Foreign Policy Issues Don’t Belong in Expenditure Bills, Not Even Defense Bills

The WSJ reports Defense Bill Slowed by Fights Over Uyghur, Nord Stream 2 Policy Amendments.

An annual defense-policy bill that typically passes Congress with broad bipartisan support has been slowed in the Senate by a handful of controversial policy issues regarding Russia and China, as well as the pressures of the year-end Senate calendar.

Amendments 

  • Sen. Jim Risch (R., Idaho) added a sanction against the owner of Nord Stream 2, a pipeline built to deliver Russian natural gas to Germany 
  • Sen. Bob Menendez (D., N.J.) also filed a Russia-sanctions amendment for the NDAA. His would allow the president to sanction Nord Stream 2 AG only if Russia initiates an invasion or overthrow of Ukraine.
  • Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) that language from the bipartisan Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act be added to the NDAA. That bill aims to ensure that products made by the forced labor of Uyghur Muslims, and others, in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, don’t enter the U.S. market.

Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act

Senate Democratic leaders don’t object to the substance of the Rubio amendment, but say that the language in the NDAA would violate the constitutional requirement that revenue measures originate in the House, not the Senate. 

I would like to see the exact wording because the amendment appears to have nothing to do with revenue. 

That’s not the key issue anyway.

Nord Stream 2

The Nord Stream 2 pipeline is completely finished despite Trump sanctions. Trump managed to delay not defeat the pipeline. 

In the process, Russian workers not EU workers completed the project, to the benefit of Russia.

The fundamental problem is that Nord Stream is an EU issue. The US has no business meddling. 

It is only because of the SWIFT payment system of routing money that the US can get away with such nonsense.

Once there is an easy way around the current payment system (hint central bank digital currencies), US ability to globally set sanctions will end, and that will be a good thing. 

Should We Accept There are Problems in the World the US Cannot Solve?

On November 19, I asked Should We Accept There are Problems in the World the US Cannot Solve?

Failure to correctly answer that question led to the US losing two wars. The first was Vietnam, the second in Afghanistan.

Neither was our issue and ultimately US voters turned against each war.

But problems go far beyond absurd wars based on lies.

Trump placed sanctions on Russia and European companies over Nord Stream 2. The result was that Nord Stream was completed anyway, by Russia with help from Merkel.

If Germany wants to cut a deal with Russia over natural gas, that’s their call, not ours. 

Whose battle is it?

Trump threatened to cut funding for NATO. He also said he would pull all troops from Afghanistan. 

He should have. But he was all talk and no show. 

We made a mess in the Ukraine by foolishly attempting to convert it into a NATO country.

The wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan speak for themselves. ISIS was a direct result of a foolish attack on Iraq.

None of this meddling ever did the US any good. 

Correct Focus

Whether a problem is solvable or not is actually not the correct focus.

Let’s state the issue in correct terms.

The EU and the US both need to admit there are problems beyond their control in which meddling is likely to make matters worse.

For starters, the US cannot afford to be the world’s policeman and should not even try.

The answers are obvious but don’t expect anyone to listen.

Thanks for Tuning In!

Like these reports? If so, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen.

Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

16 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
2 years ago
It’s a nice theory to think all would well if the US didn’t meddle and just got out of all these places. The truth would be quite different given the territorial expansion of Russia and China. It’s ashame to see Americans equivocating. We will realize this only when it’s too late and Russia and China are dividing up US states as territories. 
Webej
Webej
2 years ago
His would allow the president to sanction Nord Stream 2 AG only if Russia initiates an invasion or overthrow of Ukraine.
If there is a war in the Ukraine (Does Russia covet a hostile failed state?) there will be no energy flowing into Europe, the economic devastation would throw it back to a third world country, but then in the winter. NordStream will be the last thing anybody is worried about.
products made by the forced labor of Uyghur Muslims, and others, in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, don’t enter the U.S. market.
This would be a difficult condition to administer. What products came from slave hands, and which from regular Ughurs? There’s been about 140 delegations from seriously Muslim countries and organizations, and they have had a hard time finding the thousands of camps with millions of inmates, let alone lists of products made by various Uyghurs. Does Rubio really care about Uyghurs? Wouldn’t it be easier to form a pciture of products made in sweatshops by illegals in the American South?
Jmurr
Jmurr
2 years ago
Does the US really have any credibility on the human rights front given it’s continued participation in the Yemeni genocide. 
Jojo
Jojo
2 years ago
Reply to  Jmurr
This is nothing new.  I read an interesting first person account of someone who escaped from The Yemen war zone and got settled in the USA a couple of years back.  Very interesting story!
The Fox Hunt
A Refugee’s Memoir of Coming to America
by Mohammed Al Samawi
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
2 years ago
Interesting tidbit with regards to wealth inequality…..from 2016 to 2019, wealth inequality for the American middle class went DOWN  vs “the rich”.
In other words the wealth for those in the middle went UP more, proportional to  those in the top wealth echelon. Two times as much. This is not what most people think and say. Great report below.
link to img03.en25.com.pdf?utm_campaign=RIHA%20Housing%20Wealth%20Study%20-%2012-2-21&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua
The poor continued to lose ground, for the obvious reason that they don’t hold any assets that retain value,
Call_Me
Call_Me
2 years ago
Reply to  Eddie_T
In that particular 3-year window would it be fair to say that residential housing outperformed equities?  I think so, and Blackrock would likely agree.
Theorize that homeowners (or at least mortgage payers) who happen to be middle class have a disproportionate share of their ‘wealth’ in their home when compared to the upper class, so they would have a relatively greater increase in their personal ‘wealth’ during that time period and marginally closing the gap is not so surprising.  Of course in the end it’s just playing with statistics and numbers.  Shifting 1 year to 2017-2020 would probably produce a result more in line with the popular belief.
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
2 years ago
Reply to  Call_Me
I think 2020 would show the trend continued. Not sure how long it continues, I agree that housing is why.
Jojo
Jojo
2 years ago
I’ve long ranted that Congressional bills should be focused on a single subject, instead of the “kitchen sink” method they use.  This would make it easier to see what was included, what was excluded and would make the bills much smaller.
Of course, this will never happen.
Call_Me
Call_Me
2 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
It would be nice to have a singularly-focused legislation and bills with less than 25 pages of text.  Theoretically, it could happen.
Unfortunately, then all the pols would have to take a stance on individual  items and not be able to hide their support (objection) to something controversial by just voting for (against) it when it’s neatly tucked into a larger piece of unrelated legislation.
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
2 years ago
Once there is an easy way around the current payment system (hint central bank digital currencies), US ability to globally set sanctions will end, and that will be a good thing. 
But can it happen without the US and the Fed being onboard? I think this might be what is holding up the switch to using crypto for settlement. It  hurts the US politically, and it hurts the dollar.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
2 years ago
Reply to  Eddie_T
Some countries are already clearly doing this. China for example does plenty of business with Iran by going around the current payment system. Russia does the same.
More and more countries are going to want to escape being under the US’s thumb on the payment systems. So it’s going to happen sooner or later regardless of what the US wants. I’m with Mish, the sooner the better because it means less US meddling around the world which should overall be a good thing for the US and the rest of the world.
Mish
Mish
2 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
I expect the EU will beat the US to this. 
They have far more reasons, Nord Stream and Iran being two of them. 
The EU disagreed with Trump’s sanctions on Iran but could not get around Swift.
Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear
2 years ago
For transactions so large as the Nordstream2, Germany could pay with semiconductor chips, automobiles, airplanes, or even gold.
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
2 years ago
Reply to  Six000mileyear
The issue is not payment from Germany the country to Russia the country. But rather that Western companies and individuals are afraid to be sanctioned on account of involvement in the project. Which sucks for them, but is hardly a crippling problem overall, since Russian companies can just do the work instead, as they just did. With German labor, even.
IOW, dependence on a country whose junta likes to pretend to be the world’s policeman, but in reality is just the world’s burglar and highway robber, sucks. And is a problem which it behoves the world to find a workaround for. The quicker they do so, the better off the world will be.
Mish
Mish
2 years ago
Reply to  Six000mileyear
The sanctions are against companies. They fear US retaliation. 
And payment in gold first involves buying gold, and going through Swift to do so.
Mish
Mish
2 years ago
Reply to  Mish
Iran does barter to evade SWIFT – but China is one of few countries willing to do so. 

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.