This is a critical week for the Trump administration. The debate to pass tax reform is in motion, and the Senate will vote on it momentarily.

There are a few Republican outliers who are threatening to vote against the bill. Republicans hold 52 seats in the Senate, and the vice president will settle a tie. Therefore Republicans can only lose two votes for the bill to pass.

The potential no votes are motivated by a few different issues. Most importantly they include the impact of tax reform on the budget and the national debt. Other concerns are an increase in uninsured Americas that will occur if the Obamacare mandate is eliminated, the temporary nature of the middle class tax cuts and a desire to increase tax benefits to small businesses. This essay will examine the budget issue.

Two senators are particularly focused on the cost of tax reform and the implications of this on our nation’s debt. Proponents of the bill say the $1.7 trillion price tag will be mitigated by, among other things, growth in the economy. Supposedly lowering tax rates for middle class Americans along with lowering tax rates for corporations will strengthen our economy. If all this comes to pass, it will increase the amount of taxes collected by the federal government as individual salaries and business profits grow.

Evidence shows that the nation’s economic growth has increased since Trump took office. And Americans are more confident economically. Holiday season retail sales have been very strong.

But will the economy continue to grow rapidly with tax reform and how will this impact interest rates and inflation? No one really knows the answers to these questions, but economic growth will be critical to our nation’s health moving forward assuming any scenario.

Regardless of whether tax reform passes, the only way that the nation’s debt will improve is if tax revenues increase from economic prosperity, tax revenues increase from higher tax rates and/or entitlement reductions.

No politician has the courage to tell the American public that if all things remain the same, Medicare, Medicaid and Welfare will bankrupt the country, so I will say it. It would be political suicide for a candidate to suggest a delay in Medicare payments, conditions for Medicaid or work in exchange for welfare. So, the issue of overspending in these areas will continue to increase at a breathtaking pace.

At some point it is likely that our president and lawmakers will need to cut back entitlements. This will evoke cries of unfairness and even bigotry from the left. The mantra of the left has always centered on the well-being of the lower classes. For decades overspending and growing welfare has not abated. At some point the nation will be unable to meet its obligations without significantly increasing borrowings to dangerous levels.

It is an understatement to say that economic growth is an important element of tax reform. It is critical to our nation in any case. Without more growth in tax revenues our leaders will be forced to resort to Machiavellian actions relating to spending in spite of liberal objections.

The tax reform proposals are not perfect but they will do one thing that is critical to our national financial strength. They will increase economic growth, which will ultimately increase taxes collected by the federal government.

 

For many years my family has taken Thanksgiving trips to warm places in the Caribbean. It’s a massive undertaking involving about 30 people who come together from their homes and colleges around the country.

This year our plans were dashed because of hurricane damage. As an alternative the group traveled to a country resort in Vermont.

Many of the attendees were skeptical about the change in venue. In a tropical setting most of our time is spent on the beach or around the pool basking in the warm sunshine. This year we found ourselves in a much chillier environment.

The patriarch and matriarch of the family, after conferring with several other members of the family, decided to include two community service activities on our agenda. The reception by the attendees was tepid at first.

At one event we served a meal to a community of churchgoers. A free turkey dinner with all the fixings was available to anyone in the local area. The crowd included many elderly couples and a few families had young children. It was an opportunity for them to dodge the cost and hassle of preparing a dinner in their own homes. A side benefit was the time spent with their neighbors.

The event was anything but fancy as food was served on paper plates and drinks in plastic cups. Nevertheless the diners and the priest who led this flock were really grateful.

The other community service project was a bit more traditional and beneficial to people in need. We went to a Habitat for Humanity site and spent the day building a house and associated infrastructure that would service it.

Each member of our crew was given a job that frankly no one had any experience doing heretofore. We nailed aluminum siding on a house, put up sheet rock and prepared the sidewalks for a delivery of cement. It was tedious and backbreaking work. For one thing it gave us a sense of the daily grind of construction workers as they build and maintain America.

The most important thing was that three generations in our family worked together in a way that helped those less fortunate. These experiences were beneficial to all, young and old. And they were in the spirit of the holiday season, during which commercialism and gifting often masks the true meaning of Thanksgiving, Christmas, Chanukah and Kwanzaa.

Eating turkey, watching football and being with family are important. Giving something back to the community was priceless.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that the resort was located near an area that had many outlet stores. The bargains were amazing and most of us took home more clothes than we arrived with.

Social media usage has reached epic levels in our society. Every second of every day millions of people worldwide are publishing information about their lives. The most striking thing is that millions of other people are reading and commenting on these posts.

President Trump is an active social media buff. He attacks and counter attacks others with tweets much to the dismay of his staff and many Americans. In fact many say that the president is abusing this means of communication right along with his fellow Americans.

What are the symptoms of abuse? Is social media usage becoming an obsession rivaling alcohol and sexual abuse? Will entrepreneurial psychologists and psychiatrists open clinics someday to help people addicted to social media? I think it’s likely.

This is how I would define social media abuse? If you need to be connected 24 hours a day to ensure you never miss an “important” text, your are hooked. It means that when you are driving a car, you must stay online to respond to developments in your community of friends even if the odds of getting into an accident increases exponentially. If you are unable to complete your work on the job because of constant social media devise usage, you are hooked.  If you endanger others because you are online (while caring for children, for instance), you are hooked. If you cannot sit through a meal with family or friends without resorting to your social media devise, you are hooked.

How might your family, friends and business associates respond to your abusive use of social media? At home, your mother, father, siblings, partner or children may begin to feel you don’t care about them. They might indicate that you are detached and spending far too much time texting.

At work, your supervisors might object to the amount of time that you spend online rather than working and earning your salary.

In social situations, the friends you are sitting with might object to the attention you are giving to other friends who are not present.

The benefits of social media have been documented countless times. The cellphone is an important means of communication these days. If you have a problem, a flat tire, injure yourself, witness a crime or your children need help, the cell can be a lifesaver. It’s the social aspect of it that’s beginning rub some the wrong way.

My question is how much of social media is a waste of time? I’m referring to both ends of a post. You have a texter at a restaurant eating a great meal. Is anyone really interested in seeing a picture of the steak he is about to dig into? I suppose so, if the food is extraordinary for some reason, a picture text might be nice.

If you wake up in the morning and you are happy or sad, are your contacts really interested in an essay about your state of mind? Not I.

And heaven forbid that your friends don’t click “like” on a post. It would be an insult and reason for you to not click “like” the next time the offender posts an item, which will likely be less than ten minutes later.

Another inane activity is collecting contacts. Just because someone agrees to be a text pal does not mean they are  your friend and interested in your stupid and idiotic posts . The number of people in a contact list is not indicative of one’s popularity.

Parents have enabled their children at young ages to become abusive users of social media taking away time for school work, reading, family time and face to face social interaction. Many young people have become idiot savants, experts at communicating via social media and incapable of living their lives.

What’s the solution to this growing problem? There is no way to stem the tide of social media. It’s already baked into our society. We must be diligent with our children and each other. In social settings, like the theater, in classrooms and at religious ceremonies phones should be turned off.

And then there are the risks affiliated with privacy  that are beginning to get the attention of our government. It’s unwise to pour your heart out on social media. There are more than a few creeps trolling the airwaves looking for ways to cheat and torment innocent people that say too much about their private lives.

I suppose it’s going to be difficult to manage this process given that the president of the United States is hooked on social media.

 

As an addendum to my blog about the last four presidents, I offer this list of issues that have not been adequately addressed during the past 25 years and need immediate attention. Past presidents have kicked many problems down the road.

They have accumulated and made America vulnerable. Given President Trump’s relationship with lawmakers it is unlikely that he will make a significant impact on these items.

• The US infrastructure must be revamped. Our roadways, bridges and tunnels are falling apart. This monstrous project will be extraordinarily expensive, but it must be done. On the positive side appropriations by Congress to do this work will dramatically increase the number of high paying jobs across the country.
• Our national debt and the budget are not being managed properly. At some point a president and his Congress must exhibit the courage to address “sacred cow” entitlement such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid that are dragging our nation towards bankruptcy.
• Immigration policies have created havoc throughout the country. America can no longer afford to have an “open door” policy. Up to 20 million people from the south have entered the country illegally. They have drained the country of tremendous resources. (Note: The writer is not suggesting that illegal aliens be expelled from the country. Rather he wants to stop any increase in the number.) Further, immigration from other countries with no records of their citizens should cease. If we cannot vet applicants, we should not allow them into the country. The passage of time alone is not a good vetting standard.
• The welfare class in America is growing because our government is not doing anything to encourage less fortunate people to support themselves and their families. Welfare has enabled millions of Americans to become totally dependent on others. Issuing checks without any conditions is bad public policy. The solution is simple: every able-body person in the country must work to receive assistance. Our government has to guarantee employment for everyone and demand they participate. The infirmed and children should be excluded from this new system.
• Social media fanaticism is has become a serious issue. People waste hours each day, at work and during leisure time, on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and numerous other sites reading nonsense published by their friends and total strangers. Further, people walk around the streets of the city like zombies bumping into others and into intersections while reading some incredibly important texts from friends. The two most asinine transgressions are texting while driving, which is supposed to be illegal, and being on a phone while caring for a child. I am not proposing to stop the high tech tsunami, but it needs government regulation.
• Income inequality continues to grow in America. The financial condition of many Americans is stagnating or worsening while the wealth of the affluent increases. Liberals have adopted a “Robin Hood” perspective relating to this social phenomenon. Over-taxation of the rich and giving to the poor is bad public policy. It discriminates against one class of people and is unfair. A better strategy is one where all classes of people rise together. This can only happen during positive economic conditions. When America is blessed with good times, lower socioeconomic workers should benefit along with stockholders. Corporations, large and small, should adopt this approach voluntarily and share the wealth.
• Isolation of our country is a dangerous policy. We must continue to accept the fact that our leadership throughout the world is based on our ability to trade with everyone and to protect allies with our military strength. Trump’s backlash to previous arrangements, where the US was subjected to unfair commercial arrangements and one-sided military deployments, will serve us well. Other developed nations must contribute to the well being of the less fortunate along with the US.
• Domestic crime and domestic terrorism are just as important as international terrorism. The risk of domestic violence is far greater than crime by international interlopers. The stand off between gun advocates and those that want more gun control should not prevent the country from trying to end the senseless killing of Americans. Common sense restrictions, not anything that limits the rights of law-abiding citizens to own guns, should be undertaken immediately. The threat of one more death of a friend or neighbor should drive us to make changes that decrease the odds of violence.
• Fringe groups are popping up across the country. Most are violent and bigoted. Dissatisfaction with our government, poverty and a proliferation of weapons is exacerbating this problem. On the one hand we need to be sensitive to the problems of these citizens. On the other hand we need to crush any groups that are not obeying our laws.
• The US must facilitate peace in the Middle East. The issues that continue to rake on the people of this region are primarily religious. The thousand-year standoff between Sunnis and Shiite is not dissipating. It is getting worse and more violent, and now the development of nuclear weapons by some nations is making matters even more disconcerting. Ever since World War II US presidents have failed repeatedly to make the warring factions come to terms. The establishment of the State of Israel only made problems that much more contentious. US diplomats must work even more diligently to stop the violence because it has and will continue to spread to other places, like the US, if it is not addressed.
• Congress needs a complete makeover. The old guard in our legislative branch needs to retire and make way for new Republicans and Democrats that are willing to work with each other. A two-party political system is best for our country, but we may gravitate towards the domination of one party if things do not change soon. Average citizens should be able to have conversations with each other that do not end in screaming matches, or worse, violence. Free speech should be encouraged so everyone is heard without the threat of condemnation or physical harm.
• Populism and nationalism taken to an extreme can destroy us. Our leaders must be sensitive to the fact that democracy is not the best form of government for some other countries for a plethora of reasons. The time that populist and nationalistic feelings are most on display is during elections. American voters should reject candidates who espouse or suggest violence. They should also reject politicians who encourage a schism between the various parts of our society.
• Everyone should vote.

 

The aforementioned will be a daunting challenge for our leaders and lawmakers. Americans should demand more from those we elect, and we should insist that they execute in a congenial manner.

 

 

The toxic environment in Washington has permeated the entire country. A plethora of reasons are responsible for the declining overall sentiment in America. Our problems have been exacerbated by many factors that are rooted in politics, culture and finance. But the primary cause of our current dilemma is ineffective leadership during the last quarter century.

The previous four presidents have been woefully unsuccessful in many ways. Bill Clinton had the advantage of serving during a time of economic prosperity. His advocates often attribute these good times to Clinton’s leadership skills. This is a fallacy. The nation was on a recovery trajectory that had nothing to do with Clinton’s agenda. Clinton is certainly a charismatic individual with great political skills, but he rode a wave of economic success that was a product of his predecessors and good fortune.

What is more apropos to this conversation is the political turmoil that Clinton and his wife created during his time in office. The integrity of his presidency was questioned because of Clintons’ dubious character that ultimately resulted in his impeachment. This episode was the beginning of an era of personal attacks between hacks in both parties that continues to this day.

George W. Bush had to deal with the 9/11 attacks, which he did very well according to most accounts. The most significant threat to our homeland ever brought the nation together. Fighting terrorism that emanated from the Middle East was the most important issue of the time.

All this led to controversial wars with Iraq and Afghanistan that are still dogging us to this day. Critics say the Iraq conflict was not righteous and based upon questionable intelligence. The gains that Bush enjoyed initially in his presidency were offset by extended and mismanaged efforts to rebuild what the American military destroyed. Too many lives were lost in the process.

America then opted for Barack Obama. Of note is the inexperience of the new president. Frankly he was totally unqualified to rise to the most powerful position in the world. Right out of the box he put tremendous political and financial pressure on the country by ramrodding Obamacare through Congress with not one vote from the opposition.

This expensive and bold initiative was a noble attempt to give every American affordable health care and to reduce health care costs across the nation. The execution of the entitlement was an unmitigated disaster and the objectives of the plan never panned out. The $2 trillion plus price tag on Obamacare together with the costs affiliated with two wars in the Middle East severely impacted our country’s financial security. A great recession ensued.

Obama employed liberal populist dogma to solidify his base. The result was a great divide between the classes. He derided American exceptionalism and denigrated the most successful among us. This group, he said, does not pay its “fair share” and is stealing money from the lower and middle classes.

Internationally America lost all credibility under the inept leadership of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. Her claim to fame was an enormous accumulation of miles travelled.

Obama ruled with mandates because his lack of political skills and desire to destroy his opponents made it impossible to enact any meaningful legislation. So bad were his political instincts that he lost both houses shortly after being elected in 2008. The bad feelings he inspired across the aisle made it impossible to have a successful tenure and set the stage for Hillary Clinton’s crushing defeat in 2016.

A lot of people are very supportive of Donald Trump’s agenda. Unfortunately his personality has made it impossible for him to achieve any meaningful success after one year in office. He outfoxed Hillary and the Democrats, and the latter two felt cheated in the election. It was a dirty campaign that Trump won because Clinton made bonehead decisions at every turn.

Trump is impossible to like. Yet his firebrand right wing populism carried the day. But how was he to predict that traitors in his party would sabotage his efforts to keep his campaign promises? He knew Democrats would fight with him tooth and nail.

The current state of play revolves around tax reform, Trump’s last chance for redemption. To be successful he needs to navigate through growing anti-Trump sentiment in Congress and a liberal media that has legitimized the concept of “fake news.”

The nagging insistence that Trump colluded with Russia in the elections just won’t end in spite of no tangible evidence it actually took place. In fact the Clinton campaign seems to have been more involved with Russians than Trump minions.

The extent of bad feelings in Washington was best exhibited by questioning of Attorney General Jeff Sessions by Democrats yesterday. They demanded that Sessions admit he committed perjury, which he denied numerous times during the hearing. Democrat lawmakers were embarrassingly nasty and unprofessional. Even a former congressperson is not immune to the disgraceful and insulting way that people are questioned in these hearings. Frankly most of the questions were repeated over and over again as if asking them ten times would result in a different answer. I hope the constituents of these interrogators were watching yesterday. They were given many reasons not to vote for these incompetent buffoons.

The bottom line is that Trump will have to fight for every victory. The venom and lack of comity is sinful and will make Washington totally ineffective for the foreseeable future. Personal attacks are now more important than governance. The swamp has never been more dangerous and unproductive.

 

The sexual harassment revolution is picking up more steam every day. Women are coming out of the woodwork accusing men of abuses from decades past. Up to now most of the accusations have been directed at famous men in entertainment, politics, journalism and business. One wonders whether lesser known men will soon be exposed for major and minor acts that occurred many years ago.

Several things are striking about revelations during the past few months. One has to do with the limits imposed by the statute of limitations. Limits for sexual assault differ between states and certain kinds of acts. Twenty-seven states have some form of DNA exemption that extends the time for prosecuting an offense indefinitely. For instance New York has no limit for rape, criminal sexual acts, aggravated sexual abuse and sexual conduct against a child. Other offenses have a limit of 5 years.

Hardcore abusers should have no time limitations. But what about less serious acts, such as the use of foul language and verbal harassment? These types of offenses have limits in some states. But today, with the advent of social media, abusers could be accused of minor offenses even though they cannot be prosecuted. Public opinion could severely impact minor abusers and result in devastating effects on their lives and livelihood. To be clear this would include actions such as a misstep at an office party that happened many years earlier.

[Writer’s Note: the types of abuse we read about in the press are beyond the pale and deserve serious repercussions that include loss of freedom and fortune.]

A second observation is that a number of men have lost their livelihoods, financial supporters, movie deals and such without due process. It should be noted that some of the accused have fessed up and admitted wrongdoing. Political correctness demands that “accused” abusers no longer be affiliated with corporate sponsors who have been quick to react even in situations where the accused have pleaded innocent.

And then there is “he said, she said.” Today, if a woman says a man did something improper while they were alone, the man’s denial means next to nothing. It is an alleged crime between two people who were alone, and one of them is guilty until proven innocent. Even if the evidence ultimately proves the man did nothing wrong, the stigma of the accusation could have a devastating impact on his life.

Frankly no one is losing sleep over the treatment of the sleaze balls we read about in the tabloids. They deserve to be emasculated professionally and financially. The problem is that the tables have been turned relating to sexual abuse. The women who say they were abused have all the power of society, if not the law, to destroy the accused. Once accused, a man’s life is changed forever, especially if the story appears in the press or on the Internet.

Another issue is that abuse has not been graded by our legal system. When a murder is committed it could be manslaughter, second degree or first degree. These crimes all have different punishments. Sexual abuse missteps need further delineation identifying serious and less serious crimes.

How will all these accusations change the way that men and women meet and fall in love? Seems to me that initial contact and the first intimate experience are high-risk moments for the man. Do we need legal documents before a couple goes out on a date and before they are intimate?

Whatever transpires in the future regarding this topic, I, for one, am supportive of new laws that protect women.

Gun control is one of the most contentious issues in the US. The ownership of weapons for hunting and personal protection is clearly endorsed by the Constitution. Therefore the possibility that gun ownership will be outlawed in the future is nil.

Yet the prevalence of guns in America is quite remarkable. The New York Times published a piece that is very anti-gun. Nevertheless some of the statistics in the story could lead one to believe that the sheer number of guns in the country accounts for higher rates of death.

[Note: This piece is not meant to be an anti-gun statement. Rather it is presented to others for discussion purposes. One important assumption made by the writer is that the statistics presented by the Times are accurate and not intentionally tilted.]

Consider the following comments made in the aforementioned piece:

• The US has 270 million guns and had 90 mass shooters from 1966 to 2012.
• No other country has more than 46 million guns or 18 mass shooters during the same period.
• Americans make up about 4.4% of the world’s population, but own 42% of the guns in the world.
• From 1966-2002, 31% of gunmen in mass shootings were Americans.
• Only Yemen has a higher rate of mass shootings among countries with more than 10 million people.
• America’s gun homicide rate was 33 per million in 2009, far exceeding the average among developed countries.
• In Canada and Britain, the gun homicide rates were 5 per million and 0.7 per million, respectively.
• A New Yorker is just as likely to be robbed as a Londoner, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process.
• In 2013, American gun-related deaths included 21,175 suicides, 11,208 homicides and 505 by accidental discharge
• An American is about 300 times more likely to die by gun homicide than a Japanese person.

All these factoids are not a reason to radically change gun control laws. Rather they should impel Americans to reconsider common sensible changes to laws that just might decrease the number of deaths in America caused by guns.

The first issue that comes to mind is the shear number of weapons in this country. Less availability of guns could decrease the number of deaths. The odds favor this outcome.

A strict and highly enforced law against gun ownership by mentally ill people makes sense. In Texas a breakdown of the current system of notifications enabled a crazed person to buy weapons and kill innocent people.

The availability of semi-automatic and automatic weapons definitely makes it easier for a killer to murder others. They should be banned.

Magazines that hold large numbers of bullets should also be banned. Once again they only result in more deaths.

I am for gun ownership. The Constitution indicates that I have a right to own a weapon. But common sense should guide us in this important debate.

Who are the most partisan and disruptive people in Washington? The list is a long one.

Most Americans are disgusted with the partisan shroud over our government. The situation has gotten so bad that just about everyone is sickened by our un-presidential president, and our lawmakers who are unable to legislate.

Donald Trump deserves a great deal of responsibility for the environment in our nation’s capital. He’s an angry man who believes Washington is a swamp populated by corrupt and contemptible people.

Hillary Clinton (a.k.a. Crooked Hillary) has been his favorite target before and after the election. He infuriates his enemies by conferring on them denigrating nicknames alluding to their ethics, physical stature or inability to perform their jobs. This playground commentary directed at our country’s leaders and lawmakers has poisoned the well.

When Trump outs a poor performer or any person who opposes him, he does it with venom. He truly hates others who are unwilling to bow to his wishes. If America was a totalitarian state and Trump was the governing despot, he would have purged scores of people to solidify his rule. But we are a democracy, and the president must work with Congress and represent every American.

It may seem trite, but when the electorate spurns politician, they really should retire and allow the winners to do their jobs. Hillary Clinton continues to disrupt the country without any standing.

She resents the fact that Barack Obama and Donald Trump stole the presidency from her. Why did this happen? For one thing Hillary is not Bill. The latter was a masterful politician. He was able to stay in power and retain his presidency after being humiliated and impeached as a liar.

Hillary made many errors during her campaign and refused to fess up to any of them. She continues to be dogged by accusations of scandals every day. And Hillary attributes her pathetic political performance to incompetent people who worked for her and the far right.

Frankly it’s time for Hilary to go away and can her sanctimonious whining about achieving her destiny. In 2008 the voters wanted a fresh face, so Obama won. In 2016 the country wanted change, so Trump won.

The GOP caucus in Congress deserves special mention for its disloyalty and naivety about the operation of American government. Led by upstarts who believe they can effect change in Washington on their own, certain lawmakers defy their party. For some reason they do not appreciate that power in America lies with the majority. If you have more votes in Congress, you drive the agenda and you enact the laws.

These rebels, in effect, seceded from the Republican Party and make it impossible for it to impose traditional ideology. The majority has essentially been lost. Savvy lawmakers would have accepted compromise with fellow Republicans, kept their powder dry for another day and solidified their party’s power base. But these outliers have made the Trump agenda unattainable.

The Democratic Party deserves special mention for doing their part in making our government impotent. The opposition needs to protect the country from tyranny by the party in power. This is an important and noble role. However being completely uncooperative regarding legislation of any kind just to embarrass the president is downright un-American.

Instead of obstructing all legislation, Democrats would have been better served by cooperating on bills that are important to the country. Democrats built their case against Republicans. If you hate Trump, we are your party.

Almost never do Democrats offer alternative legislation that has any chance of stimulating bipartisanship. They are a party with no ideas, no exciting leaders and no chance of making progress while Republicans are shackled by the craziness of the Trump administration. 2018 and 2020 should be moments when Democrats make gains. It’s not gong to happen.

And finally there are the lobbyists. Many ex-politicians populate this group. They have become too disruptive. They corrupt our leaders and lawmakers. The president and Congress should be working towards decreasing the influence of lobbyists so that our country can move forward without undue interference. This group and all their special interests make wide-ranging legislation impossible.

The impediments to great government in Washington are overwhelming. Ego and power have superseded patriotism. Remember term limits? We should have them and turn over Congress periodically.

President Trump has embarked on the most important foreign relations trip of his tenure. Of note are his visits to South Korea, Japan and China. The principle issues that will be addressed are the continuing belligerence of North Korea and threats by Trump directed towards the country.

The perspectives of the countries mentioned above and the US are all important in the search for peace in this part of the world.

Let’s begin with South Korea. It is surrounded by China and North Korea. In response to this, the country has relied upon its relationship with the US for protection. Nevertheless South Korea is a major trading partner of China. In recent days it has conducted negotiations with China in an effort to gain its support and assurances regarding North Korea. The relationship with China has always been strained by the military partnership South Korea has with the US.

The most important issue for South Korea is to avoid war. Even though the country is vastly superior to its evil twin to the north, South Korean leaders understand that a war will devastate their country. Seoul, its capital, is just a few miles from the border with North Korea and threatened by heavy artillery and many soldiers. South Korea will be a big loser in a US/North Korean conflict, so it must do everything possible to prevent it.

North Korea’s Kim Jong-un wants global recognition. The only way to achieve this goal, in Kim’s mind, is to develop a nuclear capability. Without it North Korea has no status and very few allies. Its military strength could give it a seat at any negotiating table.

You might be asking yourself how we have reached this critical moment. Years of appeasement by China and the US have paved the way for Kim and his predecessors to build a formidable military presence that includes nuclear weapons. Not only is North Korea on the verge of developing such a weapon with an ability to strike targets hundreds and even thousands of miles away, it also amassed a huge army, and stationed powerful conventional weapons on its border with South Korea.

Why did China enable North Korea all these years? The existence of two Koreas has afforded China a sense of security, a buffer between it and the democratic world. Chinese leaders have studied the unification of Germany and concluded that a similar fate for Korea would favor a new democratic state with a strong US military presence on its southeastern border. The US already has thousands of troops and armaments in South Korea along with a considerable naval presence in Asia. China wants to preserve this buffer at all costs and discourage immigration from North Korea into China.

Why didn’t previous administrations effectively deal with the growing nuclear threat from North Korea? Frankly they kicked the can down the road never thinking that Kim would ever have the ability to launch a missile thousands of miles and threaten the US homeland.

It is questionable why China considers the US a greater existential threat than Kim. Xi of China seemingly has a relaxed attitude about the presence of a madman at his front door, as opposed to a unified, peaceful and free nation. Chinese leadership thinks that war with the US is a greater possibility than problems caused by Kim threatening South Korea, Japan and the US with nukes.

What is the Chinese endgame? Unification of Korea led from the south is a non-starter because of the strong military alliance between South Korea and the US, although this has been strained in recent months. China similarly does not want further increases in missile defense systems throughout South Korea.

The actions of China may become more confrontational with the US, or more receptive to a lasting deal that leads to the denuclearization of North Korea. Xi has been elevated to a status equal to Mao during the recent party meetings in his country. His power is unlimited and uncontested after he purged all potential challengers. He is in a position to make bold moves at this time.

One last issue that is worrisome to China is the migration of North Koreans into China for any reason. For sure this would accelerate if violence were to occur. China is a closed society and does not want more mouths to feed.

The US has one primary objective. It is to protect our homeland and our allies, South Korea and Japan, from a nuclear attack by North Korea. The only sure fire way to accomplish this is denuclearization. This possibility is remote unless China demands it or the US attacks North Korea and China stands by and allows it happen.

Trump and the US are in a very tenuous position. Are threats empty like those for 70 years? Or will the president increase tensions? This game of chicken could become deadly in the months to come.

As discussed several times on this site, it is unknown how close Kim is to having a nuclear weapon that can reach US territory accurately. Once he has this capability war could become inevitable.

On the other hand China maybe in a position to intercede. It will not turn away and allow the US to obliterate North Korea unless the latter initiates a conflict. Xi’s relaxed perspective could change dramatically based upon the conversations he will have with Trump in the next few days.