2020 began a hectic time. After a series of attacks on US military bases in Iraq and an attack on the United States Embassy in Baghdad, the US military destroyed Iranian General Kassem Suleimani, who was accused of organizing these actions. Tehran has already threatened retaliation. Washington, in turn, said it would harshly respond to "any new manifestations of aggression" by the Islamic Republic and its Shiite allies.
It is perhaps premature to talk about the beginning of a new big war in the Middle East, but the situation in the region has become extremely aggravated. However, here and so recently it has been very far from peace and tranquility. Turkey’s military operation in northern Syria, the ongoing war in Yemen, the constant raids of Israeli aircraft on Iranian targets on the territory of the Arab Republic — all this threatened at any moment to develop into a large-scale cross-border conflict affecting the interests of great powers.
And yet, in my opinion, a much greater danger to the world is connected with what is happening inside the United States, where the political struggle has acquired the character of a fundamental confrontation. Opponents of the current president of the United States condemned the killing of Suleimani, but do not think that they were wiser or more peaceful than the owner of the White House. It’s just that the opposition has found another reason to criticize the leader that it hates. The same people who today accuse Trump of incontinence, a few days ago claimed that he did not react decisively to the attack on the American embassy. Not to mention the fact that many of them in 2003 welcomed Washington's Iraqi adventure.
Paradoxically, but a fact. The president, who gave the order to kill General Suleymani, is being tried to be removed from power not because of an aggressive foreign policy, but because he questioned Washington’s foreign policy consensus on the role of the United States in the world. The roles of a global policeman.
Formal accusations are completely unimportant. The overwhelming leader must be overthrown at all costs. For example, provoking him to unleash another big war. Or accusing him of a “wrong” conversation with Vladimir Zelensky. Or calling him "the puppet of the Kremlin." Acting in accordance with this logic, the U.S. House of Representatives, where the majority belong to the Democrats, impeached President Trump at the end of 2019.
Further, according to the Constitution, the case should be referred to the Senate, where a trial will be held under the chairmanship of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, as a result of which the senators will decide whether to remove the head of state from power or acquit. But it was not there! Democrats from the lower house, who for the past two months have been talking about the extreme urgency of impeachment (after all, Donald Trump, in their opinion, continues to commit a crime by simply staying at the helm of the country), suddenly refused to hand over the indictment.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi explained this by saying that she was not sure of the honesty and procedural integrity of the Senate case.
Later, she softened her position somewhat and stated that the documents would be handed over to the upper house only when the procedure for considering the case by senators became clear. Will it be a “fair trial” with a call to all those witnesses who could not be interrogated during the hearings in the House of Representatives, or a “one-party justification” that the Republicans “planned in advance”. Such a collision occurs for the first time in American history. How to resolve it is not yet clear. The intervention of the Supreme Court may be required.
But it is not necessary to hope that the supreme judicial body and the voting of senators will put an end to the history of impeachment.
Democrats have already stated that they can add new charges to their conclusion. Perhaps one of these accusations will be "drawing the US into the war." In addition, speaking in the media, opposition congressmen did not rule out the announcement of the next impeachment if Trump was acquitted. And then one more, and more, and more ... This, as you know, has not happened in the history of the USA either.
All this would be very funny if it did not cause a feeling of anxiety. No civil agreement is foreseen in the overseas nuclear superpower. Opposing political forces discarded all propriety. They forgot about the traditions and provisions of the very Constitution, which they were so proud of and whose name they were going to outlaw each other. At the same time - and this is very American - they absolutely do not care how they look from the outside and what the world thinks about them.
The problem is not limited to the irreconcilable struggle of the elites. The power departments secretly and clearly participate in the battle. It all began (in any case, it became known about it) in 2016, when a scandal broke out around the world with electronic surveillance of Trump's campaign headquarters. Already after the inauguration, US National Intelligence Director James Klapper said: “In the place of Trump, I would not get involved with the intelligence community. This has not brought anyone to good. ” A year later, the president threatened Klapper with prison.
In 2019, a special group of investigators led by John Durham was formed at the US Department of Justice. Her task was to investigate the activities of the FBI and other law enforcement agencies in the conduct of the so-called Russian case. One bureau employee has already been charged with falsifying evidence. Of particular note is the personality of Durham himself. He is a Connecticut federal attorney. The choice fell on him, of course, not only because he does not belong to the “Washington Swamp”. John earned his reputation by investigating corruption and abuse of power in the CIA and the FBI. His work in 2020 will affect many former and current senior officials of the special services and federal departments. Very important and influential people with connections in the intelligence community and the political elite can receive impressive prison sentences.
In response, the Democrats threatened to impeach both Durham himself and his immediate supervisor, Attorney General William Barr.
Representatives of the special services involved in the game against Trump are also unlikely to be idle. It is possible that the investigation is already putting sticks in wheels. In any case, Barr hinted at it. In the event of a real danger for members of the intelligence community, sabotage will become so obvious that the prosecutor general, known for his strong temper, will be forced to use force. And the conflict will reach a fundamentally new level.
No tactical success of one of the parties, even very impressive, will lead to the end of the confrontation. There is no question of compromise. In 2019, after the epic failure of Mueller’s investigation, the Democrats quickly enough found a new reason for attacking Trump - “Ukraingate”, in which he was impeached. So when the Senate (if, of course, the case is handed over to him) justifies the president (and in the current situation it is almost inevitable), the next accusations will appear. It is no coincidence that public opinion is preparing for the fact that impeachment will be repeated.
Even if Trump wins the 2020 presidential election with a clear margin, and Democrats are outnumbered in both houses, the confrontation will not come to naught. Mainstream media will continue to talk about the “criminal president” and, apparently, will again talk about the “Russian trace” in Donald’s next electoral victory. The head of state can achieve any kind of success in the economy and foreign policy, but in the eyes of liberals he will remain the worst US leader in history, an “existential threat” to their lifestyle. Exactly the same thing about Trump's enemies is thought by those who supported him in 2016. Voters today do not just sharply disagree, they seem to live in two different countries. Worse, they almost consider their opponents to be enemies.
Almost every day, news comes about another minor skirmish between Trump supporters and left-liberal activists. Closer to the elections, the situation will become even more heated. In 2016, the case cost several major fights. In 2020, during the election campaign, clashes can occur, in comparison with which even the massacres in Charlottesville and Portland seem to be children's parties. Politicians and the media will habitually mutter about the unacceptability of violence, but then they will certainly blame only the other side for everything that happened. I think that even small skirmishes will not scare them enough to take real measures to reconcile or at least reduce the degree of tension.
Trump's supporters have not yet shown a lot of street activity and, unlike the left, have not caused unrest for one single reason: they are sure that impeachment will fail and their leader will be re-elected for a second term. But if (or when) the case smells like kerosene, rallies of the right will immediately begin to gather across the country. There are enough opinion leaders in the United States who can bring about a million trampists to Washington. And then the capital will be like a barrel of gunpowder with a smoldering fuse.
Losing Donald Trump in the 2020 elections, although unlikely, is still possible.
But this will not be the end of the story. In the republican primaries of 2024, a person with the same program as Trump, and possibly more radical, will inevitably become a presidential candidate. The whole question is whether the right will agree to wait four years before the restoration of trampism or whether they will start to rebel the very next day after the election.
Of course, liberals will not accept the bad voting results on November 3, 2020. Even now they do not miss the opportunity to speculate that "the country is ruled by an illegitimate president." And on November 4, a nationwide campaign to reject the election results will begin. In November-December 2016, rallies also swept across the country under the slogan “This is not my president!”, But then Barack Obama (we must give him his due) quite firmly insisted on a peaceful transfer of power. Are there any cold heads in the Democratic Party this time?
In 2020, protests can go to the pogroms of election commissions and offices of federal departments. Those who disagree will try to leak into the congress building (when the Senate will approve the decision of the electoral college), all the more so since such an experience exists: this was the case when Brett Cavanaugh was approved by the judge of the Supreme Court. Trump's rival may not admit defeat. And then the mainstream media every day will broadcast the thesis about the illegitimacy of elections to the whole nation. Well, if the case is resolved in the highest court. To do this, you need "the smallest thing" - for street activists to recognize the decision of the Supreme Court, where the current owner of the White House has already appointed two judges.
Of course, a lot will depend on who becomes the presidential candidate for the Democratic Party. Much will become clear if not in February (after the primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina), then in early March - after the so-called Super Tuesday, when the primary elections will be held in 14 states, on one associated territory and among Americans abroad. But if the mood of the Democratic voters does not seriously change, their election conference will begin in the absence of an obvious winner. In this case, it will become competitive (sometimes such a conference is also called trade), and the party leadership will decide who will become a candidate for the highest state post and its vice.
And their decision may not appeal to street leaders. This has already happened in US history. The most striking example is the 1968 Democrat Party Conference in Chicago. The case turned into bloody clashes with the police. In general, that massacre was the end of the “left awakening” of 1968. Conservative Richard Nixon was elected president that year.
If something similar happens in 2020, it will be, oddly enough, a favorable development of events.
The most zealous left activists will spend all their anger on the bosses of the Democratic Party and will not become their fighting squad in November.
Perhaps even an exotic development of events. If for some reason the electoral college is unable to get together or its work is hindered, and if some delegates under pressure change their minds so that no candidate gets 270 votes, then by January 20, 2021 the fate of the highest office in the United States Congress will have to decide. This has already happened in American history, but not under the conditions of the extreme polarization of society.
The US exit from the political crisis largely depends on the hardware game in the Ministry of Justice (I recall that Nixon’s resignation in 1974 was largely influenced by the position of this department). One of the parties must convincingly and relatively for a long time win, and with a demonstration of brute force. And this means real prison sentences either for a number of high-ranking special services officers who worked under Obama, or for several key Trump associates. And perhaps for himself. And this only raises the stakes in the political confrontation.
Throughout 2020, the United States will balance on the brink of transitioning the Cold Civil War into a hot phase. And from this it will be restless on the whole planet. Much more turbulent than from the extraterritorial application of American justice, the constant non-compliance with international law by the United States and the destruction of the global strategic security system.
In my opinion, the development of events in the “greatest democracy on Earth” requires decisive action on the part of the international community. Responsible powers and all people of good will must demand from the United States an immediate settlement of the internal conflict. In this situation, such a requirement is not only legitimate, but also extremely necessary.
At least “express concern” should be given. What I am doing. I also make an appeal. Americans, live in the new year peacefully!
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.