Hello 'Pussy' it's Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle and Pippi Longstocking:
In the days since you ordered a cruise missile strike against Syria in retaliation for a chemical attack on civilians, your administration has spoken with multiple voices as it seeks to explain its evolving policy.
Do you have any idea why we feel so ashamed? I do!
Should I remain in bed, leave my country or fight against the dragon?
( see also the story by Wolfgang Hampel,
' Betty MacDonald: Nothing more to say ' )
Betty and Don MacDonald in Hollywood
Betty MacDonald's mother Sydney with grandchild Alison Beck
Betty MacDonald fan club fans,
Betty MacDonald fan club team with Mats, Pieter, Sandra and many other members are working on the new Betty MacDonald fan club item ' Betty MacDonald and The Egg and I Road '.
In
1981, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners officially established
the name "Egg and I Road," in memory of local history in the form of a
book with its own checkered past.
"On
a chicken ranch," Betty MacDonald writes, "there never dawns a beautiful day that
isn't immediately spoiled by some great big backbreaking task."
"The
Egg and I" contains many more such complaints, the rainy weather and hard work, the balky wood stove and
insensitive husband.
It also praises the lovely views and amazing local food.
It also praises the lovely views and amazing local food.
We have many colourful Betty MacDonald Easter eggs for you.
One of these Betty MacDonald fan club Easter surprises is the new outstanding website of beloved Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Mr. Tigerli.
Don't miss it, please.
Surprise, surprise!
We found new radio manuscripts and shows.
We are working on Betty MacDonald fan club exhibit and an updated Betty MacDonald documentary.
Betty MacDonald fan club newsletter April includes a letter by Betty MacDonald, mentioning Dorita Hess and other very important persons in her books.
Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel told us that Betty MacDonald fan club research team does an excellent job in supporting him with his several Betty MacDonald projects especially an updated Betty MacDonald biography.
Betty MacDonald fan club event team is very happy to hear from you and they got some really great ideas for the next International event.
Thanks a lot!
You can join Eurovision Song Contest Fan Club on Facebook.
Join us, please. We have lots of fun and joy and had several International ESC meetings in the past.
Vita Magica with Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel and Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Letizia Maninco was outstanding.
The audience enjoyed it very much.
Wolfgang Hampel's Vita Magica is fascinating because he includes Betty MacDonald, other members of the Bard family and Betty MacDonald fan club honor members.
Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Mr. Tigerli and our 'Italian Betty MacDonald' - Betty MacDonald fan club honor member author and artist Letizia Mancino belong to the most popular Betty MacDonald fan club teams in our history.
Their many devoted fans are waiting for a new Mr. Tigerli adventure.
Letizia Mancino's magical Betty MacDonald Gallery is a special gift for our Betty MacDonald fan club fans.
We'll have several International Betty MacDonald fan club events in 2017.
Join us in voting for your favourite city, please.
Wolfgang Hampel's Vita Magica guest was a very famous TV lady, author and singer and she is our new Betty MacDonald fan club honor member.
Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Mr. Tigerli is our beloved Betty MacDonald fan club honor member.
I guess our Casanova adores our Betty MacDonald fan club honor member very much because author and TV moderator Tatjana Geßler is a very beautiful, charming and intelligent lady.
Tatjana Geßler's books are outstanding. I've read several of them.
Enjoy Betty MacDonald's very beautiful Vashon Island, please.
Great Betty MacDonald fan club news!
You can join
Betty MacDonald fan club
Betty MacDonald Society
Vita Magica
on Facebook.
Thank you so much in advance for your support and interest.
If you join Betty MacDonald fan club blog as a follower during March you'll receive a very special Betty MacDonald fan club Welcome gift.
Send your email-address to our contact address, please.
Great news!
Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Mr. Tigerli is back and his fans are delighted.
We'll have several International Betty MacDonald fan club events in 2017.
Don't miss Wolfgang Hampel's Vita Magica March, please.
You'll enjoy it very much.
You can see brilliant Brad Craft.
"This is Me," by Bad Kid Billy. [Official Music Video]
Seems I'm in this for a hot second. I remember being asked to participate one day on the street in front of the bookstore where I work. I didn't think to ask what it was for, or even so much as the name of the song or the band. Didn't want to be late coming back from lunch. Silly bugger. The very nice young woman with the green hair also featured herein happens to work at Magus Books. She mentioned she'd seen me. Told me the name of the band, and here we are.
Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Monica Sone and other Betty MacDonald fan club honor members will be included in Wolfgang Hampel's new project 'Vita Magica'.
We got very interesting new info for updated Betty MacDonald biography.
Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel and Betty MacDonald fan club research team are going to include all these new details and info in updated Betty MacDonald biography.
If you'd like to join Betty MacDonald fan club you only have to press the join button on Betty MacDonald fan club blog.
New Betty MacDonald fan club fans will receive a special Betty MacDonald fan club Welcome gift during April.
Send us your email address to our contact address, please.
Wolfgang Hampel's Vita Magica February was outstanding and so was Vita Magica Betty MacDonald event with Wolfgang Hampel, Thomas Bödigheimer and Friedrich von Hoheneichen
Wolfgang Hampel and Betty MacDonald fan club research team are working on an updated Betty MacDonald biography.
This very new Betty MacDonald biography includes all the results we got during a very successful Betty MacDonald fan club research which started in 1983.
You'll be able to find unique Betty MacDonald treasures in our Betty MacDonald biography.
Betty MacDonald biography includes for example interviews with Betty MacDonald, her family and friends.
We got many letters by Betty MacDonald and other family members even very important original ones.
Our goal is to publish a Betty MacDonald biography that shows all the details of Betty MacDonald's life and work but also to present her fascinating siblings.
Dear Betty MacDonald fan club fans let us know please what you are interested most in a future Betty MacDonald biography.
Do you prefer an e-book or a so called real book?
Wolfgang Hampel and Friends of Vita Magica visited Minister of Science of Baden-Württemberg, Theresia Bauer in Stuttgart.
They visited Landtag and had a great time there.
Do you have any books by Betty MacDonald and Mary Bard Jensen with funny or interesting dedications?
If so would you be so kind to share them?
Our next Betty MacDonald fan club project is a collection of these unique dedications.
If you share your dedication from your Betty MacDonald - and Mary Bard Jensen collection you might be the winner of our new Betty MacDonald fan club items.
Thank you so much in advance for your support.
Thank you so much for sending us your favourite Betty MacDonald quote.
We are so glad that our beloved Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Mr. Tigerli is back.
New Betty MacDonald documentary will be very interesting with many new interviews.
Alison Bard Burnett and other Betty MacDonald fan club honor members will be included in Wolfgang Hampel's fascinating project Vita Magica.
Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel interviewed Betty MacDonald's daughter Joan MacDonald Keil and her husband Jerry Keil.
This interview will be published for the first time ever.
New Betty MacDonald documentary will be very interesting with many interviews never published before.
We adore Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Mr. Tigerli
Thank you so much for sharing this witty memories with us.
Wolfgang Hampel's literary event Vita Magica is very fascinating because he is going to include Betty MacDonald, other members of the Bard family and Betty MacDonald fan club honor members.
It's simply great to read Wolfgang Hampel's new very well researched stories about Betty MacDonald, Robert Eugene Heskett, Donald Chauncey MacDonald, Darsie Bard, Sydney Bard, Gammy, Alison Bard Burnett, Darsie Beck, Mary Bard Jensen, Clyde Reynolds Jensen, Sydney Cleveland Bard, Mary Alice Bard, Dorothea DeDe Goldsmith, Madge Baldwin, Don Woodfin, Mike Gordon, Ma and Pa Kettle, Nancy and Plum, Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle and others.
Linde Lund and many fans from all over the world adore this funny sketch by Wolfgang Hampel very much although our German isn't the best.
I won't ever forget the way Wolfgang Hampel is shouting ' Brexit '.
Don't miss it, please.
It's simply great!
You can hear that Wolfgang Hampel got an outstandig voice.
He presented one of Linde Lund's favourite songs ' Try to remember ' like a professional singer.
Thanks a million!
Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Mr. Tigerli and our 'Italian Betty MacDonald' - Betty MacDonald fan club honor member author and artist Letizia Mancino belong to the most popular Betty MacDonald fan club teams in our history.
Their many devoted fans are waiting for a new Mr. Tigerli adventure.
Letizia Mancino's magical Betty MacDonald Gallery is a special gift for Betty MacDonald fan club fans from all over the world.
Don't miss Brad Craft's 'More friends', please.
Betty MacDonald's very beautiful Vashon Island is one of my favourites.
I agree with Betty in this very witty Betty MacDonald story Betty MacDonald: Nothing more to say by Wolfgang Hampel.
I can't imagine to live in a country with him as so-called elected President although there are very good reasons to remain there to fight against these brainless politics.
In the days since President Trump ordered a cruise missile strike against Syria in retaliation for a chemical attack on civilians, his administration has spoken with multiple voices as it seeks to explain its evolving policy. But one voice has not been heard from: that of Mr. Trump himself.
As
various officials have described it, the United States will intervene
only when chemical weapons are used — or any time innocents are killed.
It will push for the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria
— or pursue that only after defeating the Islamic State. America’s
national interest in Syria is to fight terrorism. Or to ease the
humanitarian crisis there. Or to restore stability.
The latest mixed messages were sent on Monday in both Washington and Europe. Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson — during a stop in Italy on his way to Moscow for a potentially tense visit, given Russian anger
at last week’s missile strike — outlined a dramatically interventionist
approach. “We rededicate ourselves to holding to account any and all
who commit crimes against the innocents anywhere in the world,” he said.
Hours
later, Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, said at his daily
briefing that Mr. Trump would act against Syria not just if it resorted
to chemical weapons, like the sarin nerve agent reportedly used last week,
but also when it used conventional munitions. “If you gas a baby, if
you put a barrel bomb into innocent people, I think you will see a
response from this president,” Mr. Spicer said.
I think the future dinosaur flatulence will be the behaviour of 'Pussy' and his very strange government.
Poor World! Poor America!
Don't miss these very interesting articles below, please.
The most difficult case in Mrs.Piggle-Wiggle's career
Hello 'Pussy', this is Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle.
You took calls from foreign leaders on unsecured phone lines, without consultung the State Department. We have to change your silly behaviour with a new Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle cure. I know you are the most difficult case in my career - but we have to try everything.......................
Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel sent his brilliant thoughts. Thank you so much dear Wolfgang!
Hi Libi, nice to meet you. Can you feel it?
I'm the most powerful leader in the world.
Betty MacDonald: Nothing more to say
Copyright 2016 by Wolfgang Hampel
All rights reserved
Betty MacDonald was sitting on her egg-shaped cloud and listened to a rather strange guy.
He said to his friends: So sorry to keep you waiting. Very complicated business! Very complicated!
Betty said: Obviously much too complicated for you old toupee!
Besides him ( by the way the First Lady's place ) his 10 year old son was bored to death and listened to this 'exciting' victory speech.
The old man could be his great-grandfather.
The boy was very tired and thought: I don't know what this old guy is talking about. Come on and finish it, please. I'd like to go to bed.
Dear 'great-grandfather' continued and praised the Democratic candidate.
He congratulated her and her family for a very strong campaign although he wanted to put her in jail.
He always called her the most corrupt person ever and repeated it over and over again in the fashion of a Tibetan prayer wheel.
She is so corrupt. She is so corrupt. Do you know how corrupt she is?
Betty MacDonald couldn't believe it when he said: She has worked very long and very hard over a long period of time, and we owe her a major debt of gratitude for her service to our country.
Afterwards old toupee praised his parents, wife, children, siblings and friends.
He asked the same question like a parrot all the time:
Where are you? Where are you? Where are you?
I know you are here!
Betty MacDonald answered: No Pussy they are not! They left the country.
They immigrated to Canada because they are very much afraid of the future in the U.S.A. with you as their leader like the majority of all so-called more or less normal citizens.
By the way keep your finger far away from the pussies and the Red Button, please.
I'm going to fly with my egg-shaped cloud to Canada within a minute too.
Away - away - there is nothing more to say!
Daniel Mount wrote a great article about Betty MacDonald and her garden.
We hope you'll enjoy it very much.
I adore Mount Rainier and Betty MacDonald's outstanding descriptions
Can you remember in which book you can find it?
If so let us know, please and you might be the next Betty MacDonald fan club contest winner.
I hope we'll be able to read Wolfgang Hampel's new very well researched stories about Betty MacDonald, Robert Eugene Heskett, Donald Chauncey MacDonald, Darsie Bard, Sydney Bard, Gammy, Alison Bard Burnett, Darsie Beck, Mary Bard Jensen, Clyde Reynolds Jensen, Sydney Cleveland Bard, Mary Alice Bard, Dorothea DeDe Goldsmith, Madge Baldwin, Don Woodfin, Mike Gordon, Ma and Pa Kettle, Nancy and Plum, Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle and others - very soon.
It' s such a pleasure to read them.
Let's go to magical Betty MacDonald's Vashon Island.
Betty MacDonald fan club organizer Linde Lund and Betty MacDonald fan club research team share their recent Betty MacDonald fan club research results.
Congratulations! They found the most interesting and important info for Wolfgang Hampel's oustanding Betty MacDonald biography.
I enjoy Bradley Craft's story very much.
Don't miss our Betty MacDonald fan club contests, please.
You can win a never published before Alison Bard Burnett interview by Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel.
Good luck!
This CD is a golden treasure because Betty MacDonald's very witty sister Alison Bard Burnett shares unique stories about Betty MacDonald, Mary Bard Jensen, Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle and Nancy and Plum.
Wolfgang Hampel's Betty MacDonald and Ma and Pa Kettle biography and Betty MacDonald interviews have fans in 40 countries. I'm one of their many devoted fans.
Many Betty MacDonald - and Wolfgang Hampel fans are very interested in a Wolfgang Hampel CD and DVD with his very funny poems and stories.
We are going to publish new Betty MacDonald essays on Betty MacDonald's gardens and nature in Washington State.
Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Mr. Tigerli is beloved all over the World.
We are so happy that our 'Casanova' is back.
Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel
and Betty MacDonald fan club research team are going to share very
interesting info on ' Betty MacDonald and the movie The Egg and I '.
Another rare episode (from March 21 1952) of the short-lived comedy soap opera, "The Egg and I," based on best selling book by Betty MacDonald which also became a popular film.
The series premiered on September 3, 1951, the same day as "Search for Tomorrow," and ended on August 1, 1952.
Although it did well in the ratings, it had difficulty attracting a steady sponsor. This episode features Betty Lynn (later known for her work on "The Andy Griffith Show") as Betty MacDonald, John Craven as Bob MacDonald, Doris Rich as Ma Kettle, and Frank Twedell as Pa Kettle.
Betty MacDonald fan club exhibition will be fascinating with the international book editions and letters by Betty MacDonald.
I can't wait to see the new Betty MacDonald documentary.
Enjoy a great breakfast at the bookstore with Brad and Nick, please.
Take care,
Another rare episode (from March 21 1952) of the short-lived comedy soap opera, "The Egg and I," based on best selling book by Betty MacDonald which also became a popular film.
The series premiered on September 3, 1951, the same day as "Search for Tomorrow," and ended on August 1, 1952.
Although it did well in the ratings, it had difficulty attracting a steady sponsor. This episode features Betty Lynn (later known for her work on "The Andy Griffith Show") as Betty MacDonald, John Craven as Bob MacDonald, Doris Rich as Ma Kettle, and Frank Twedell as Pa Kettle.
Betty MacDonald fan club exhibition will be fascinating with the international book editions and letters by Betty MacDonald.
I can't wait to see the new Betty MacDonald documentary.
Enjoy a great breakfast at the bookstore with Brad and Nick, please.
Take care,
Julia
you can join
Betty MacDonald fan club
Betty MacDonald Society
Vita Magica
Eurovision Song Contest Fan Club
on Facebook
Vita Magica Betty MacDonald event with Wolfgang Hampel, Thomas Bödigheimer and Friedrich von Hoheneichen
Vita Magica
Betty MacDonald
Betty MacDonald fan club
Betty MacDonald fan club on Facebook
Betty MacDonald forum
Wolfgang Hampel - Wikipedia ( English )
Wolfgang Hampel - Wikipedia ( English ) - The Egg and I
Wolfgang Hampel - Wikipedia ( Polski)
Wolfgang Hampel - Wikipedia ( German )
Wolfgang Hampel - LinkFang ( German ) Wolfgang Hampel - Academic ( German )
Wolfgang Hampel - cyclopaedia.net ( German )
Wolfgang Hampel - DBpedia ( English / German )
Wolfgang Hampel - people check ( English )
Wolfgang Hampel - Memim ( English )
Vashon Island - Wikipedia ( German )
Wolfgang Hampel - Monica Sone - Wikipedia ( English )
Wolfgang Hampel - Ma and Pa Kettle - Wikipedia ( English )
Wolfgang Hampel - Ma and Pa Kettle - Wikipedia ( French )
Wolfgang Hampel - Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle - Wikipedia ( English)
Wolfgang Hampel in Florida State University
Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel
Betty MacDonald fan club interviews on CD/DVD
Betty MacDonald fan club items
Betty MacDonald fan club items - comments
Betty MacDonald fan club - The Stove and I
Betty MacDonald fan club groups
Betty MacDonald fan club organizer Linde Lund
Betty MacDonald fan club organizer Greta Larson
WASHINGTON — In the days since President Trump ordered a cruise missile strike against Syria
in retaliation for a chemical attack on civilians, his administration
has spoken with multiple voices as it seeks to explain its evolving
policy. But one voice has not been heard from: that of Mr. Trump
himself.
As
various officials have described it, the United States will intervene
only when chemical weapons are used — or any time innocents are killed.
It will push for the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria
— or pursue that only after defeating the Islamic State. America’s
national interest in Syria is to fight terrorism. Or to ease the
humanitarian crisis there. Or to restore stability.
The latest mixed messages were sent on Monday in both Washington and Europe. Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson — during a stop in Italy on his way to Moscow for a potentially tense visit, given Russian anger
at last week’s missile strike — outlined a dramatically interventionist
approach. “We rededicate ourselves to holding to account any and all
who commit crimes against the innocents anywhere in the world,” he said.
Hours
later, Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, said at his daily
briefing that Mr. Trump would act against Syria not just if it resorted
to chemical weapons, like the sarin nerve agent reportedly used last week,
but also when it used conventional munitions. “If you gas a baby, if
you put a barrel bomb into innocent people, I think you will see a
response from this president,” Mr. Spicer said.
For
Mr. Trump, who came to office espousing an “America first” policy that
stayed out of the affairs of other countries where the United States had
no interest of its own, responding to barrel bombs in Syria or to “any
and all” humanitarian abuses “anywhere” would be a far more sweeping
standard for American leadership. If anything, it sounds more like the
activist advisers around President Barack Obama, such as Samantha Power,
his ambassador to the United Nations, who pushed for more intervention
to protect civilians in various conflict zones, often to no avail.
Just
as likely, analysts said, neither Mr. Tillerson nor Mr. Spicer really
meant it or, possibly, fully understood the potentially far-reaching
consequences of what they were saying. Unlike chemical weapons, barrel
bombs — typically oil
drums filled with explosives — are used with vicious regularity in the
Syrian civil war. According to the Syrian Network for Human Rights, the
government dropped 495 barrel bombs in March alone, and 12,958 in 2016.
By
the end of the day Monday, fearing that a new “red line” had been
drawn, the White House sought to unwind Mr. Spicer’s comment. “Nothing
has changed in our posture,” officials said in a statement emailed to
reporters. “The president retains the option to act in Syria against the
Assad regime whenever it is in the national interest, as was determined
following that government’s use of chemical weapons against its own
citizens.”
The confusion was only heightened when The Associated Press quoted
an unidentified American official saying that Russia had known about
Syria’s chemical attack in advance. The White House summoned reporters
for a background briefing but then made the session off the record,
leaving the matter unaddressed. Hours later, a senior administration
official issued a brief statement saying there was no consensus within
the American intelligence community that Russia had foreknowledge of the
attack.
With all the murky signals, Mr. Trump has done little to clarify how he will proceed after firing Tomahawks at a Syrian air base
in retaliation for the chemical attack, which killed more than 80
civilians. While his cabinet and other advisers seem to be reading from
different talking points, the president has not spoken publicly about
Syria at all since the missile strike last Thursday night. Even his
famed Twitter feed has largely avoided the subject, beyond thanking
military personnel.
The
only substantive comment he has made on Twitter about the situation was
to defend against critics who asked why the runway at the air base had
been left untouched. “The reason you don’t generally hit runways is that
they are easy and inexpensive to quickly fix (fill in and top)!” he wrote on Sunday.
The
resulting vacuum has left world leaders and American lawmakers
scratching their heads over how the United States will proceed now that
it has taken direct action against Mr. Assad’s government for the first
time in Syria’s six-year-old civil war.
Mr. Tillerson made his comment a day before arriving in Moscow to confront Russia’s
foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, over the Kremlin’s support for Mr.
Assad. There had been some expectation that Mr. Tillerson would meet
with President Vladimir V. Putin. But Russia announced on Monday that Mr. Putin would be unavailable — another sign of the Kremlin’s growing displeasure.
Although
Mr. Tillerson, a former chief executive of Exxon Mobil, has known Mr.
Putin for years, he will now be the first secretary of state not to meet
with the Russian president or top Soviet leader in his inaugural trip
to Moscow in office, according to State Department records and news reports.
On Sunday, Mr. Tillerson called Russia “incompetent”
for allowing Syria to hold on to chemical weapons, and he accused
Russia of trying to influence elections in Europe using the same methods
it employed in the United States.
European
countries, which had been deeply uneasy with the Trump administration’s
more transactional approach to foreign policy and its potential
willingness to forgive Mr. Putin’s annexation of Crimea
and continued meddling in Ukraine, welcomed the strike on Syria and Mr.
Tillerson’s reference to humanitarian issues’ guiding strategy.
Graphic
Which Countries Support and Which Oppose the U.S. Missile Strikes in Syria
Russia and Iran sharply criticized U.S. missile strikes
on a Syrian airfield on Thursday night, while European countries have
been broadly supportive so far.
“There
is overwhelming support in what the U.S. did,” Britain’s foreign
secretary, Boris Johnson, said on Monday, “signaling that we will not
tolerate the barbaric use of chemical weapons.”
The foreign ministers of France and Italy have made similar remarks, with Angelino Alfano of Italy saying the American military strike had contributed to a “renewed harmony” between the United States and Europe.
Mr.
Johnson said Europe also supported the Trump administration’s
increasingly hard line on Russia, saying that Mr. Putin was “toxifying
the reputation of Russia with his continuous association with a guy that
has flagrantly poisoned his own people.”
Still,
the Europeans and others were left to puzzle out Mr. Trump’s strategy.
Over the weekend, Mr. Tillerson suggested that the administration still
wanted to stay out of Syria’s war. “We’re asking and calling on Bashar al-Assad
to cease the use of these weapons,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.”
“Other than that, there is no change to our military posture.”
Yet
Nikki R. Haley, the ambassador to the United Nations, suggested on
CNN’s “State of the Union” that Mr. Assad had to go. “There is no
political solution that any of us can see with Assad at the lead,” she
said.
By
the time Mr. Tillerson met with other foreign ministers from the Group
of 7 in Italy on Monday, he seemed to be emphasizing a shift from Mr.
Trump’s focus on economic nationalism to a foreign policy at least
partly defined by humanitarian values. Mr. Tillerson belatedly added a
visit to a memorial at Sant’Anna di Stazzema, a village near Lucca where
560 people, including children, were massacred by the Nazis during World War II.
After
the blaring of trumpets and the laying of a wreath at the memorial, Mr.
Tillerson approached a small news media contingent to make a
three-sentence declaration that included the pledge to hold accountable
“any and all who commit crimes” against innocent civilians.
But
back in Washington, Mr. Spicer seemed to return to Mr. Trump’s “America
first” formulation. “We’re not just going to become the world’s
policeman running around the country — running around the world,” he
said. “It’s our national security first and foremost.”
Asked if Syria fit within that doctrine, he said, “Absolutely.”
Correction: April 10, 2017
An earlier version of this article mischaracterized the
history of secretaries of state meeting with Russian leaders. Rex W.
Tillerson will be the first secretary of state ever not to meet with a
Russian president or top Soviet leader on his first trip to Moscow in
office, not the first since Warren Christopher in 1993.
President Donald Trump made something happen in
Syria, I guess. But like so much with his administration, it's an
ill-advised, barely hashed out plan with a much bigger potential
downside than up. And all from a president who has constantly tried to pretend that he's the only pol who is clear-eyed on the Middle East.
Let's rewind a bit. On Thursday, when asked
about what he would do in reaction to Syrian dictator Bashar Assad using
what the international community has identified as chemical weapons
against his own people, Trump responded, "He's there, and I guess he's
running things, so I guess something should happen."
"I guess something should happen" is a pretty
perfect distillation of foreign policy from a president who knows little
about world affairs and seems uninterested, at the best of times, in
bolstering that knowledge set. The ultimate decision Trump made, after
meeting with his military-heavy national defense team, was to bomb the Syrian airfield from which the chemical attack allegedly originated.
This marks the first official strike against the Assad regime by the United States, something former President Barack Obama spent years assiduously avoiding. And that was the right call
on Obama's part, as there's no benefit to the U.S. in getting involved
in a protracted civil war in the Middle East. The examples of Iraq and
Libya should have taught us that the toppling of a dictator is only the
beginning, not the end, of a country's internal struggle, and there's
little American military might can do to change the outcome.
The latter, though, are always quick to swoon
over a president firing off big, "beautiful" missiles, in the words of
NBC's Brian Williams. "I think Donald Trump became president" because of
the attack, said CNN's Fareed Zakaria.
My concern is that Trump will cave in ever-more
to this cult of "do something," getting the U.S. further and further
bogged down in a conflict in which it shouldn't be embroiled.
After all, the strikes won't do anything to
change the situation on the ground. Assad is still entrenched, backed by
his Russian and Iranian benefactors. The "moderates" whom hawks love to
crow about among the Syrian rebels are still few and far between, with
no indication that they could run things were Assad to vacate the
premises. A few American bombs doesn't bring the end of the war any
closer, and I'm skeptical it will even convince Assad to change his
behavior, given the clear backing he has from other nations who are far
more invested in keeping him in power than America is in relieving him
of it.
So what happens the next time Assad crosses a
line? What about when he goes back to bombing civilians via conventional
weapons? Will Trump once again cave to the chorus screaming that
America must do more because that's what America does, even if there's
no end game in sight? Trump's now opened the door to direct American
intervention against Assad; want to bet it will be closed again or
kicked wide open?
Further undermining confidence is the Trump
team's flippy-floppy, all-over-the-place treatment of entire issue. Just
a week ago, after all, his foreign policy heavyweights were
telegraphing that they had no interest in ousting Assad. This week, they're embracing regime change.
Trump himself, too, for years has been quite insistent that the U.S.
stay out of Syria; it took him just weeks to be convinced otherwise, for
reasons as yet unclear. "I will tell you, it's already happened that my
attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much," he said on Wednesday.
Well, OK then.
Politics
The Emerging Trump Doctrine: Don’t Follow Doctrine
WASHINGTON — As he confronted a series of international challenges from the Middle East to Asia last week, President Trump
made certain that nothing was certain about his foreign policy. To the
extent that a Trump Doctrine is emerging, it seems to be this: don’t get
roped in by doctrine.
In a week in which he hosted foreign heads of state and launched a cruise missile strike against Syria’s
government, Mr. Trump dispensed with his own dogma and forced other
world leaders to re-examine their assumptions about how the United
States will lead in this new era. He demonstrated a highly
improvisational and situational approach that could inject a risky
unpredictability into relations with potential antagonists, but he also
opened the door to a more traditional American engagement with the world
that eases allies’ fears.
As a private citizen and candidate, Mr. Trump spent years arguing that Syria’s civil war was not America’s problem, that Russia should be a friend, and that China
was an “enemy” whose leaders should not be invited to dinner. As
president, Mr. Trump, in the space of just days, involved America more
directly in the Syrian morass than ever before, opened a new acrimonious rift with Russia, and invited China’s leader for a largely convivial, let’s-get-along dinner at his Florida estate.
In
the process, Mr. Trump upended domestic politics as well. He rejected
the nationalist wing of his own White House, led by Stephen K. Bannon,
his chief strategist, who opposes entanglement in Middle East conflicts
beyond fighting terrorism and favors punitive trade measures against
Beijing. And Mr. Trump, by launching the strike on Russia’s ally Syria,
undercut critics who have portrayed him as a Manchurian candidate doing
the bidding of President Vladimir V. Putin after the Kremlin intervened in last year’s election on his behalf.
Given
his unpredictability, none of this means that Mr. Trump has pivoted
permanently in any of these areas. The White House has prepared an
executive order that the president may sign in the coming days targeting
countries like China that dump steel in the American market. And Mr.
Trump is sending Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson on Tuesday to Moscow,
where he will have the additional task of trying to smooth over the
rancor of recent days, in addition to exploring whether Russia could be a
real partner in battling the Islamic State in Syria.
Moreover,
the missile strike, in response to a chemical weapons attack, was
intended to be a limited, one-time operation, and the president seemed
determined to quickly move on. After announcing the attack Thursday
evening, he made no mention of it Friday during public appearances, nor
on Saturday during his weekly address. As of Saturday afternoon, the
Twitter-obssessed president had not even taunted President Bashar al-Assad of Syria online, although he did thank the American troops who carried out the missile strike and defended the decision not to target the runway at the air base that was hit.
“Our
decisions,” Mr. Trump said in the Saturday address, “will be guided by
our values and our goals — and we will reject the path of inflexible
ideology that too often leads to unintended consequences.”
That
concept, flexibility, seems key to understanding Mr. Trump. He hates to
be boxed in, as he mused in the Rose Garden last week while
contemplating the first new military operation of his presidency with
geopolitical consequences.
“I
like to think of myself as a very flexible person,” he told reporters.
“I don’t have to have one specific way.” He made clear he cherished
unpredictability. “I don’t like to say where I’m going and what I’m
doing,” he said.
That
flexibility was a hallmark of his rise in real estate, and if critics
preferred the word erratic, it did not bother Mr. Trump — it has since
worked well enough to vault him to the White House. But now that he is
commander in chief of the world’s most powerful nation, leaders around
the world are trying to detect a method to the man.
“There
is no emerging doctrine for Trump foreign policy in a classical sense,”
said Kathleen H. Hicks, a former Pentagon official who is now at the
Center for Strategic and International Studies. “There are, however,
clear emerging characteristics consistent with the attributes of the man
himself: unpredictable, instinctual and undisciplined.”
On Syria, Mr. Trump had mocked President Barack Obama
for setting a “red line” against the use of chemical weapons and urged
him not to launch a punitive strike against Syria after Mr. Assad
crossed it in 2013. That attack, with a death toll of 1,400, dwarfed
last week’s toll of 84. And just days before last week’s attack, Mr.
Tillerson indicated that Washington would accept Mr. Assad’s remaining
in power.
Rubio, Republican of Florida, argued
that Mr. Assad felt free to launch a chemical attack precisely because
Mr. Trump’s administration had given him a green light.Russia,
critics added, did not constrain Mr. Assad because it has had a blank
check from an overly friendly Trump administration. And Mr. Trump’s
efforts to bar Syrian refugees from the United States, they said, sent a
signal that he did not care about them.
“President
Trump seems not to have thought through any of this, or have any kind
of broader strategy, but rather to have launched a military strike based
on a sudden, emotional decision,” Senator Christopher S. Murphy,
Democrat of Connecticut, wrote in an article for The Huffington Post on Saturday.
Mr. Assad is not the only leader testing Mr. Trump. North Korea has test-launched missile after missile in recent weeks, almost as if trying to get Mr. Trump’s attention.
So far, he has been measured in his response, urging President Xi Jinping of China during his visit to do more to rein in North Korea.
But national security aides have also prepared options for Mr. Trump if
China does not take a more assertive stance, including reintroducing nuclear weapons in South Korea.
Mr.
Trump’s action in Syria was welcomed by many traditional American
allies who had fretted over Mr. Obama’s reluctance to take a greater
leadership role in the Middle East, and feared that Mr. Trump would
withdraw even more.
After the missile strike, Israeli news outlets were filled with headlines like “The Americans Are Back,” and European leaders expressed relief both that he had taken action and that he had not gone too far.
“We
have learned that Trump is not so isolationist as many Europeans feared
he would be — he appears to care about victims of a gas attack in
Syria,” said Charles Grant, director of the Center for European Reform
in London. “We have learned that he understands that U.S. influence had
suffered from the perception — which grew under Obama — that it was a
power weakened by its reluctance to use force.”
That touches on another animating factor as Mr. Trump deals with foreign challenges — doing the opposite of whatever Mr. Obama did.
Mr. Trump’s first instinct after the Syrian chemical attack was to
blame Mr. Obama for not enforcing his red line, never mind that Mr.
Trump had urged him not to at the time. Even as he announced the missile
strike on Thursday night, Mr. Trump asserted that his predecessor’s
handling of Syria had “failed very dramatically.”
Intentionally
or not, though, Mr. Trump adopted language similar to that used by Mr.
Obama and many other presidents in defining American priorities. While
in the past Mr. Trump said the United States did not have a national
interest in Syria, last week he said instability there was “threatening
the United States and its allies.”
He
also said that “America stands for justice,” effectively espousing a
responsibility to act in cases of human rights abuses, as other
presidents have at times.
Until now, Mr. Trump has largely eschewed such language. Just three days earlier, he had hosted Egypt’s authoritarian president, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, and made no public mention of the thousands of people the Cairo government has imprisoned in a political crackdown.
“What
is striking to me is a subtle yet clear shift away from the rhetoric of
pure American self-interest narrowly defined, as espoused by candidate Donald Trump,”
said Robert Danin, a former Middle East negotiator who is now at the
Council on Foreign Relations. “What has emerged is a new language of
American leadership in the world that we have not heard before from
President Trump.”
Mr.
Grant and others noted that the strike, coming as Mr. Trump shared a
meal with Mr. Xi, could resonate in Asia as well, leaving North Korea to
wonder whether the president might resort to force to stop its
development of ballistic missiles.
But
Ms. Hicks said Mr. Trump’s flexibility — or unpredictability — was
itself “extremely risky.” If other countries cannot accurately predict
what an American president will do, she said, they may act
precipitously, citing the example of China’s extending its maritime
claims in the South China Sea.
“Imagine
if Donald Trump then took exception in ways they didn’t anticipate and
major wars ensued,” she said. “Bright lines, derived from clear
interests and enforced well, are generally best, and I don’t think
Donald Trump likes to be constrained by bright lines.”
The Opinion Pages | Op-Ed Columnist
The Riddle of Trump’s Syria Attack
The
agony of Donald Trump — well, one of the many agonies — is that there
are times when he will actually do the right thing, or at least a
defensible thing, and we’ll be left wondering, even more than we did
with other presidents, about what his motivations were, whether they fit
into any truly considered plan or whether his actions amount to the
newest episode of a continuing reality show.
Such
is the case with the strike against Syria, which is too big a risk in
too complicated a place to be used for distraction, for diversion, for
the pose he needs in the narrative du jour.
There’s
justification for it, absolutely. President Obama had advisers who
wished he’d done something similar, and there were Democrats aplenty —
Hillary Clinton apparently among them — who found his restraint when it
came to Syria and the regime of Bashar al-Assad to be infuriating, a
surrender of America’s role and moral authority in the world.
But
Trump’s military action makes little sense in the context of most of
what he said in the years before he was elected and much of what he has
done as president so far. Let me get this straight: Obama wasn’t
supposed to draw or be drawn across a red line, not even when the Assad
regime used chemical weapons, but when the regime did that on Trump’s
watch, it crossed “many, many lines,” in his words, and compelled an
American response?
That’s a “dizzying turnabout,” as Blake Hounshell wrote in Politico,
under the headline “Trump’s Syria Whiplash.” And I can’t square Trump’s
statements over the last two days that the United States can’t stand by
idly in the face of such grotesque suffering with his determination to
bar those who suffer from being accepted as refugees into America. The
babies prompt outrage and heartache when they’re writhing in Syria, but
God forbid they come here.
And so two questions, loud and urgent: Why did he do this now? And, beyond that, who exactly is he?
The
readiest answers unsettle me. It’s impossible to ignore the degree to
which the military strike pushes a slew of unflattering stories about
the Trump administration — its failed attempt to undo Obamacare, the
feuding within its ranks and, above all, the probes into possible
collusion between Trump’s associates and the Russian government — to the
side of the page. Nothing drowns out scandal like the fire and fury of
59 Tomahawk cruise missiles.
The
notion that military action salvages a president on the defensive,
boldly underscoring his role as commander in chief, is nothing new. But
there’s a fresh wrinkle in this case, because those bombs put Trump at
particular odds with Russia at a moment when there’s enormous advantage
in that.
Listen
to the television commentators right now. Read the news. It focuses on
present and looming tensions with Vladimir Putin, not the Putin-Trump
kissy-face that’s been so appalling and fascinating to watch. It’s a
whole new story.
What’s
more, the quickness with which those missiles followed the Assad
regime’s latest atrocity cast Trump in an emphatically decisive light.
It’s precisely the look that he needs right now.
On Friday morning Mike Allen of Axios quoted
an unnamed official in the Trump administration saying that White House
aides were viewing this particular juncture — these last few days — as
“leadership week,” because Trump was not only meeting with the Chinese
president at Mar-a-Lago but had also stood tall at a lectern there on
Thursday night, just after the strike against Syria, to utter these
sweeping words: “God bless America and the entire world.”
To read Allen’s succinct account
is to get the haunting sense that the administration isn’t talking
about — or, for that matter, evaluating — the substance of what Trump
did in Syria. The official is talking about a script that Trump is
reading and a role that he’s playing. I fear that Trump is relishing
that role too much, and that his enjoyment explains the turnabout. How
shocking, really, was Assad’s use of chemical weapons against its
citizens? He’s done it before. What’s changed is that Trump, not Obama,
is now the one in position to send America’s missiles, flex America’s
muscle and feel the titanic power of that.
That
brings me back to the second of the two questions I asked earlier: Who
is this president? Is he guided by any fixed philosophies or is he moved
by moods and operating on whim? This, too, isn’t a concern singular to
Trump’s presidency, but it’s a concern that’s amplified in Trump’s
presidency, because his background is so unusual: no government
experience, no military service, a hodgepodge of political positions and
associations over time. On top of which, his performance on the
campaign trail, in debates and in the White House has made clear, time
and again, how woefully uninformed he can be and how blissfully
untroubled by that he is.
A
positive interpretation of these latest developments is that Trump is
someone who’s willing to adjust to a deeper, fresher understanding of
events, to pivot in accordance with circumstances, to learn and to
evolve. Consistency can definitely be overrated. At times it’s just a
euphemism for stubbornness.
But
another take is that Trump isn’t just uninformed but unformed. And
that’s not reassuring at all. As the week went on, there were more and
more reports not just of tension in the White House between Steve Bannon
and Jared Kushner but of extreme acrimony and outright warfare. The
intensity of that collision reflects competing ideologies and
sensibilities, yes, but it also speaks to the stakes.
The winner’s spoils aren’t merely influence over Trump, who, according to a report
in The Times on Friday morning, tilts “one way or the other depending
on the day, or even the hour.” The spoils, it seems, are the opportunity
to mold him utterly, because nearly 80 days into his administration, he
remains a wet piece of clay.
Rita Knobel Ulrich - Islam in Germany - a very interesting ZDF ( 2nd German Television ) documentary with English subtitles
perfect Partners
How Trump Can Improve the Messy U.S.-Chinese Economic Relationship
The
United States and China are locked in a mutually dependent, frequently
dysfunctional economic partnership. The world’s biggest and
second-biggest economies are like a married couple that complain about
each other constantly yet can’t even contemplate a divorce.
The marriage enters a new phase Thursday, as President Xi Jinping
of China visits for two days of meetings at the Florida estate of a
president who made China a punching bag on the campaign trail.
The
question is whether President Trump can turn his bellicose language
into concrete gains for American companies and workers. A look at the
economics of the relationship between the nations, and conversations
with former officials with battle scars from past negotiations, shows a
path for getting a better deal.
That
path to success may not include the kind of flashy, headline-generating
announcements that the Trump administration has tended to celebrate.
It’s not about the currency (for now)
In February, Mr. Trump called China
the “grand champions at manipulation of currency.” During the campaign,
too, he frequently assailed China for artificially reducing the value
of the renminbi to favor its companies versus American and other
competitors.
It
is a view that is outdated. For years, China did intervene in financial
markets to depress the value of its currency. But now it is intervening
to keep the yuan from falling — actually doing the opposite of what Mr.
Trump alleged. Economists generally think that the Chinese currency is
close to the levels that would be set by purely market forces.
That
doesn’t mean currencies shouldn’t come up at Mar-a-Lago. This moment of
relative peace between the countries on currency policy could be the
ideal time to develop an understanding for the future.
“I
think currency is still an issue, but it doesn’t make sense to discuss
it under the rubric of manipulation,” said Brad Setser, a senior fellow
at the Council on Foreign Relations. “China is managing its currency;
it’s just that it’s managing it right now in a way that is relatively
advantageous to the United States. That understanding of how China
intends to manage its currency in the future remains a top-order issue.”
In
other words, Mr. Trump could use this moment not to beat China over the
head about what happened in the past, or where things stand today, but
to develop an agreement on what it will do in the future, if a day comes
when market forces start pushing the yuan upward.
Focus on the causes of the trade deficit, not the number
Mr.
Trump has similarly assailed the United States trade deficit with China
and other countries, often characterizing it as a scorecard, evidence
that China is winning at trade and the United States losing, to the tune
of $310 billion a year.
The
reality is more nuanced. The persistent trade deficit is indeed
problematic, but that’s because of the factors that drive it and the
imbalances they cause to build. Simply targeting a lower trade deficit
could well leave both American and Chinese workers worse off, if carried
out the wrong way. For example, a trade war that significantly reduces
American imports from China while also reducing American exports to
China would reduce the trade deficit but would mean lower incomes and
fewer jobs in both countries.
The
U.S.-China trade imbalance is indeed driven in part by trade barriers
that China enacts against American companies, including a 25 percent
tariff on imported automobiles and various quotas and restrictions that
reduce agricultural imports. If Mr. Trump can persuade China to loosen
those restrictions, it might close the trade deficit by increasing
American exports — the healthy kind of trade rebalancing.
But
the trade gap isn’t driven just by the details of trade arrangements.
It is also driven by the flow of capital between countries. To
oversimplify, when a company sells more abroad than it buys, it has to
do something with that money.
The
flip side of a current account deficit, as an economist might put it,
is a capital account surplus. China’s trade imbalances are a function
not only of its trade practices, but also of its very high levels of
savings, which are in turn invested around the world.
For
China to change that, it would have to change the very structure of its
economy: away from savings and big-ticket infrastructure investments,
and toward consumer demand — including for products made both
domestically and abroad.
If
the Trump administration really wants the trade deficit with China to
come down over time, it’s not enough to look at only one side of the
international economic ledger — flows of goods — while ignoring the flow
of capital.
In
practice, this would mean making demands on some issues that might seem
like purely domestic concerns only tangentially related to trade. That
might include pushing China to allow more troubled state-owned
enterprises to fail, so that their accumulated profits might be spread
through the Chinese economy instead of funneled toward the purchase of
foreign assets. A more generous pension system might spur demand among
older Chinese citizens.
If
China allowed global financial companies more access to its market, it
could both encourage more domestic spending and give a major American
industry an opportunity it has long sought.
Use leverage carefully
President
Trump prides himself on being a dealmaker, and his negotiating style is
to lay out extreme requests in order to work back to agreement. But
resetting economic relations with China will prove trickier than any
real estate deal.
One
of the fundamental realities of the relationship is that while neither
side is wholly comfortable with how it works, these are big, powerful
countries that can’t be easily swayed by what a country on the other
side of the Pacific Ocean wants to happen. The leverage that each side
has to deploy is limited — at least so long as neither country is
willing to shoot itself in the foot.
So,
for example, in trying to get more favorable Chinese treatment of
American goods and services, the standard menu of carrots Mr. Trump has
to offer for compliance is relatively modest. China wants things like
United States membership in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
that it started, and support for its “One Belt, One Road” program to build better transportation infrastructure stretching from Southeast Asia to Europe.
Bigger Chinese goals, like achieving “market economy” status
in the World Trade Organization, are likely to be nonstarters unless
the country makes major progress on allowing international companies
better access to its market.
The
United States could conceivably have more negotiating leverage by
threatening punitive tariffs or other aggressive measures, as Mr. Trump
did during his campaign, but those actions are just as likely to produce
a painful blowback from China that damages the United States.
Then there are noneconomic issues, which invariably could shape the contours of economic relationships.
“In
the Obama administration, China was a good citizen cooperating with us
on Iran sanctions and on climate change, which I think made it hard for
the U.S. to contemplate anything that harsh in the trade arena,” said
David Dollar, a former Treasury Department official in Beijing and now a
senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “You could have something
similar if the Trump administration wants China to cooperate more on
North Korea. That could be hard to turn around and be harsh on them in
the economic realm.”
Be patient, and don’t get distracted by baubles
Mr.
Trump likes to announce big splashy deals, and given that the Chinese
are looking for places to invest their capital in the United States, it
would be easy enough to find something along those lines to announce.
But
in the context of the two giant economies, that kind of thing is small
bore. This flawed economic relationship has been building for a long
time, and the fixes are unlikely to come overnight.
“Mr.
Trump ought to pick the right fights rather than focus on issues that
resonate with his political base but which are unlikely to help U.S.
economic interest in either the short term or long run,” said Eswar
Prasad, an economist at Cornell and author of “Gaining Currency,” a book about China’s role in global finance.
It’s
unlikely that the first meeting between the new president and the
Chinese leader will resolve issues that have been building for years or
even decades. Rather, those who have worked in diplomacy advise looking
beyond the current headlines to make progress on lowering Chinese trade
barriers, increasing its domestic savings and committing not to return
to the days of manipulating its currency lower.
When you’re talking about commerce between two superpowers, things don’t change overnight.
Trump Removes Stephen Bannon From National Security Council Post
WASHINGTON
— For the first 10 weeks of President Trump’s administration, no
adviser loomed larger in the public imagination than Stephen K. Bannon,
the raw and rumpled former chairman of Breitbart News who considers
himself a “virulently anti-establishment” revolutionary out to destroy
the “administrative state.”
But
behind the scenes, White House officials said, the ideologist who
enjoyed the president’s confidence became increasingly embattled as
other advisers, including Mr. Trump’s daughter and son-in-law,
complained about setbacks on health care and immigration. Lately, Mr.
Bannon has been conspicuously absent from some meetings. And now he has
lost his seat at the national security table.
In a move that was widely seen as a sign of changing fortunes, Mr. Trump removed Mr. Bannon, his chief strategist, from the National Security Council’s
cabinet-level “principals committee” on Wednesday. The shift was
orchestrated by Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, Mr. Trump’s national security
adviser, who insisted on purging a political adviser from the Situation
Room where decisions about war and peace are made.
Mr.
Bannon resisted the move, even threatening at one point to quit if it
went forward, according to a White House official who, like others,
insisted on anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. Mr. Bannon’s
camp denied that he had threatened to resign and spent the day spreading
the word that the shift was a natural evolution, not a signal of any
diminution of his outsize influence.
His
allies said privately that Mr. Bannon had been put on the principals
committee to keep an eye on Mr. Trump’s first national security adviser,
Michael T. Flynn, a retired three-star general who lasted just 24 days
before being forced out for misleading Vice President Mike Pence and
other White House officials about what he had discussed with Russia’s
ambassador. With Mr. Flynn gone, these allies said, there was no need
for Mr. Bannon to remain, but they noted that he had kept his security
clearance.
“Susan
Rice operationalized the N.S.C. during the last administration,” Mr.
Bannon said in a statement, referring to President Barack Obama’s
national security adviser. “I was put on the N.S.C. with General Flynn
to ensure that it was de-operationalized. General McMaster has returned
the N.S.C. to its proper function.”
Document: Stephen Bannon Is Removed From Top National Security Council Post
Mr. Bannon did not explain what he meant by “operationalized” or how his presence on the committee had ensured it would not be.
It
was one more drama in a White House consumed by palace intrigue, where
officials jockey for the ear of the president, angle for authority and
seek to place blame for political defeats. Even as Mr. Bannon lost a
national security credential, Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law
and senior adviser, seems to be acting as a shadow secretary of state,
visiting Iraq and taking on China, Mexico and Middle East portfolios.
Mr.
Bannon’s many enemies, inside and outside the White House, celebrated
what they saw as a defeat for his brand of fiery, nationalist politics.
“He
didn’t belong on the principals committee to begin with — doesn’t
really belong in the White House at all,” said Representative Adam B.
Schiff of California, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence
Committee. “I hope that this is a sign that McMaster is taking control
of the National Security Council.”
Karl
Rove — who, as senior adviser to President George W. Bush, was not
allowed to join national security meetings — said it was a move back to a
better process. “It was wrong for him to be added in the first place,
and it was right to take him off,” he said.
Even
if Mr. Bannon really was removed only because there was no longer a
need for someone to mind Mr. Flynn, Mr. Rove added, the end result was a
victory for General McMaster. “It’s either a sign of McMaster’s
strength, or the result is it strengthens McMaster,” he said.
Still,
Mr. Bannon, who has been under attack from outside the administration
since the early days of the transition, is a crafty survivor, and
insiders warned that it would be a mistake to underestimate him. When
General McMaster wanted to fire a staff member, Ezra Cohen-Watnick, Mr.
Bannon intervened to save his job.
Mr.
Cohen-Watnick had alerted colleagues that Mr. Trump’s associates had
been caught up in surveillance of foreigners, information then shown by
another White House official to Representative Devin Nunes, Republican
of California and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, which is
investigating Russian meddling in last year’s election.
James
Jeffrey, a deputy national security adviser to Mr. Bush, said General
McMaster appeared to have “scored one on the presumably more powerful
Bannon,” but cautioned against reading too much into what it meant for
Mr. Bannon. “He seems to be very close to the president and, by most
accounts, still wins many of his battles,” Mr. Jeffrey said.
From
the start, General McMaster intended to revamp the National Security
Council organization that he inherited from Mr. Flynn. The principals
committee, which is led by the national security adviser and includes
the vice president, secretary of state, defense secretary and others, is
the primary policy-making body deciding questions that do not rise to
the level of the president and framing those that do.
The
initial structure approved by Mr. Trump not only gave Mr. Bannon formal
membership on the committee, but also downgraded the chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff and the director of national intelligence to
occasional participants as issues demanded.
In
addition to removing Mr. Bannon, the new order issued by Mr. Trump,
dated Tuesday and made public on Wednesday, restored the Joint Chiefs
chairman and intelligence director and added the energy secretary,
C.I.A. director and United Nations ambassador. It also put the Homeland
Security Council under General McMaster rather than making it a separate
entity, as Mr. Trump’s original order had done.
Mr.
Trump was angry over the fallout from his first order, feeling that he
had not been properly warned about its implications. He briefly
considered reversing it the same weekend it was announced, according to a
person with direct knowledge, but decided against it for fear of
creating more of a public storm.
For
the first two months of Mr. Trump’s presidency, Mr. Bannon occupied an
unassailable perch at the president’s side — ramming through key
elements of his eclectic and hard-edge populist agenda, including two
executive orders on freezing immigration from several predominantly
Muslim countries. Mr. Trump viewed Mr. Bannon as a street-fighting
kindred spirit who favored his own attack-when-attacked communications
strategy.
But
blunders by Mr. Bannon’s team — especially the first immigration order,
which was rejected by multiple courts — have undermined his position.
His take-no-prisoners style was not a winning strategy on Capitol Hill,
and Mr. Bannon declined to take a significant part. Experienced
politicians, including Mr. Pence and Mr. Trump’s budget director, Mick
Mulvaney, stepped into more expansive roles as negotiations over the
failed health care overhaul dragged on.
Mr.
Trump initially supported Mr. Bannon’s take-it-or-leave-it final
message to holdouts in the House Freedom Caucus. But, needing a win, the
president grew skeptical and authorized Mr. Pence to resume health care
talks, with Mr. Bannon playing more of a supporting role, according to
three people close to Mr. Trump.
Mr.
Bannon has also been at odds with Gary Cohn, the president’s national
economics adviser. Mr. Cohn is close with Mr. Kushner, who has said
privately that he fears that Mr. Bannon plays to the president’s worst
impulses, according to people with direct knowledge of such discussions.
Moreover,
Mr. Bannon’s Svengali-style reputation has chafed on a president who
sees himself as the West Wing’s only leading man. Several associates
said the president had quietly expressed annoyance over the credit Mr.
Bannon had received for setting the agenda — and Mr. Trump was not
pleased by the “President Bannon” puppet-master theme promoted by
magazines, late-night talk shows and Twitter.
Yet
there is a risk for Mr. Trump in appearing to minimize Mr. Bannon, a
hero to the nationalist, anti-immigration base that helped drive Mr.
Trump to an Electoral College victory. With his approval ratings at
historic lows for so early in a presidency, he is counting on the same
people who see Mr. Bannon as their champion — just as Mr. Bannon is
counting on Mr. Trump to retain his place in the White House inner
circle.
The Opinion Pages | Op-Ed Columnist
Trump’s Gifts to China
SINGAPORE — The United States meets China this week in a position of weakness. Since taking office, Donald Trump
has handed China a strategic gift by abandoning a trade pact designed
to offset Chinese power in the region, been obliged to grovel after
offending China over Taiwan, and turned President Xi Jinping of China into an unlikely poster boy for climate change concern and an open global trading system.
So
much for the art of the deal; to Asian nations like Singapore worried
about China’s aggressive territorial expansion in the South China Sea,
American policy under Trump has looked more like a blink-first exercise.
Now Trump — having given
the Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe, the full Mar-a-Lago - is
obliged to give Xi the same at his Florida resort. (Angela Merkel,
merely the German chancellor, need not apply.)
Top
of the Florida menu is North Korea and how far China will help Trump in
rolling back Kim Jong-un’s nuclear and missile program. The thousands
of acres of new land built by China
in the form of artificial islands or expanded reefs in the Spratly
Islands off the coast of the Philippines — an extraordinary act of
lawless territorial expansionism — will also be part of the discussions.
Then of course there’s bilateral trade and Trump’s unhappiness with the
$347 billion
U.S. deficit last year — although with North Korea’s belligerent Kim
now in a position to hit Japan, that feels like a manageable irritant in
the symbiotic U.S.-Chinese economic entanglement.
China will not satisfy the United States on North Korea. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has said “strategic patience” is over.
But what does that mean? A pre-emptive American strike is nearly
unthinkable given Kim’s ability to blow up Seoul. It sounds like what
the Trump administration has specialized in: bluster. The Trump foreign
policy doctrine: Shout loud and carry a little stick. When Trump tells
The Financial Times that he can “totally” solve North Korea without China’s help, everyone shrugs at his saber-rattling.
China
has leverage over Kim, but its “strategic patience” with him is
infinite. Its priority is the survival of the totalitarian regime as a
buffer. The dictator is China’s insurance against a nuclear-armed united
Korea at its doorstep. Millions of North Koreans flooding over its
border in the event of a regime collapse is the last thing China wants.
To
Trump’s demands to deliver Kim, China is likely to shrug. Especially if
the president (unlikely scenario) does what he should and tells Xi that
China’s artificial-island push for regional dominance in the South
China Sea is unacceptable.
In
the long run any effective North Korea policy will probably have to
begin with acceptance that denuclearization is no longer possible and
stringent curtailment of Kim is the best bet. Diplomacy is a word that
Trump might usefully add to his vocabulary.
For
countries from Vietnam to Singapore, its absence has been alarming.
Trump’s decision to rip up the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an ambitious
free-trade arrangement including many countries in the region but not
China, was reckless. China’s pressure on Singapore to choose between the
United States and Beijing — something Singapore rightly refuses to do —
is typical of the increasingly heavy-handed Chinese regional approach.
With the T.P.P. dead, China is emboldened.
Already
last year it had impounded some Singaporean military vehicles to signal
impatience with Singapore’s close relations with Taiwan. It has also
been critical of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of Singapore when he
raises concerns over China’s South China Sea aggrandizement. For the
Chinese, “silence is golden” when it comes to all that new land for
runways, radars and the like in waters far from its shore. But for
Singapore, the sea is its lifeline. It cannot stay quiet; and it needs
offsetting American power in Asia to keep those sea-lanes open.
Here
we get to the nub of what should be on the Trump-Xi agenda. As Razeen
Sally, an associate professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public
Policy, told me: “In the end it’s about free people and open societies.
Are we going to have more or less of that in this part of the world?
That is why more Chinese domination in Asia would be so ominous.”
But
of course the Trump foreign policy is an experiment in a valueless,
transactional approach to the world from which the American idea has
been stripped.
Anthony
Miller, an American businessman in Japan, wrote to me recently about a
meeting with a senior Japanese university official who had asked him why
Japan should align itself with America if there is no longer “a mutual
belief in democracy, free trade and liberal values.” Miller concluded of
Trump: “The damage he is doing to the underpinnings of liberal
democracy is tremendous.”
When
Lee, the Singapore prime minister, called Trump in early December he
mentioned the free trade agreement between the United States and
Singapore. The then president-elect, I was told, had no idea of its
existence. Nor did Trump know that the United States has a trade surplus
with Singapore.
Unpreparedness is bad. It’s worse when combined with bluster and recklessness. That’s why China is winning.
You can follow me on Twitter (@NYTimesCohen) or join me on Facebook.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.
Trump Tries to Deflect Russia Scrutiny, Citing ‘Crooked Scheme’ by Obama
WASHINGTON
— President Trump sought to turn attention away from the Russia
investigation on Monday, saying that “the real story” was what he called
a “crooked scheme against us” by President Barack Obama’s team to mine American intelligence reports for information about him during last year’s presidential campaign.
The
president’s broadside against his predecessor coincided with a string
of reports in conservative news media outlets that Susan E. Rice, Mr.
Obama’s national security adviser, requested the identities of Americans
who were cited in intelligence reports about surveillance of foreign
officials, and who were connected with Mr. Trump’s campaign or
transition.
Former
national security officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity,
described the requests as normal and said they were justified by the
need for the president’s top security adviser to understand the context
of reports sent to her by the nation’s intelligence agencies.
The
process of “unmasking” Americans whose names are redacted in
intelligence reports, they said, is not the same thing as leaking them
publicly.
But
Mr. Trump and his allies seized on the news media reports to bolster
his case that he was targeted by the departing administration for
political reasons. As the F.B.I. and congressional committees
investigate contacts that associates of Mr. Trump had with Russian
officials and business figures, the president argued that he was the
victim of dirty tricks and that, if anything, it was associates of his
defeated opponent, Hillary Clinton, who were doing the bidding of Vladimir V. Putin’s Russia.
“Such amazing reporting on unmasking and the crooked scheme against us by @foxandfriends,” Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter
early Monday morning in the opening burst of four messages aimed at Mr.
Obama, Mrs. Clinton and the Democrats. “‘Spied on before nomination.’
The real story.”
In another post on Twitter
later in the morning, he added: “@FoxNews from multiple sources: ‘There
was electronic surveillance of Trump, and people close to Trump. This
is unprecedented.’ @FBI”
At
his daily briefing later in the day, Sean Spicer, the White House press
secretary, said he would not discuss the reports about Ms. Rice
specifically. “There’s a troubling direction that some of this is going
in, but we’re going to let this review go on before we jump to it,” he
said.
He
chided reporters for showing more interest in the investigation into
contacts between Mr. Trump’s team and Russia than in the conduct of Mr.
Obama’s White House.
Mr.
Trump first accused Mr. Obama a month ago of tapping his phones at
Trump Tower during the campaign last year. He has refused to back down,
even though Mr. Obama and his top aides have adamantly denied it. The F.B.I. director
and the former director of national intelligence have said the phone
tapping charge is not true, and congressional leaders of both parties
have said they have seen no evidence of it.
In
an interview broadcast on BBC on Monday evening, John O. Brennan, the
C.I.A. director under Mr. Obama, chided Mr. Trump for making an
unsubstantiated allegation against the former president. Mr. Trump, he
said, has “a solemn obligation” to provide information “that is
accurate, that is measured and that is not just a spontaneous or
impulsive number of words.”
While
other officials have said there is no convincing evidence so far of
collusion between Mr. Trump’s campaign and Russian officials who meddled
in last year’s election, Mr. Brennan said that “it would be premature
at this time to make any determination, or rule anything out.” At the
same time, he agreed with Mr. Trump about the seriousness of leaks to
the news media in recent weeks. “These leaks are appalling,” he said.
“They need to stop.”
In
trying to combat what Mr. Trump’s aides see as a concerted campaign of
leaks to undermine his legitimacy, the White House last month provided intelligence to Representative Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, showing that the president or his associates may have been “incidentally” swept up
in foreign surveillance by American spy agencies last year. Since Mr.
Nunes made that public, Mr. Trump’s team has focused on whether Mr.
Obama’s White House improperly used that information.
Republicans pointed to the reports about Ms. Rice on Monday. “Smoking gun found!” Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, wrote on Twitter. “Obama pal and noted dissembler Susan Rice said to have been spying on Trump campaign.”
Intelligence
officials are supposed to guard the privacy of Americans caught up in
routine eavesdropping of foreign officials. In daily intelligence
reports to officials like Ms. Rice, they typically refer to Americans
who came up in recorded conversations as U.S. Person One or U.S. Person
Two. But high-ranking officials, as Ms. Rice was, can ask intelligence
briefers to provide names to better understand the meaning of the
report.
It
remains unclear how many names were unmasked by Ms. Rice. But several
former officials said she did so for legitimate reasons: The Obama White
House was concerned during the election about continuing attempts by
the Russian government to hack Democratic email accounts and interfere
in the campaign. Ms. Rice, they said, needed to understand if Americans
were involved in that.
They
also said Mr. Obama’s advisers worried during the transition — as he
imposed sanctions on Russia for its election meddling — that the Trump
transition team was trying to undermine American policy before coming to
office.
The
content of the intelligence reports at issue remains unclear. Some
officials have said the reports consisted primarily of ambassadors and
other foreign officials talking about how they were trying to develop
contacts within Mr. Trump’s family and inner circle before his
inauguration.
The
former national security officials’ description of the intelligence is
in line with Mr. Nunes’s characterization of the material, which he said
was not related to the Russia investigations when he disclosed its
existence.
The
White House and Mr. Nunes have not made clear whether they are
concerned that actual names had been unmasked in reports, or whether one
could tell who the person being discussed was from their context.
But
at least one name is known to have been unmasked: Michael T. Flynn, the
former national security adviser. He was selected for that post during
American surveillance of Russia’s ambassador in December, when the two
talked about the sanctions Mr. Obama had just imposed on Moscow.
Mr. Flynn was forced out
in February after it emerged that he had misled Vice President Mike
Pence about the nature of the calls. But Mr. Trump and other White House
officials have suggested that the real problem in the Flynn case
involved the leaks about his calls with the Russian envoy, not the
content of the calls themselves — or what Mr. Flynn did or did not tell
colleagues about his communications.
Intelligence
agencies are permitted to record calls even if they involve Americans,
and any American citizen who talks with, messages or emails a foreign
official under surveillance would be picked up by intelligence agencies.
During the transition, this would have included Trump associates and
even Obama administration officials.
The Opinion Pages | Op-Ed Columnist
Trump Is Wimping Out on Trade
During the campaign, Donald Trump talked loudly and often about how he was going to renegotiate America’s “horrible trade deals,”
bringing back millions of good jobs. So far, however, nothing has
happened. Not only is Trumpist trade policy — Trumptrade? — nowhere to
be seen in practice; there isn’t even any indication of what it will
involve.
So
on Friday the White House scheduled a ceremony in which Mr. Trump would
sign two new executive orders on trade. The goal, presumably, was to
counteract the growing impression that his bombast on trade was sound
and fury signifying nothing.
Unfortunately,
the executive orders in question were, to use the technical term,
nothingburgers. One called for a report on the causes of the trade
deficit; wait, they’re just starting to study the issue? The other
addressed some minor issues of tariff collection, and its content
apparently duplicated an act President Obama already signed last year.
Not
surprisingly, reporters at the event questioned the president, not
about trade, but about Michael Flynn and the Russia connection. Mr.
Trump then walked out
of the room — without signing the orders. (Vice President Mike Pence
gathered them up, and the White House claims that they were signed
later.)
First,
back when Mr. Trump was railing against trade deals, he had no idea
what he was talking about. (I know, you’re shocked to hear that.)
For
example, listening to the Tweeter-in-chief, you’d think that Nafta was a
big giveaway by the United States, which got nothing in return. In
fact, Mexico drastically cut its tariffs on goods imported from the U.S., in return for much smaller cuts on the U.S. side.
Or take Mr. Trump’s repeated claims that China gains a competitive advantage by manipulating its currency.
That was true six years ago, but it’s not true now. These days China is
actually intervening to keep its currency up, not down.
Talking
nonsense about trade didn’t hurt Mr. Trump during the campaign. But now
he’s finding out that those grossly unfair trade deals he promised to
renegotiate aren’t all that unfair, after all, leaving him with no idea
what to do next.
Which
brings me to Trumptrade’s second big obstacle: Whatever you think of
past trade agreements, trade is now deeply embedded in the economy.
Consider the case of automobiles.
At this point it makes little sense to talk about a U.S. auto industry,
a Canadian auto industry or a Mexican auto industry. What we have
instead is a tightly integrated North American industry, in which
vehicles and components crisscross the continent, with almost every
finished car containing components from all three nations.
Does
it have to be this way? No. Slap on 30 percent tariffs, and after a few
years those national industries would separate again. But the
transition would be chaotic and painful.
Economists talk, with considerable justification, about the “China shock”:
the disruptive effect on jobs and communities of the rapid growth of
Chinese exports from the 1990s through 2007. But reversing globalization
now would produce an equally painful “Trump shock,” disrupting jobs and
communities all over again — and would also be painful for some of the
big corporate interests that, strange to say, have a lot of influence in
this supposedly populist regime.
The
point is that at a deep level Trumptrade is running into the same wall
that caused Trumpcare to crash and burn. Mr. Trump came into office
talking big, sure that his predecessors had messed everything up and he —
he alone — could do far better. And millions of voters believed him.
But governing America isn’t like reality TV. A few weeks ago Mr. Trump whined, “Nobody knew that health care could be so complicated.” Now, one suspects, he’s saying the same thing about trade policy.
SundayReview | Op-Ed Columnist
Trump Needs a Brain
THE series of columns I’ve been writing lately, floating implausible proposals
for an ideologically unstable age, has been a useful way of avoiding
the depressing subject of the Trump administration’s first 100 days —
because really, in the face of such incompetence and chaos, what is
there to say?
But
precisely because this administration seems so hopeless, any
constructive advice for the Trump White House automatically falls into
the category of implausible ideas. So I can continue my ongoing series
while also talking about Donald Trump — by proposing, as this week’s
unlikely-to-happen proposal, that our president should go out and get
himself a brain.
I do not mean a vat-grown cerebral cortex cooked up in some underground anti-aging lab funded by Silicon Valley immortalists
… though I gather those may be soon available as well. I mean a brain
in the sense that people (unkindly, but not inaccurately) used the term
to describe Bill Kristol when he was the aide-de-camp to Vice President
Dan Quayle 25 years ago: a person, or better a group of persons, who can
tell Trump what specific policies he ought to support.
Because
a core weakness of this White House, more devastating (for now) than
the pugilistic tweets and permanent swirl of scandal, is the absence of
anyone who seems to have thought through how one might translate
Trumpism, the populist nationalism on which the president campaigned,
into substantive policy on any specific issue except a temporary visa
freeze.
The dearth of Trumpists in official Washington was always going to be a major problem for this administration, both in staffing the White House and in negotiating with Congress. But it’s been worse than anticipated, because Trump himself doesn’t know what he wants to do on major issues and there’s nobody in his innermost circle who seems to have a compelling vision that might guide him.
A
certain Steve Bannon — perhaps you’ve heard of him — was supposed to
help Trump figure all this out, perhaps with an assist from Michael Anton,
the once-pseudonymous pro-Trump essayist now ensconced in the National
Security Council. But there’s little evidence that either man’s policy
vision has advanced much beyond, “The conservative movement has failed,
let’s try something else.” Bannon seems to have been particularly
useless during the health care negotiations, encouraging Trump to work with the Freedom Caucus one day and trying to bully them the next, while throwing out various critiques of the Paul Ryan bill that didn’t point toward anything coherent.
It
was probably unreasonable to expect a sixtysomething whose life
experience is all in media and Hollywood to suddenly turn into a one-man
think tank, no matter how many French far-right agitators
he name-drops. But a think tank is basically what Trump needs: a small
brain trust committed to figuring out what parts of the mainstream
G.O.P. vision he should support and what heterodoxies it makes sense for
him to champion, so that he isn’t stuck governing on the Heritage
Foundation’s austerity budgets while his friends outside the
administration urge him to expand Medicaid.
Some Trump supporters — the folks behind the new journal American Affairs,
most notably — are trying to play that role already. But they’re
getting going slowly; Trump needs something sooner, faster, now. He
needs, in effect, a think tank inside the White House: a small group,
separate from the process-oriented Domestic Policy Council, whose only
task is to brief the president regularly on how Trumpist premises should
shape any given legislative deal.
The
way things are going, there won’t be many such deals struck. But this
brain trust would have a longer-term purpose, too: It would be assigned
to build up an easy-to-explain agenda that Trumpish candidates could run
on in 2018, that Trump could champion if he tries to triangulate
between Ryan and the Democrats, and that the president could campaign on
when he runs for re-election. (Aren’t you excited for 2020, dear
reader?)
Who
might staff it? The people involved with American Affairs would be
candidates, but I would also look to other dissident-conservative
publications like The American Conservative, junior (that is, not yet
set in their views) staff at places like Heritage and the American
Enterprise Institute, lesser known right-leaning outfits like the
Institute for Family Studies, and the offices of creative populists like
Senator Mike Lee of Utah. Possible brain trusters might include figures
like F. H. Buckley, the George Mason law professor and Trump
speechwriter who recently urged the president to come out for single-payer; Mickey Kaus, the once-liberal blogger turned Trumpista; and Henry Olsen of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, author of a forthcoming book on Reagan’s populism.
All
of this assumes that Trump cares about Trumpism as something more than a
grift, and that he can accept advice and counsel in a sustained way,
without changing his mind the instant someone makes a different case. As
I said, it’s a deeply implausible idea.
But so is every solution to this White House’s struggles — and we’ve still got most of four years left to go.
In the Garden: A Welcome Sign of Spring
By Charles Kidder
Perhaps
the first plant I could recognize and name as a child was the daffodil,
a welcome sight and fragrance after a long New York winter. And
although native to the Mediterranean, daffodils (Narcissus species) have
been in Virginia since at least the middle of the seventeenth century.
Beginning in the 1890s, Gloucester County became a
center of daffodil production for much of the eastern United States.
Much of this revolved around “wild” or naturalized daffodils that were
cut and shipped north. By the middle of the twentieth century, this
industry was rapidly dying off for a variety of reasons. But Gloucester
County still has one daffodil breeder of note and continues to celebrate
its floral heritage with the Daffodil Festival on the last weekend of
March. More on that later.
The various Narcissus species, hybrids and
cultivars are commonly referred to as either daffodils, jonquils or even
simply narcissus, the latter especially when referring to the paper
whites commonly forced indoors. The term jonquil is commonly used in
certain regions for any daffodil, but technically refers only to one
group that has narrow reed-like foliage. The various daffodils are
divided into 13 divisions—or 12, if you believe some sources—that are
based on flower shape and heritage. For example, Division 1 daffodils
are called Trumpets, since the central portion or trumpet is quite long.
Regardless of division, colors range from yellow to white, perhaps with
some pink or orange in the trumpets. If you seek out specialty
nurseries, hundreds of cultivars are available.
All daffodils have similar cultural requirements.
As for the amount of sun they want, the more the better. Part sun, or
about six hours per day, is sufficient, but less sun than that will lead
to reduced blooming, even though the plants may soldier on for a long
time. And sunlight in a deciduous woodland does not really count as full
sunlight. As for soil, good drainage is important to avoid bulb rot. If
your soil is unusually sodden, either amend it with gravel or put
daffodils in a raised bed.
Daffodil bulbs should be planted at a depth equal
to about three times their diameter, so a two-inch bulb should be six
inches deep. Six inches is also a good distance between bulbs. Farther
apart and they lose visual impact; closer, and they will require
division sooner. Bulbs will look funny planted like soldiers in a
straight line, so if you have ten bulbs, better to either plant them in
two groups of five, or in a staggered double row. If you are planting a
very large number, you can avoid an overly orderly appearance by picking
up a handful and tossing them to the general area in which you wish to
plant.
There are any number of “new, improved,
back-saving!!” bulb planters out there. Use whatever works best for you,
which might just be an ordinary trowel or even a garden shovel. And
remember: nothing says you have to plant one bulb at a time. You can
take a spade and dig up a good-sized hole with one or two punches, and
then throw in three to five bulbs. For even larger areas, a rototiller
might be the quickest option. And do the bulbs have to be pointy-side
up? That’s the ideal, but the shoot will always get turned around and
pointed toward the sky anyway. If you’re in a hurry, ensuring that the
bulbs are at least on their side would be a good compromise.
Amending your soil with compost will definitely
give your daffodils a boost, but there’s no need to fertilize when
planting—which of course is not now, but in mid-to-late fall. In very
early spring, a balanced fertilizer—about 5-5-5 or 10-10-10 is
best—should be sprinkled around the plants just as their foliage
emerges. (You can also do this in the fall, but that assumes you’ll
remember where your daffodils are!) And speaking of feeding your
daffodils, we all know what to do with their foliage, which is there to
provide nutrients for the bulb, right? Doing nothing is perfectly okay.
Or when the foliage turns yellow and lies on the ground, you can throw
some mulch on it if the sight offends you. Do not cut the foliage off
while it’s still green or tie it up in cutesy knots! That prevents
movement of nutrients down to the bulb; plus, it takes a lot of valuable
gardening time.
But back to Gloucester County. The annual Daffodil
Festival takes place on the last weekend of March and includes the usual
attractions: a parade, a queen, entertainers, a race, a car show, and
of course, daffodils. (A full schedule is available on the county’s
website. There’s also a link to the history of daffodil farming in this
corner of Virginia.) On Saturday they will be running frequent buses
over to Brent and Becky’s Bulbs for tours and shopping. Brent and Becky
Heath own a business that has been in the family for several
generations, at one time operating as the Daffodil Mart. Although they
now sell many other types of bulbs, daffodils are still a specialty,
with over 200 varieties available.
Once planted, daffodils tend to naturalize, meaning
they spread slowly, but never seem to become invasive. Part of their
secret to longevity might be their poisonous nature: deer and other
critters don’t bother them, so you can enjoy your host of daffodils for
many years.
Betty MacDonald fan club fans,
we share a very special gift by beloved and very popular Betty MacDonald Fan Club Honor member Letizia Mancino.
We know you'll enjoy it as much as we do.
Thanks a Million, dear Letizia Mancino.
You are an outstanding writer and artist.
We are so proud and happy to have you with us.
Letizia writes: One should not underestimate Wolfgang Hampel’s talent in speedily mobilizing Betty MacDonald’s friends.
We agree. Thank you so much dear Wolfgang Hampel for doing this. You founded Betty MacDonald Fan Club with four members.
Now we have members in 40 countries around the world. A dream came true.
Mary Holmes did an excellent job in translating this great story.
Thank you so much dear Mary Holmes.
We are really very grateful.
All the best to Letizia, Wolfgang and Mary and to all Betty MacDonald Fan Club fans from all over the world!
Lenard
Following in Betty’s footsteps in Seattle:
or some small talk with Betty
Copyright 2011/2016 by Letizia Mancino
All rights reserved
translated by Mary Holmes
We were going to Canada in the summer. “When we are in Edmonton”, I said to Christoph Cremer, “let’s make a quick trip to Seattle”. And that’s how it happened. At Edmonton Airport we climbed into a plane and two hours later we landed in the city where Betty had lived. I was so happy to be in Seattle at last and to be able to trace Betty’s tracks!
Wolfgang Hampel had told Betty’s friends about our arrival.
They were happy to plan a small marathon through the town and it’s surroundings with us. We only had a few days free. One should not underestimate Wolfgang’s talent in speedily mobilizing Betty’s friends, even though it was holiday time. E-mails flew backwards and forwards between Heidelberg and Seattle, and soon a well prepared itinerary was ready for us. Shortly before my departure Wolfgang handed me several parcels, presents for Betty MacDonald's friends. I rushed to pack the heavy gifts in my luggage but because of the extra weight had to throw out a pair of pajamas!
After we had landed we took a taxi to the Hotel in downtown Seattle. I was so curious to see everything. I turned my head in all directions like one of the hungry hens from Betty’s farm searching for food! Fortunately it was quite a short journey otherwise I would have lost my head like a loose screw!
Our hotel room was on the 22nd floor and looked directly out onto the 16-lane highway. There might have been even more than 16 but it made me too giddy to count! It was like a glimpse of hell! “And is this Seattle?” I asked myself. I was horrified! The cars racing by were enough to drive one mad. The traffic roared by day and night.
We immediately contacted Betty MacDonald's friends and let them know we had arrived and they confirmed the times when we should see them.
On the next morning I planned my first excursion tracing Betty’s tracks. I spread out the map of Seattle. “Oh dear” I realized “the Olympic Peninsula is much too far away for me to get there.”
Betty nodded to me! “Very difficult, Letizia, without a car.”
“But I so much wanted to see your chicken farm”
“My chickens are no longer there and you can admire the mountains from a distance”
But I wanted to go there. I left the hotel and walked to the waterfront where the State Ferry terminal is. Mamma mia, the streets in Seattle are so steep! I couldn’t prevent my feet from running down the hill. Why hadn’t I asked for brakes to be fixed on my shoes? I looked at the drivers. How incredibly good they must be to accelerate away from the red traffic lights. The people were walking uphill towards me as briskly as agile salmon. Good heavens, these Americans! I tried to keep my balance. The force of gravity is relentless. I grasped hold of objects where I could and staggered down.
In Canada a friend had warned me that in Seattle I would see a lot of people with crutches.
Betty laughed. “ It’s not surprising, Letizia, walking salmon don’t fall directly into the soft mouth of a bear!”
“ Betty, stop making these gruesome remarks. We are not in Firlands!”
I went further. Like a small deranged ant at the foot of a palace monster I came to a tunnel. The noise was unbearable. On the motorway, “The Alaskan Way Viaduct”, cars, busses and trucks were driving at the speed of light right over my head. They puffed out their poisonous gas into the open balconies and cultivated terraces of the luxurious sky- scrapers without a thought in the world. America! You are crazy!
“Betty, are all people in Seattle deaf? Or is it perhaps a privilege for wealthy people to be able to enjoy having cars so near to their eyes and noses to save them from boredom?”
“When the fog democratically allows everything to disappear into nothing, it makes a bit of a change, Letizia”
“ Your irony is incorrigible, Betty, but tell me, Seattle is meant to be a beautiful city, But where?”
I had at last reached the State Ferry terminal.
“No Madam, the ferry for Vashon Island doesn’t start from here,” one of the men in the ticket office tells me. ”Take a buss and go to the ferry terminal in West Seattle.”
Betty explained to me “The island lies in Puget Sound and not in Elliott Bay! It is opposite the airport. You must have seen it when you were landing!”
“Betty, when I am landing I shut my eyes and pray!”
It’s time for lunch. The weather is beautiful and warm. Who said to me that it always rains here?
“Sure to be some envious man who wanted to frighten you away from coming to Seattle. The city is really beautiful, you’ll see. Stay by the waterfront, choose the best restaurant with a view of Elliott Bay and enjoy it.”
“Thank you Betty!”
I find a table on the terrace of “Elliott’s Oyster House”. The view of the island is wonderful. It lies quietly in the sun like a green fleecy cushion on the blue water.
Betty plays with my words:
“Vashon Island is a big cushion, even bigger than Bainbridge which you see in front of your eyes, Letizia. The islands look similar. They have well kept houses and beautiful gardens”.
I relax during this introduction, “Bainbridge” you are Vashon Island, and order a mineral water.
“At one time the hotel belonging to the parents of Monica Sone stood on the waterfront.”
“Oh, of your friend Kimi!” Unfortunately I forget to ask Betty exactly where it was.
My mind wanders and I think of my mountain hike back to the hotel! “Why is there no donkey for tourists?” Betty laughs:
“I’m sure you can walk back to the hotel. “Letizia can do everything.””
“Yes, Betty, I am my own donkey!”
But I don’t remember that San Francisco is so steep. It doesn’t matter, I sit and wait. The waiter comes and brings me the menu. I almost fall off my chair!
“ What, you have geoduck on the menu! I have to try it” (I confess I hate the look of geoduck meat. Betty’s recipe with the pieces made me feel quite sick – I must try Betty’s favourite dish!)
“Proof that you love me!” said Betty enthusiastically “ Isn’t the way to the heart through the stomach?”
I order the geoduck. The waiter looks at me. He would have liked to recommend oysters.
“Geoduck no good for you!”
Had he perhaps read my deepest thoughts? Fate! Then no geoduck. “No good for me.”
“Neither geoduck nor tuberculosis in Seattle” whispered Betty in my ear!
“Oh Betty, my best friend, you take such good care of me!”
I order salmon with salad.
“Which salmon? Those that swim in water or those that run through Seattle?”
“Betty, I believe you want me to have a taste of your black humour.”
“Enjoy it then, Letizia.”
During lunch we talked about tuberculosis, and that quite spoilt our appetite.
“Have you read my book “The Plague and I”?”
“Oh Betty, I’ve started to read it twice but both times I felt so sad I had to stop again!”
“But why?” asked Betty “Nearly everybody has tuberculosis! I recovered very quickly and put on 20 pounds! There was no talk of me wasting away! What did you think of my jokes in the book?”
“Those would have been a good reason for choosing another sanitorium. I would have been afraid of becoming a victim of your humour! You would have certainly given me a nickname! You always thought up such amusing names!” Betty laughed.
“You’re right. I would have called you “Roman nose”. I would have said to Urbi and Orbi “ Early this morning “Roman nose” was brought here. She speaks broken English, doesn’t eat geoduck but she does love cats.”
“Oh Betty, I would have felt so ashamed to cough. To cough in your presence, how embarrassing! You would have talked about how I coughed, how many coughs!”
“It depends on that “how”, Letizia!”
“Please, leave Goethe quotations out of it. You have certainly learnt from the Indians how to differentiate between noises. It’s incredible how you can distinguish between so many sorts of cough! At least 10!”
“So few?”
”And also your descriptions of the patients and the nurses were pitiless. An artistic revenge! The smallest pimple on their face didn’t escape your notice! Amazing.”
“ I was also pitiless to myself. Don’t forget my irony against myself!”
Betty was silent. She was thinking about Kimi, the “Princess” from Japan! No, she had only written good things about her best friend, Monica Sone, in her book “The Plague and I”. A deep friendship had started in the hospital. The pearl that developed from the illness.
“Isn’t it wonderful, Betty, that an unknown seed can make its way into a mollusk in the sea and develop into a beautiful jewel?” Betty is paying attention.
“Betty, the friendship between you and Monica reminds me of Goethe’s poem “Gingo-Biloba”. You must know it?” Betty nods and I begin to recite it:
The leaf of this Eastern tree
Which has been entrusted to my garden
Offers a feast of secret significance,
For the edification of the initiate.
Is it one living thing.
That has become divided within itself?
Are these two who have chosen each other,
So that we know them as one?
The friendship with Monica is like the wonderful gingo-biloba leaf, the tree from the east. Betty was touched. There was a deep feeling of trust between us.
“Our friendship never broke up, partly because she was in distress, endangered by the deadly illness. We understood and supplemented each other. We were like one lung with two lobes, one from the east and one from the west!”
“A beautiful picture, Betty. You were like two red gingo-biloba leaves!”
Betty was sad and said ” Monica, although Japanese, before she really knew me felt she was also an American. But she was interned in America, Letizia, during the second world war. Isn’t that terrible?”
“Betty, I never knew her personally. I have only seen her on a video, but what dignity in her face, and she speaks and moves so gracefully!”
“Fate could not change her”
“Yes, Betty, like the gingo-biloba tree in Hiroshima. It was the only tree that blossomed again after the atom bomb!”
The bill came and I paid at once. In America one is urged away from the table when one has finished eating. If one wants to go on chatting one has to order something else.
“That’s why all those people gossiping at the tables are so fat!” Betty remarks. “Haven’t you seen how many massively obese people walk around in the streets of America. Like dustbins that have never been emptied!” With this typically unsentimental remark Betty ended our conversation.
Ciao! I so enjoyed the talk; the humour, the irony and the empathy. I waved to her and now I too felt like moving! I take a lovely walk along the waterfront.
Now I am back in Heidelberg and when I think about how Betty’s “Princessin” left this world on September 5th and that in August I was speaking about her with Betty in Seattle I feel very sad. The readers who knew her well (we feel that every author and hero of a book is nearer to us than our fleeting neighbours next door) yes we, who thought of her as immortal, cannot believe that even she would die after 92 years. How unforeseen and unexpected that her death should come four days after her birthday on September 1th. On September 5th I was on my way to Turkey, once again in seventh heaven, looking back on the unforgettable days in Seattle. I was flying from west to east towards the rising sun.
Is this Mr. Tigerli?
 |
