Trump is an old man. He is no stranger to the history of the cold war. He is also no stranger to America’s continued efforts to maintain its standing in the world against some of its historic enemies. Yet with every move he makes, America loses ground in Europe against our two most feared rivals: Russian Intelligence and Islamic Terrorism. And a single failure in judgment could set American back fifty years, at home and abroad.
If there is a question of motive as to why Trump was propped up by connections in Russia during the election, you have to look no further than Europe. With the Muslim immigration into Europe – some of whom have a propensity for violence and distaste, if not hatred, toward America – there is the making of an Anti-American army on the continent. And there could be no better Emmanuel Goldstein for Big Brother to lambaste in order to drum up hate for, than our current president. Making Americans and American affiliations heightened targets of terrorism. The result is the capacity for the Kremlin to create further distance between America and a European citizenry hostage to random acts of violence, explicated as Anti-American sentiment – true or false. The perceptions are as important as the reality. Should a people, not knowing otherwise what they can do to protect themselves from violence, decide that they can at least disassociate, just in case, then they may – provided they do not see it for what it is.
The Kremlin wants, and at all cost, for Europe and the world not to see it for what it is, and America cannot dawdle bringing it to light.
Should the Europeans see this presidency for what it is – an attempt to prop up a (notably non-Jewish, though not anti-Jewish) Goldstein in order to win hate against America – they are integral enough not to collapse under the weight of pressure from anti-American sentiment. Should the means and methods by which Trump came into power remain even too slowly dragged into the public consciousness, a single misstep can destroy American objectives for years to come in the meantime. This may well be the intended purpose of this presidency itself. And with it the Kremlin gains what Authoritarians always desire most, control.
The best hope is for the FBI to move swiftly with their investigations – something that Trump is now fighting with the release, and threat of release, of previously classified intelligence documents. But the best case scenario is admitting we have been had by the Kremlin, so in any case, America will have to realize it has some fighting to do, but at least we stem the tide of tyranny.
It happens everyday, but not least in the highest reaches of government. In the highest reaches of government, people are quick to clean their hands of any potential wrong doing with a turn of phrase. The matter does not have to be complicated. If I am a diplomat and I say that we don’t like X, and if you do Y, we will do Z, this only constitutes a threat if the other side does not like Z and it is not to your advantage that they do Y. But if you say it like that, your hands are washed of whatever wrong was done with Y, and if you do Z given Y, you can effectively establish trust – all under the guise of whatever protection Z feigns to provide (e.g. xyz=(Ukraine,Syria,Economy).
Matters are not as cut and dried as national broadcasts would like, and in relations, both domestic and foreign, such implicit agreements are the norm rather than the exception. Still I cannot but beg to maintain that if there is to be integrity to the system – and if our leaders are to know the first as well as the last thing as to what is going on – then we need a system of coordination which is forthright and does not save face for the sake of future votes, protecting against future spin, and living in a reality of appearances which cannot be sustained given a more intelligent populous.
On a plateau over Granada, Spain stands Alhambra. It is a grand palace and former settlement of the Moors. It is today well preserved in its full history, but its history is still alive.
Inside the grounds of Alhambra is a church. It is a nice church, in the renaissance style, but it’s history is not so nice. Alhambra was a Moorish palace and settlement, and where the church of Santa Maria de la Encarnacion stands once stood a mosque. That mosque was torn down and in its place was put the church. It was common practice throughout Andalusia, Spain to convert old mosques to cathedrals. The major cathedrals of Andalusia were once mosques. But tearing down this mosque and building in its place a church, on the grounds of Moorish Alhambra, was a clear show of power by Catholic rule, and no mere convenience.
In The Alhambra Trinity I address – in literary and indirect form – some reasons for turning St. Maria’s of Alhambra into an offering of peace. What I do not address directly – though it is an underlying current – is its historical significance as a symbol of religious struggle and the domination by Catholicism in Spain. As such it holds a unique place for potential as a symbol of peace as Spain enters an age of religious diversity and tolerance, but I do not believe the proper action is to convert St. Maria’s to a mosque. It should instead be made symbol of interfaith peace and not a symbol of triumph by one side over another – diplomatic or otherwise. A place where all people of faith are welcome, including those of the Jewish faith, who have a long history in the region of Granada, and also worked on Alhambra.
To that end I, a Catholic, suggest it be converted to a place where all faiths can practice together, though in a unique way. I realize that the suggestion of re-architecting a renaissance style church in Europe may fall on deaf ears. And some may look at this approach as opening a can of worms, but I look at it as the most supreme offering of peace that the Church can make. And peace should be the goal of all faith, Catholic, Islamic, Jewish or otherwise.