State of the Union

As of the publication of this edition, President Donald Trump is about to deliver the first State of the Union address of his second administration.

This happens after a first month of jarring executive orders, canceling what President Biden had established with same, and the ascension, as a government director, of Elon Musk, who must always be captioned as "the world's richest man". While he is not officially in charge of the Department of Governmental Efficiency (DOGE) - which used to be the U.S. Digital Service (USDS), but was cheekily renamed as a wink to Musk's cryptocurrency Dogecoin - Musk has taken a chainsaw (there's a video) to the federal workforce, cutting indiscriminately, taking out scientists with the same elan as he has displayed in taking out administrators. Some Republicans have asked that Elon show some empathy.

Key indicators: According to the Pew Research Center, Americans are deeply divided over Donald Trump’s plans and the way he is handling his job in the early weeks of his return to the presidency. Overall, 47% of U.S. adults approve of how Trump is handling his job as president, while 51% say they disapprove. And most of these views are strongly held: 37% strongly approve of his performance, while 40% strongly disapprove. Roughly a third (35%) say they support all or most of Trump’s policies and plans, with 17% saying they support some of them. Nearly half of adults (47%) say they support only a few or none of his plans. Most Americans (73%), including majorities of both Republicans and Democrats, say Trump has clear goals for where he wants to lead the country. But Republicans are more likely to say he’ll be successful at achieving those goals.

The stock market has been wild, since Trump was sworn into office. Corporate CEOs don't know to handle the problems Trump has created regarding relations with allies. They are watching the tariffs, for effect, and the economy seems frozen.

To no surprise, Trump hasn't been able to do anything about the cost of living, and most especially the price of eggs. He seems to have no influence over bird flu. In fact, the first weeks of his administration has been consumed by getting his totally unqualified cabinet into place. Here in America, it has been like a DC Comics movie, where some villain takes control of the city, lets all the criminals out of jail, and appoints some of them to cabinet positions.

Civil War, World War, or What?

Following the February 28 Oval Office meltdown between Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and U.S. President Donald Trump, it seems abundantly clear that the international coalition that has kept the western world safe from hostile eastern powers has ended. Donald Trump - convicted felon, abuser of women - has made a decision to end it.

See the story featured on this site regarding Trump's possible role as a groomed Russian asset. (Non a KGB agent, but a well-connected American businessman who could be exploited for access to influential circles, and to information vital to American interests.)

So what happens now? Government leaders throughout Europe and the United Kingdom have quickly closed ranks, preparing to see America abandon the NATO alliance in deference to Russia, and Putin, and gearing up to go it alone.

Ashamed of the United States as we at the RCJ are, as the U.S. is now positioned geo-politically under the Trump administration, it seems there is room for some concern about the viability of the Russian threat. Does Putin really have the military muscle to take all of Ukraine, and then not stop there but advance on into Poland and beyond?

Putin has suffered extraordinary losses in the war in Ukraine. His military is so badly diminished that he has called for aid from untrained North Korean fighters, expanding the war to create the basis for an "Axis of Evil", referencing Russia's close ties with another nuclear nation, China. The best argument supporters for continued American support for Ukraine is that the return on investment has been tremendous. The biggest portion of the money the U.S. has spent on the Ukraine war has gone right back to U.S. government munitions and equipment manufacturers - the feared Military Industrial Complex. The result has been devastating to Russia, in terms of loss of life and loss of hardware. They have even lost some Russian territory, as Ukraine has advanced into Russia to capture ground that could be traded back to Russia in return for land seized from Ukraine.

The Russian military has around 1.5 million enlisted soldiers, with another 2.0 million in reserve, but even as Russia has gone on a war footing, they have big problems related to manufacturing of equipment. And, other problems.

Russia is running out of military equipment, and the situation is expected to worsen in 2025 and beyond. Russia has lost more than half of its military hardware since the invasion of Ukraine. This includes tanks, armored vehicles, and artillery. Russia's remaining Soviet-era equipment is in poor condition and can't replace the losses. Sanctions have made it harder to get basic materials and components. Russia's war economy is struggling, and production is slowing. Russia is cannibalizing its remaining stockpiles to keep newer equipment operational. Russia may not have enough tanks to launch effective offensives after early 2026. Combat intensity may decline by late 2025 or early 2026. Russia may rely more on missile and drone strikes. Weapons shortages may become acute in the second half of 2025. Russia is also facing a labor shortage. Russian soldiers are increasingly using outdated equipment, which is contributing to high casualty rates. (Sources include Al Jazeera, Foreign Policy, and Semifor.)

Is Donald Trump pushing hard for a peace settlement in Ukraine because he knows his buddy Putin is running out of resources? Does Trump need for Ukraine to fold so Russia isn't revealed to be a paper tiger (with nuclear weapons)?

If Russia is as weak as those assessments would seem to suggest, do Europe and the U.K. really have that much to fear from Russian aggression beyond regions of Ukraine?

Perhaps the greater question is, what is the relationship now between Europe and U.K. and the United States, now that Donald Trump has sided against them and with an enemy aggressor, however disabled, while also placing tariffs on a variety of foreign goods and materials?

And there is the homefront question. Trump and his campaign to limit the size of the U.S. federal government - notably getting rid of oversight agencies, along with soft foreign policy assets like USAID - has added to the unemployment roles for even his own supporters, and early surveys show that a majority of Americans are not happy with the position they, and America, has been put in. Will a shared discontent unite a deeply polarized country, at least to some extent. Trump really has only a hardcore support group of about 33 percent of the electorate. There is some indication that the Trump campaign may have done some of their own crooked election work - see the story on this site - Are U.S. Elections Legitimate?

Then there is the question of American empirialism, particularly as Trump has imagined taking Panama, Canada, and Greenland.

The United States of America has 750 overseas military installations. The second place country, in terms of outside of country military installations is Great Britain. The competing super powers - Russia and China - have one or two each. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States also has a long-history of commitment to clandestine foreign operations designed for regime change. It seems natural, as an American, to feel existential angst. Are we the good guys, ensuring stability in a hostile world? Or are we empirical dictators on a global scale, the bad guys?

Columbia University Economist Jeffrey Sachs, interviewed in the following video, is annoying, but he seems to the RCJ to be a straight shooter on the facts. The U.S. has long engaged in activities that at this point in history are endangering us all.