When the system strikes back
20 May 2017
Republican billionaire Donald Trump’s anti-establishment outlook
and rhetoric helped him secure the much-coveted US presidency. He was
derisively described by his political rivals prior to the polls as an
anti-establishment outsider surrounded by some like-minded wags. That
label stuck. Paradoxical as it may sound, such criticism stood him in
good stead thanks to the disillusionment of many Americans with the
establishment which had thrown up several leaders who could not live up
to their expectations. Trump has since lived up to his ‘reputation’!
President
Trump may have thought he had triumphed over the establishment
decisively, but the unforeseen difficulties he has had to face since
his inauguration a few months ago show that the establishment has struck
back with might and main. Did he underestimate his pro-establishment
enemies who are all out to make life miserable for him? He sought to
bulldoze his way through from the word go. His rule began with the
sacking of an acting Attorney General, who refused to endorse his
draconian travel ban which affected predominantly Muslim nations. Then
he unceremoniously sacked an FBI Director. He went on the offensive.
But, his rivals have regrouped; the establishment has put him on the
defensive.
President Trump stands accused of having asked
FBI Director James Comey, whom he subsequently sacked, to hush up a
probe into his former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s
associations with Russia. Such action amounts to the obstruction of
justice, undermining the rule of law and abuse of power—all impeachable
offences—which won’t go unnoticed by the irate Democrats. It is being
argued that President Trump has the power to terminate the aforesaid
investigation without anyone else’s assistance, but that fact cannot be
cited in extenuation of what Comey accuses him of having done. Besides,
Trump’s critics claim he has revealed highly sensitive, classified
information, which was passed on to Russians. This is also a very
serious allegation which, if proved, could cost him dear politically.
It may be recalled that one of the reasons for the impeachment of South
Korean President Park Geun-hye was the allegation that she had given
one of her confidantes access to classified government information.
Nothing
would have been more worrisome for Trump than the appointment of
ex-FBI Director Robert Mueller as a special counsel in charge of a
government probe into his White House team’s alleged Russian links. This
has been a very adroit move on the part of his political enemies to
unsettle him. Ironically, Trump’s critics claim Russians influenced the
polls in his favour through cyber means. He has vehemently denied the
charge. So has the Kremlin but to no avail. He has had to face a probe.
The
US, which has taken on Russia for meddling with its elections, has a
history of engineering the downfall of many a foreign regime perceived
to be hostile to it. Some of the US-backed regime change operations
have plunged the targeted countries into bloodbaths. Chile is a case in
point. In Libya, too, it backed an army of bloodthirsty terrorists,
euphemistically described as militant groups, who captured power and
executed President Muammar Gaddafi in a savage manner. The then US
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton even exulted over the brutal killing
of Gaddafi. As for interfering in the electoral affairs of other
countries, one may wonder whether Russia has beaten Uncle Sam at his
own game.
Trump’s kneejerk reaction to the high-level probe
into the alleged Russian connection has been to play the victim. He
lost no time in playing the sympathy card on twitter: "This is the
single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history!" (We
thought politicians had to face witch hunts only in the developing
world!) He may be able to retain the sympathy of his optimistic
backers, but his enemies are not likely to relent in their efforts to
see the back of the ‘anti-establishment outsider’.
No comments:
Post a Comment