of the Trumpist far-right in America, announced its intention to join Communist China’s Belt and Road Initiative. The new “Silk Road” initiative will increase Communist China’s influence through financing of infrastructure improvements abroad to increase trade. The Taliban militia that rules Afghanistan also is joining the initiative, although China, like the rest of the world, has not recognized the Taliban as the legitimate government of neighboring Afghanistan. The Taliban, which are intertwined with terrorists, provided safe haven to al-Qeada before being overthrown in 2002 by an American-led international coalition, but returned to power in 2021 after the disastrous Trump-Biden withdrawal. Israel-Hamas War: There was more international outrage against Israel for targeting a hospital that terrorists had turned into a military base, than against the Russian Federation for targeting multiple hospitals and aid workers in Syria against rebels who were not terrorists and who were not using hospitals as bases. Russia backs the tyrannical terrorist-sponsoring Syrian Assad regime in its twelve year-long civil war, as do terrorist-sponsoring Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shi’ite terrorist organization.

South African Has Lost Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi, Conservative Zulu Leader

South African conservatives have recently been mourning the death of Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi, the chief of the Zulu tribe and founder in 1975 of the center-right Inkatha Freedom Party. He had fought against the African National Congress during apartheid because it is a Marxist and violent organization that he rightly feared would dominate South African politics if Blacks were given the franchise, much as a leftist party has ruled neighboring Zimbabwe continuously since independence in 1980 through oppression and rigged elections. Although South Africa is somewhat free and conducts fair multi-party national and provincial elections, its parliamentary elections and most of its regional elections are effectively non-competitive, as the ANC, which governs nationally in a coalition with the Communist Party, easily wins a parliamentary majority in every election versus the fractured opposition, which represents various ethnicities and ranges across the political spectrum. The Inkatha Freedom Party holds some seats in both chambers of the South African Parliament and is the leading opposition party in KwaZulu-Natal Province, while the centrist Democratic alliance, which holds power in the Western Cape Province, which is majority white (Afrikaans and English), is the leading opposition party in the South African Parliament. Zulus are the second largest tribe in South Africa, while members of the Xhosa tribe are the majority of the national population. Just as the Inkatha Freedom Party supports regionalism and tribalism, there is also a secession movement in Western Cape. The pro-Russian ANC, which came to power in 1994, has had a history of corruption. A far-left party has similarly maintained rule in Namibia since South Africa granted it independence in 1990. It is hoped that Buthelezi’s memory would encourage more sharing of power in South Africa and Namibia.

Economic Stimulus to the American Economy from Defense Aid to Ukraine

A recent report recognized the economic stimulus being experienced in America from the defense aid being provided to Ukraine against the Russian aggression against it. Liberals see non-defense spending, no matter how wasteful or inefficient, as economically stimulative, but defense spending only as wasteful, as if somehow a dollar spent for defense, whether for the United States or our allies, is somehow unequal to that spent for non-defense matters. They also fail to recognize that spending for defense is not a choice against social spending, as defense spending includes food, clothing, housing, medical care, and education for active duty personnel and their dependents, as well as various benefits for retired military servicemen, including their pensions. In addition to liberals, libertarian and far-right isolationists view foreign military aid as spending money “over there,” as if the materials are manufactured abroad. Defense spending, including military aid to foreigners, and even the expense of engaging in combat abroad, is not primarily spent abroad, however, but domestically. Even servicemen’s combat pay is often saved or sent home. That foreign military aid or defense spending can be economically stimulative is not a justification for defense, let alone for war, but a refutation of the argument that it is as costly as critics claim. Defense spending and foreign military aid are justifiable alone as protection of security and liberty, without which prosperity would be unlikely. Not only do they fail to count both sides of the ledger by recognizing the economic stimulus of defense spending and foreign military aid or combat abroad, but anti-war critics also contradict themselves by complaining of the economic costs of war, but then also complain about the increase of trade after an enemy is replaced with an ally or the sharing in the post-war reconstruction contracts that mitigate such costs. Thus, they argue against war for its economic costs, but then oppose any war for its economic benefits, as if to imply falsely that any economic benefit derived from it was the only intent of the war, which would nonetheless contradict their argument against the costs of the war. As it is unlikely they are simply poor at math or consistent reasoning, it is believable that they oppose defending America or its ally or interests militarily because they think other means short of war are enough to thwart terrorists or aggressors, or because they minimize or even deny the threats to it, or they do not think America is worth defending. Thus, they exaggerate all costs and minimize all benefits. Defense spending and, especially, war, whether engaged in directly or indirectly, are certainly costly, but not as costly as critics think. Regardless of the fiscal and economic aspect, defending ourselves is certainly worth it for non-economic reasons, as President John F. Kennedy said in 1961 in his Inaugural Address, to “pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of liberty.”

Conservative Analysis of the 2023 General Elections in Pennsylvania and Across the Union

The 2023 General Elections in Pennsylvania and other States in the American Union was a disaster for Republicans, with few exceptions. As with previous elections, the GOP has been weighed down by its leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, Donald Trump, and by Trumpism, a populist mix of protectionism, isolationism and nativism, with tendencies in practice of dishonesty, disloyalty, corruption, authoritarianism and cruelty. Even though most Americans favor certain restrictions on abortion, the pro-life movement has been set back electorally since making a “deal with the Devil” to back someone of such low character and who is hostile to protecting innocent life in various other ways as Trump is, and allowing him to become the champion and chief spokesman of their cause, in addition to adopting an “any means necessary” strategy of deception, intimidation, illegal campaign activity and foreign interference to get him the party nomination and election to the presidency. Instead of seeing opposition to abortion as protecting the right to live of girls, whom are often targeted for abortion, and as offering women a choice to keep their babies, instead of being forced by men or by poverty to abort them, the pro-life movement has been undermined by association with Trump’s misogyny that makes it seem as if it against women’s interests. And his authoritarianism makes opposition to abortion appear as a restriction on women’s liberty instead of a defense of the most basic human right to life. As I have posted before, the pro-life movement should disassociate with Trump and Trumpism, focus not only in politics like liberals practice that seems to be based on winning elections just to appoint judges to rule in their favor, but focus more on the science of life, on love for the most vulnerable, and to continue to emphasize the support to women in difficult situations. Furthermore, they should favor more consistency in defending innocent life as a fundamental basis of freedom. The goal of the pro-life movement should be for a more loving, moral and free society, which, in turn, would be of political benefit to those who support them, which should only be a bonus, not the main goal.

Conservative Republicans Have Formed the Society for the Rule of Law against Trumpism

Another organization has been formed by anti-Trump conservative Republicans against Trumpism. Society for the Rule of Law was organized earlier this month to stand up for the rule of law against threats from Donald Trump and his supporters, and from Trumpism. It is led by a former federal appeals court judge who was a contender for a United States Supreme Court appointment and a former board member of the Federalist Society. The organizers of the Society for the Rule of Law lamented that the legal profession and particularly conservative organizations have failed to defend the rule of law as they have underestimated the degree of the threat or have allowed partisanship or ideology to take precedence over basic legal principles. The new organization hosted the Rule of Law summit last week in Washington, and has established a political arm and chapters on law school campuses. These lawyers have thus joined similar organized efforts or organizations by professional communities, such as defense and intelligence leaders, diplomats, and political consultants in opposing Trump and Trumpism. Trump, who is not conservative and is of poor character, has espoused a mixed set of populist views, namely protectionism, isolationism and nativism, coupled with the practice of dishonesty, disloyalty, corruption, authoritarianism and cruelty. Trump undermined the rule of law and independence of the judiciary while President and threatens even worse violations and erosions of checks and balances were he to return to power.

The 2023 General Election in Pennsylvania and Across America

Pennsylvania holds its 2023 General Election on Tuesday, November 7 for election to statewide judicial, county, magisterial district judge, municipal and school director offices. Some other States across America hold statewide or local elections. As usual, there are some true conservative candidates on the Republican ballot in Pennsylvania and other States or seeking election as write-in candidates and Trumpists, who believe in a populist mix of protectionism, nativism, isolationism, cruelty, and authoritarianism, as typified by Donald Trump, the dominant GOP figure, who is known for his deception, corruption, and disloyalty. Conservative Republicans, Democrats or those who are non-partisan, or third party should seek those candidates who publicly reject Trump and Trumpism, or else write in a preferred candidate. Conservatives should consider writing in themselves, if necessary. A second-best option that is not unreasonable, is to choose the least Trumpist candidate versus those who are the most Trumpist, but this approach fails to reject Trumpism as thoroughly as it must be for the Republican Party to be restored to its principles and thus match its platform. Republican candidates for these offices should be expected to stand for equality, liberty, limited government, honesty, fiscal responsibility, toughness on crime, and civic responsibility. There is at least one high-profile such candidate in the Keystone State, namely former Philadelphia City Councilman David Oh, who is seeking election as Mayor of the City of Brotherly Love. As the son of Korean immigrants, the pro-immigration Oh is especially hated by bigoted Trumpists who reject even refugees following the legal process of seeking asylum, in contrast to conservative principles of balancing security with welcoming those who most appreciate liberty and whose contributions to America are needed. There are also referendums on the ballot in some Pennsylvania municipalities, as is usual in other States. Polls are open in Pennsylvania from 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM.