by Daniel Nardini
U.S. President Donald Trump gave a powerful speech on the evils of socialism and on those countries that practice it. The three countries he named are Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela. He especially singled out North Korea and warned that it would face “total destruction” if it kept carrying out its current provocations. He just as much condemned Cuba for its lack of democracy and Venezuela for its growing socialist dictatorship. Trump made it clear that socialism has caused nothing but death, destruction and ruin for tens of millions of people.
Personally, I agree with that assessment. Nothing socialism has done or touched has ever turned out positive. However, there are three countries that Trump seemed to have left out. They are China, Laos and Vietnam. Laos is of no consequence to the United States, and is more of an ally of China which is why Trump did not bother. Trump did not touch China because that one is a little more complicated in American foreign policy. It is largely due to the economic and trade connections between the United States and China. True, the Chinese government implemented market reforms to keep the country from falling apart, and it allows things that North Korea and Venezuela do not—some freedom of movement and the ability to travel outside the country. But China has an abysmal human rights record, an equally abysmal record on how it treats workers in its own country, a secret security apparatus, and a huge slave labor camp prison system. Freedom of the press and religion are non-existent, and the Chinese military has been making threatening moves in the South China and even East China seas.
Vietnam is very similar to China. It has an abysmal human rights record, an equally abysmal record on how it treats its workers, a powerful secret security apparatus, and a slave labor camp prison system. Like China, it has conducted free market reforms and allows some freedom of movement and the ability to let its citizens travel outside the country. But it is the odd man out in the Communist world, and while it tries to get along with the other Communist and socialist countries, its relationship with China is very prickly. Hence, it is trying to establish a better relationship with the United States so that the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (as it is officially called) can obtain badly needed military weaponry, military advisers, and possibly a military alliance with other countries and especially with the United States. A military alliance is especially not so easily forthcoming because of Vietnam’s contradictory Communist government and its “socialist” values compared to the United States. This is pretty much where things are. These three socialist countries have not been mentioned because it is not in the U.S. government’s national interest to include them in a list of enemy states. The question I have to ask is are these states in the United States’ national best interests? Would they be on our side if there is a conflict? Socialism may be bad, but politics and geographic advantages make for strange bedfellows.
What Trump Left Out of His UN Speech
by Daniel Nardini
U.S. President Donald Trump gave a powerful speech on the evils of socialism and on those countries that practice it. The three countries he named are Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela. He especially singled out North Korea and warned that it would face “total destruction” if it kept carrying out its current provocations. He just as much condemned Cuba for its lack of democracy and Venezuela for its growing socialist dictatorship. Trump made it clear that socialism has caused nothing but death, destruction and ruin for tens of millions of people.
Personally, I agree with that assessment. Nothing socialism has done or touched has ever turned out positive. However, there are three countries that Trump seemed to have left out. They are China, Laos and Vietnam. Laos is of no consequence to the United States, and is more of an ally of China which is why Trump did not bother. Trump did not touch China because that one is a little more complicated in American foreign policy. It is largely due to the economic and trade connections between the United States and China. True, the Chinese government implemented market reforms to keep the country from falling apart, and it allows things that North Korea and Venezuela do not—some freedom of movement and the ability to travel outside the country. But China has an abysmal human rights record, an equally abysmal record on how it treats workers in its own country, a secret security apparatus, and a huge slave labor camp prison system. Freedom of the press and religion are non-existent, and the Chinese military has been making threatening moves in the South China and even East China seas.
Vietnam is very similar to China. It has an abysmal human rights record, an equally abysmal record on how it treats its workers, a powerful secret security apparatus, and a slave labor camp prison system. Like China, it has conducted free market reforms and allows some freedom of movement and the ability to let its citizens travel outside the country. But it is the odd man out in the Communist world, and while it tries to get along with the other Communist and socialist countries, its relationship with China is very prickly. Hence, it is trying to establish a better relationship with the United States so that the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (as it is officially called) can obtain badly needed military weaponry, military advisers, and possibly a military alliance with other countries and especially with the United States. A military alliance is especially not so easily forthcoming because of Vietnam’s contradictory Communist government and its “socialist” values compared to the United States. This is pretty much where things are. These three socialist countries have not been mentioned because it is not in the U.S. government’s national interest to include them in a list of enemy states. The question I have to ask is are these states in the United States’ national best interests? Would they be on our side if there is a conflict? Socialism may be bad, but politics and geographic advantages make for strange bedfellows.