Followup On The Peace President

This morning I described some video discussions yesterday featuring Larry Johnson and Doug Macgregor. A common theme in many discussions concerning Trump is that Trump, personally, abhors war and desires peace. Thus, for example, Macgregor said, with regard to Trump’s seeming empathy regarding the carnage in Ukraine as opposed to his zero empathy attitude toward Gaza and other point Middle Eastern: “I just don’t get it.” I urged a reconsideration of that view of Trump as anti-war in any principled way:

Regular readers will be aware that my own view is that Trump’s claimed ambition to be a peace president is actually more of a subterfuge—that Trump’s actual MAGA ambition is to place Anglo-Zionist hegemony on a sound financial basis by using tariff’s to force the world to pay down our unsustainable debt. That will allow for the planned trillion dollar + military budgets to shore up the empire. This is no more than a continuation of the Neocon - Jewish Nationalist agenda to use the US military to establish Jewish hegemony over most of the Middle East. Countries like Russia and China, and BRICS more generally, which are not under or are resisting Anglo-Zionist banking/financial hegemony, must be subjugated.

Thus, the appearance of conflicting views within Trump 2.0 is only partially accurate. There are some within Trump’s sphere who do oppose foreign wars. Trump himself probably does genuinely prefer deal making to war making—in general. However, that seeming preference has not prevented Trump from perpetrating war crimes without compunction or apparent human empathy—it’s just that he doesn’t dare attempt such massive escalation of war tactics against Russia at this time.

So, in a sense, I take Mac and LJ’s arguments with a grain of salt. As serious analysts with good sources I have to take their arguments about Trump’s personal shortcomings very seriously. Where I would disagree is, as I argued above, with the idea that peace—per se—is Trump’s MAGA goal. I would maintain that Anglo-Zionist hegemony is his MAGA goal and that the intra-regime struggles are more about tactics than over the actual goal. Trump may prefer the deal making tactic against powerful adversaries, but he’s perfectly willing to bomb lesser adversaries into submission.

The big problem arises with Iran, which Trump knows he will not be able to bomb with impunity.

Bear with me—I do have a specific reason for repeating myself after just a few hours.

Thinking back, I realized I had addressed this whole issue previously. As I write, I’m listening to Danny Davis say: “Trump is actively trying to end the war.” Well, yes and no. It depends on what you mean by peace.

TrumpSpeak: 'Peace' vs. 'Peace Deal'

The best way I can think of to present this is to say that Trump is not actually interested in ‘peace’ per se—he’s interested in ‘peace deals’. When faced with peer or near peer foreign powers Trump will eschew direct military confrontation—Russia, China, and Iran are examples that come immediately to mind. That can be a close run thing, as the NYT recently revealed: Trump had to be talked back off the window ledge by Tulsi, Veep Vance, and Tat Man Hegseth, before he plunged us into greatly expanding his catastrophic Middle East war. With lesser powers Trump exhibits no visible compunction about waging war, and no empathy even for civilians. Think: Gaza, Palestine generally, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon.

Thus, the idea that Trump is actually interested in peace—as most of us understand the word—with Russia is, or should be, a priori suspect. From the beginning of Trump’s presidential career he has been clear that his interest in peace—or, a ‘deal’ or a ‘peace deal’—is all about clearing the geopolitical decks for the big project of neutering China, as the necessary step to MAGA. That is emphatically not ‘peace’ in the ordinary sense of the word. Further, we should not assume anything has changed. Indeed, during the 2024 campaign Trump explicitly stated, repeatedly, that his ‘peace deal’ with Russia would consist of setting a short deadline, knocking Russo-Ukrainian heads together, and telling them what peace deal was acceptable to him, to Trump. Failing that, Trump has said, he would escalate against Russia like they’ve never imagined—or something like that. This explains why he keeps a knucklehead like Keith Kellogg on his team. It’s not just to keep Kellogg from wandering the streets aimlessly, as might otherwise happen. It’s because Trump actually buys into most of the Anglo-Zionist ideas—with a few twists, like deal making in place of war if war looks too costly.

I wrote in a hurry this morning. I was aware, as of yesterday, of Trump’s escalating munitions shipments to Ukraine, which falls in line with Kellogg and with Trump’s own statements in the past. In addition, we’re seeing Ukrainian threats against the Russian Victory Day parade, celebrating the 1945 victory of Russian over Germany and its Ukro-Nazi allies:

Second Night Of Moscow Drone Raids Halt Flights Ahead Of Major Military Parade

Anyone who thinks this is going on without Trump’s approval is dreaming. We can call this war a Ukraine war on Russia or a NATO war on Russia, but in the final analysis this is an Anglo-Zionist war on Russia and Trump calls the shots. Putin knows this.

This morning, before I had a chance to read it, Larry Johnson provided an excellent example of this Trumpian war making approach from a different perspective—the minerals deal. Trump is, in various ways, trying to increase pressure on Putin to cave to Trump’s “deal”. All tactics are on the table to reach that strategic goal. As LJ makes clear, whatever validity this pressure approach might have in other circumstances, with regard to Russia and Putin it’s delusional:

Trump’s Delusional Deal with Ukraine, Nuclear Talks with Iran Back on the Agenda

Bessent fessed up, apparently today (Monday), on the hidden motive behind the deal… get Trump leverage over Russia:

Creating negotiating leverage? Trump and Bessent are delusional. Russia already knows that there is, “no daylight” between the US and Ukraine. Were it not for US actions to quash previous negotiations, to supply weapons, ammunition and intelligence, and to fund Ukraine’s government, this war would be over. If Trump thinks that this gives him leverage to pressure Putin to end the war, then it is just one more example of Trump’s detachment from reality.

Russia’s terms for a war-ending deal are firm — I’ve written about them repeatedly in previous posts. Trump apparently believes that the Russian government, not just Putin, is bluffing. If Witkoff takes this new deal back to Putin, he will get a frosty reception. Trump continues to indulge the fantasy that Russia is suffering unsustainable losses and is looking for a way out from a war, that per Trump’s belief, cannot be won. Putin and his advisors don’t see it that way. They know they will win the war and end Ukraine as a military threat. The ball will then be in NATO’s court — i.e., does NATO want a war with Russia?

To repeat. Trump is not seeking “peace” in any sense of the word that normal people would recognize. He’s seeking a ceasefire. The problem from the Russian view is that agreeing to a ceasefire on any terms other than those they have set out (which amount to a Ukrainian surrender) would amount to admitting Russia’s defeat. And, since this is a NATO war on Russia, that would be Russia surrendering to NATO. That would be a major step in sidelining Russia while Trump pursues his war on China.

We’ve got a lot to worry about. The biggest thing to worry about is that we have a president who promised transparency but is patently deceiving the American people with regard to what he’s up to in matters of war and peace.