Can Trump be stopped, or are international rules basically optional now?

[Anytimeilookaround]

I’m genuinely asking this rather than trying to start a rant. Can Trump actually be stopped by anyone?

The UN condemning things with words feels meaningless when there is no action behind it. We are watching a US president openly dismiss international law, threaten other countries, and act as if there are no consequences, and so far there do not seem to be any.

I know people will say powerful states have always broken the rules, but what feels different now is the lack of discipline or even pretence. There is no attempt to operate within the system anymore, just an open rejection of it.

This is where Gaza keeps coming to mind for me. Not because war itself is new, but because what happened there showed how far things can go with no intervention beyond statements of concern. It felt like Gaza became the resting point of what the world will tolerate when a powerful ally is involved. Once that line is established, it does not stay contained.

If international law is optional, the UN toothless, and alliances unwilling to check their own members, then are we actually living in a rules based order at all? Or just a power based one that we have not admitted yet?

I am open to being told I am wrong, but I would genuinely like to understand what, if anything, actually constrains a US president now.

And there is no reason why that would stop with the information. There is no reason to take over another country. This is immoral, illegal and absolutely no justification. Greenland is a peaceful country.

I think plenty of people can see Greenland for what it is, geopolitically. It's no secret that the Arctic is a key region for security purposes and that both China & Russia have made noises about it in the recent past. Conveniently, is also extremely mineral rich, which I'm sure isn't an attraction to Mr Trump in the slightest. Rather like it was the drugs and the need to save the people of Venezuela from the tyrannical regime, not the enormous oil reserves.

I'm also not convinced that the US annexing Greenland (should it happen) would save it from one of the other autocratic regimes. We know how cosy the current US administration is with Russia, who's to say they wouldn't 'gift' it in negotiations, or some other mad thing?

I’ve long felt with Trump that the “chaos” is deliberate, not chaos at all, and is an attempt to exhaust us with worry- so that when the really worrying stuff happens, that at a population level we’re too tired, or too desensitized, or too broken to do anything about it. Think about the outrage about “grab them by the pussy”. Who can sustain that level of anger over literally a decade or more? Nobody. It makes one wonder about those earlier “leaks” doesn’t it….

There is absolutely fuck all one individual can do against what’s happening at the moment. Nothing. There is too much. It’s not even helpful to focus on “raising awareness”, or “challenging the narrative” as it would have been with social and political injustice or corruption pre-social media. We’re all aware. We all know the narrative is bullshit.

The only real challenge would come from widespread and sustained protest -and probably economic action, as that is really the only leverage available to the citizenry now - from the population.

It won’t happen. Most people are too busy trying to keep our heads above water. Too tired. Too exhausted. Too desensitized. Overwhelmed by the scale of the shitshow- to even KNOW what we’re supposed to focus on. The apparent rebirth of fascism in populist politics? The climate emergency? Greenland? Ukraine? Venezuela? Epstein? Abortion rights? Wealth inequality? I could go on.

I don’t know what we’re in for specifically, but it’s nothing good. And the pace we’re hurtling towards whatever it is, is picking up.

So no. I don’t think anything can stop what’s going to happen next. World leaders have shown they will tolerate almost any breach of international law, and the people have been flattened by basically everything that’s happened post 9/11.

Might the method in the madness be that Trump wants to force Europe to step up and help pay/provide troops to protect Greenland from Russia and China? By threatening to take Greenland for the US he is forcing Europe’s hand.

Exactly.

So if Russia is the hypothetical big threat for Greenland, why is Trump not doing more to help Ukraine right now?

There never has been a rules-based order between states. Countries are willing to adopt international rules, like maritime law, that benefit all and don’t limit freedom of action. But the idea that the world has ever worked by external international rules of mutual respect for territory and resource is just nonsense.

It’s a falsehood much loved by fantasists and left-wing lawyers.

Yeah this, the bigger picture is this

Venezuela was basically laundering money for the iranian regime, site for drone manufacturing (drones btw which have been lobbed at Ukrainians). Theres a very bloody dangerous axis at work and this will destabilise them.

We could be looking at a much more stable and safer world by the end of the year. Personally I think this will turn out quite well.

Also YABU to think there was ever a rules based order. People keep parroting this but it never existed.

Because greenland is strategically significant for the USA, Ukraine is very much a europe problem and europe hasn’t done enough.

But the acceptable response to the fear of a Russian manoeuvre in Greenland, which is a very valid concern, is to encourage the strengthening of NATO’s presence there, and offer a stronger US contribution to NATO - not to say that Greenland should become part of the USA.

"But previous US administrations did understand the importance of preserving the equilibrium between the two superpowers and their respective power blocs and not needlessly overstepping boundaries.
That seems to have completely disappeared."

While the cold war was on , and MAD, was th policy of both sides this was true. When the soviet union collapsed, the USA largely had more free reign and emphasis on rules based order suited it.

In the background China was building its economy, Europe demilitarised to some extent and the balance of powers has shifted...

Yes this. The world sat wringing hands and making sad noises about Russia invading Ukraine - but did nothing. Then we watched a genocide being live streamed from Gaza - and the world did fuck all. Now we will watch the USA invading Countries they fancy owning, and the world will do fuck all. I feel so sorry for my kids who are young adults, let’s hope their generation will have better morals and more courage.

I think they don’t trust the europeans, especially given how difficult it is to get NATo allies to contribute what they are supposed to. We outsourced our defence to the USA and now moaning they are behaving in their own strategic interests. I think it’s because our leaders really struggle with actual leadership.

I’m worried because europe needs an america that is unequivocally and unquestionably our friend.

This is ridiculous, houthis, assad, maduro. There are plenty of examples of states/grouos that regularly disappear their own people use torture instead of normal policing etc etc.

Russia yes but for godsake the USA and Israel are not nazi states.

Christ I despair.

His health is poor, he won't live much longer and when he's gone maga will fall into complete chaos.

Trump can be stopped in some things by some nations.

China embarrassed Trump and forced him to row back on tariffs due to its control of rare earth minerals. Trump equally cannot impose his will on Russia due to the threat of nuclear Armageddon.

It is really Europe who find themselves embarrassed. They have allowed themselves to be dependent on the U,S for their defence and manufacture little that the U.S need (the sole exception being ASML).

Might has forever trumped fine words, international laws and institutions. Trump is just more brazen about it than most.

Greenland is only Danish by virtue of it having been a colony. It is 2,200 miles away from Denmark and has a land border with Canada. I don’t think it’s 58,000 (1/3 of my London Borough) population are particularly enamoured of the Danes . It doesn’t give Trump the right to annex it, but if he can persuade the population to join the U.S, via investment or naked bribery, I don’t think that would be unreasonable.

I despair of people that justify the behaviour of evil lunatics like Trump, Putin and Netanyahu. And Houthis aren’t a Country by the way. Yes there have always been terrorist groups, and other evil world dictators, but why do you think that should that give Russia, Israel, and the USA a free pass? And I might remind you that Israel and the USA are democratic countries which makes it even more worrying. So yes the comparison to how the Nazis rose to power is relevant.

Well, as we can see from the Greenland situation, there are plenty of reasons to take over another country, and plenty of ways to justify it.

Illegal? Yes, almost certainly. Immoral? That depends on how you look at the bigger picture.

When invested parties don't agree on the above, wars are fought.

No one will fight a war over Greenland and Trump won’t invade.

He could pay each inhabitant $1 million to vote to join the U.S and it would still be cheap.

More realistically he is using his rather brash ‘art of the deal’ to agree some sort of licensing/sharing deal with Europe so Greenland can be aggressively militarised and it can be paid for with a share of the mineral wealth.

I was only thinking the other day that he looks much healthier than he used to. Perhaps it is just better make up, which he seems to have toned down lately.

But regardless he has pushed the boundaries of what’s acceptable and he has increased divisions in the US. So even if he goes the chaos will continue for years.

Did you really want Iran to have nuclear weapons?

In answer to your title: Haven't they always been optional? I'm in my late 30s, and it's always been obvious to me that the UN is entirely toothless, and that countries will ignore their dictates so long as the benefit outweighs the consequences.

And never mind the situation in Gaza - look at Afghanistan, well before it. An entire country decided to remove the human rights of half its citizens, essentially reducing them to a state of enslavement, and the UN has done a sum total of nothing, as far as I'm aware.

They've always been optional in reality. There's no international court or way of enforcing anything. It relies on everyone playing nicely.

Do you think he's gonna break the Constitution when his four years are up?

@OtterlyAstounding That’s not the case. In fact it is not true that the UN (which also has an aid arm) has done nothing with regards to either country.

But with Afghanistan it has sanctions.