+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You must wear a mask and you cannot say what you want and they are not that far apart so over time , rest assured, radical Democrats will narrow the distance even more.
Perhaps you will soon just blow it out your nose.
Life-saving' nose spray that kills 99.9% of viruses begins production in
Israel
Health Ministry-approved labeling says antiviral is effective within 2
minutes; can save many lives in countries without access to vaccines, says
inventor
By NATHAN JEFFAY <https://www.timesofisrael.com
March 2021, 1:06 pm 5
<https://www.timesofisrael.com
uses-begins-production-in-isra
*
<https://static.timesofisrael.
pg>
Gilly Regev, an Israeli-raised scientist who co-founded the company
SaNOtize, uses the new nasal spray she developed (Screen grab)
A nasal spray that will be marketed as capable of killing 99.9 percent of
virus particles has started rolling off production lines in an Israeli
factory.
The spray could have prevented much of the world's COVID-19 infection, its
inventor, Dr. Gilly Regev, told The Times of Israel.
'Life-sng' nose spray that kills 99.9% of viruses begins production in
Israel
Join the Times of Israel Community
"We are hoping that our nasal spray will now save many lives of people in
countries that are waiting for the vaccine," said Regev, an Israeli-raised
biochemist who co-founded the company SaNOtize and developed the spray in
Canada. "This will be affordable and can be used for prevention, to protect
from any respiratory viral infection."
She said that it has been shown to be effective in the lab against a wide
range of viruses, and said that new variants of the coronavirus won't
interfere with its effectiveness, emphasizing: "It contains a broad spectrum
antiviral which kills all viruses and all variants."
3D medical animation still shot showing the structure of a coronavirus
(https://www.scientificanimati
plained-through-medical-animat
Regev called Enovid a "hand sanitizer equivalent for the nose," and said
that it creates a physical barrier in the nasal passages to stop viruses
along with a "chemical barrier" of nitric oxide, which is known for its
antimicrobial qualities. "The nitric oxide means this is a special spray
that doesn't just block viruses but actually kills them," she said.
Israel will become the first country where the spray is sold. The Health
Ministry has given interim approval for its sale as a medical device
suitable for people age 12 and up - meaning it could be used by many who
aren't yet approved for coronavirus vaccines - with packaging stating:
"Scientifically tested to kill 99.9% of viruses within 2 minutes."
A bottle of Enovid, a new antiviral nose spray that is being produced in
Israel (courtesy of SaNOtize)
It has also been approved for sale in New Zealand, and approval is being
sought in other countries, including the UK.
Regev said that the factory, in Ness Ziona near Tel Aviv, is working to
produce a stock of 200,000 to 500,000 bottles by May. "After this we're
hoping to get to capacity of a million bottles a month," the Hebrew
University graduate said, adding: "I hope this product will bring pride and
jobs to Israel."
The claim on the packaging is based on testing in labs, during which a range
of live viruses, including influenza and SARS-CoV-2, were subjected to the
spray. She acknowledged that the experiments took place outside the human
body, in test tubes, and do not provide definitive proof of how effective
the spray will prove in nasal passages - though she said they are very
encouraging.
Separate research, which isn't referenced on the packaging, has suggested
that the spray can lessen the impact of COVID-19 among those who are
infected.
Last week, SaNOtize and Ashford and St Peter's Hospitals NHS Foundation
Trust in Surrey, UK, announced results of clinical trials indicating that
the spray could prevent the transmission of COVID-19, shorten its course,
and reduce the severity of symptoms and damage in those already infected.
The study has been submitted to a leading medical journal for review and
publication.
Family members wearing safety gear visit a relative at the coronavirus ward
of Shaare Zedek hospital in Jerusalem on February 3, 2021 (Yonatan
Sindel/Flash90)
The spray was fully developed by the time the pandemic struck, as it was
invented mainly to fight influenza. Its innovation is the dosing procedure
for nitric oxide. "It normally comes in gas cylinders and normally gets
delivered to hospitals, but we wanted a practical way to deliver it as a
liquid antimicrobial and have spent the last 12 years developing this," said
Regev.
Ingredients of the spray mix together when it is administered to form nitric
oxide, she said, noting: "All components are used widely in the food
industry and have a very strong safety profile." Each bottle contains a
month's supply for one person to spray twice a day for protection against
viruses.
She said: "Theoretically we could have distributed it a year ago, but we
needed to negotiate regulatory approval. That's the biggest frustration,
that we've been trying 24/7 for a year to bring it to the market, and it
could have saved a lot of lives. I believe it would've prevented infections
and therefore reduced deaths
And:
Unmasking
By: Judd Garrett
Objectivity is the
Objective
A little over a year ago a virus was introduced into the population of the United States, a single-celled virus about 50 nanometers wide, less than one-one trillionth the size of an average human being, called Covid-19.
That microscopic virus has wreaked havoc on this nation, on the entire world, not just the people who have contracted the virus, or those at the most risk; the elderly or with co-morbidities, but young healthy people with a next-to-zero risk of dying from the virus have had their world turned upside down.
Many states instituted draconian locked down measures. Restaurants, bars, public places were closed down for most of 2020. Schools, in many states, are still locked down. Travel restrictions have been put in place. Mandatory quarantines, contact tracing, mask mandates, all became commonplace in our country. We threw out the bill of rights and stopped believing in the importance of individual freedom and sovereignty.
What have been the results of all this? Hundreds of thousands of businesses have been shuttered. Millions of people have become unemployed. Countless livelihoods have been lost. Our country lost over four trillion dollars in net worth. A dramatic increase in teen suicide, addiction and overdose deaths.
We have done all this in response to the threat of a microscopic virus that even the most vulnerable among us have a 95% chance of surviving. But if doing all this saves lives, then it’s worth doing, right?
That’s what we have been told whenever anyone questions the efficacy of lockdowns or wearing a mask. Masks save lives. It doesn’t matter that most of the people wearing masks do not have the virus, or that most of the air particles we would be inhaling or exhaling are benign, or even beneficial.
You must wear a mask because you never know who has the virus or who doesn’t. We cannot risk not wearing a mask even if just a small percentage of the people we come in contact with have Covid.
It makes sense to a certain degree.
What doesn’t make sense is to open up our southern border as we have done the last two months, allowing Covid positive people to walk into our country. This directly contradicts the extreme measures we have taken over the last 12 months in response to Covid. This policy is akin to allowing Antifa and BLM to riot for 5 straight months in our major cities during the heart of the pandemic. Certain politicians stopped worrying about the spread of Covid and our preventive measures when it came to “social justice” riots designed to help swing the election in their favor. Suddenly, protecting grandma from Covid became less important than torching a police station.
The bigger question regarding the illegal border crossers, though, is that we do not know who many of these people are. Very few have been properly vetted. Even if the vast majority of the illegal border crossers are good hardworking Mexicans looking for a better life, who are the other people crossing illegally?
The threat of Covid is not the only concern. Known terrorists have been apprehended trying to cross the border this month. Considering that border patrol only captures a small percentage of the illegal crossers, they couldn’t be that lucky to have caught the only terrorists who attempted to cross into America in the last few months. How many terrorists evaded border security amidst the massive influx of other illegal border crossers, and are living in our country right now, planning an attack, as a result of our lax border policies.
MS-13 gang members, human traffickers, and drug smugglers are also walking into our country unabated exploiting the overwhelmed border patrol. We are willfully allowing deadly pathogens into our country not much different than if a Covid positive patient walked up to an elderly lady and coughed right in her face. We have essentially removed our masks, and withdrawn the protection from our southern border, allowing deadly agents in.
People get arrested for not wearing a mask in America or trying to run their business during Covid, but we are allowing Covid positive illegal immigrants, as well as, terrorists, MS-13 gang members, and drug smugglers in without much thought. Over 80,000 Americans die of drug overdoses every year, and, yet, we are doing very little to stop drug smugglers from crossing into America. We are putting more of our youth at risk with this open border policy than if we had every school open for the last 12 months. It’s more important to protect our kids from drugs and gangs than it is to protect them from Covid, yet we are not doing it.
Are all illegal border crossers drug smugglers or gang members? No. Are most? No. But enough border crossers are drug smugglers and gang members that it is dangerous to have an open borders policy.
Is every person we come into contact with Covid-positive? No. Are most people Covid-positive? No. But enough people are Covid-positive that we should wear masks and social distance.
We must do what we must do to protect ourselves, and our country. So, when it comes to the border, our country should wear a mask (build a wall), and social distance (deport illegal immigrants).
If we have been so vigilant in locking down the country to protect Americans against a virus, why are we not equally vigilant in shutting down the borders to protect Americans from terrorists, gang members, and drug smugglers?
We are committing suicide as a country. As with most policies, these are not what’s in the best interests of America, or the average American citizen, and they were not put in place for the reasons that were used to justify them. The people making these decisions are not concerned with protecting the American citizens, they’re interested in creating as much chaos as possible so they can exploit it, and further empower themselves.
The politicians supporting the open border policy do not care that many of these migrants are dying on their trek to America, or they are getting caught up with the drug cartels or human traffickers. They do not care about the negative consequences of these policies because the negative consequences will never touch them. They live and work behind walls protected by people with guns while at the same time, they’re stopping the construction of the national border wall, preventing the National Guard from defending the border, and pursuing policies to take our guns away; all of which puts American lives at risk.
This massive illegal immigrant push is occurring at the same time there is a push for a substantial increase in the minimum wage. Big business wants both because they benefit from both. The minimum wage hike will drive their small business competitors out of business, while they will be able to circumvent the minimum wage by employing illegal immigrants for a fraction of the labor costs. They exploit illegal immigrants, unethically drive their smaller competitors out of business, and expose our country to an increase in crime, drugs, and gang violence for the sole purpose of enhancing their bottom line. And the politicians who push through these destructive policies do so because the more money big business makes, the more money available to finance their campaigns.
If we want to have more immigrants come into the country because we believe it helps our economy and our society, we must do it legally. We must shut down the border, reduce illegal border crossings to a trickle, and then allow more legal immigrants in. We must properly vet those coming into the country, so we can weed out anyone who means to do us harm, and only allow in the good, hard-working immigrants looking to improve their lives, and who will improve our country.
It doesn’t take a genius. It simply takes uncorrupt politicians who care more about the American citizens and the migrant workers than they care about their own power. But with the current roster of politicians in Washington, it is highly unlikely that legal, sensible, fair immigration policies like these will ever get passed.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I would love to see BIBI re-elected because I believe he has been a brilliant leader but I also believe it is dangerous to conclude any politician is indispensable and that goes for Churchill as well. Such thinking can morph into cult like thinking and determine actions which are not healthy.
Netanyahu: Israel’s
indispensable statesman
The Likud leader has developed and deepened
Israel’s bilateral ties with dozens of nations worldwide on the basis of shared
economic and strategic interests.
Over the past decade,
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu transformed Israel’s international position.
When faced with unrelenting pressure from the most hostile U.S. administration
in the history of Israel-U.S. ties, Netanyahu refused to kowtow to Barack
Obama. Instead, he leveraged his decision to defy hostile U.S. policies in
relation to Iran and the Palestinians to develop strategic ties with Arab
states that like Israel were betrayed by Obama’s support for Iran and the
Muslim Brotherhood.
More broadly, whereas
Israel’s foreign policy had long been based on the notion that its ties with
foreign nations were based on ideological affinity, Netanyahu recognized that
shared interests were just as important if not more important than ideology in
the international arena. Netanyahu initiated and implemented a wildly
successful, peripatetic diplomatic offensive to develop and deepen Israel’s bilateral
ties with dozens of nations worldwide on the basis of shared economic and
strategic interests. In short order, Israel’s per capita GDP surpassed Japan’s
as Israel’s global trade expanded worldwide.
In 2013, Obama’s
pro-Iranian bent rendered the United States paralyzed to act as Iran’s Syrian
proxy Bashar Assad began massacring the Syrian people. Recognizing the
opportunity created by the vacuum in U.S. leadership, Russian President
Vladimir Putin deployed Russian forces to Syria for the first time since 1982
to protect Assad’s regime. Russia’s arrival presented Israel with the prospect
of losing its air supremacy for the first time in 31 years.
Responding to the
danger, Netanyahu flew to Russia for a lightning meeting with Putin. Over the
course of the next several months, and several summits, Netanyahu was able to
reach an agreement with the Russian leader that enabled Israel to continue its
missions in Syria against Iranian targets and missile shipments to Hezbollah.
Netanyahu’s actions were
a diplomatic triumph of epic proportions. Not only has Israel been able to
achieve its tactical and strategic goals in Syria, but it has also been able to
operate in Syria for nearly a decade without being pulled into the civil war
there. Moreover, the agreements Netanyahu reached with Putin set the course of
cooperative ties between Moscow and Jerusalem on a host of issues, including
the return of the remains and personal effects of IDF soldier
Zechariah Baumel that had been held in Syria since 1982.
Due to these diplomatic efforts, when Donald Trump entered office in 2017, he and his advisers were greeted by a Middle East where Israel was a regional power that worked closely with several key Arab states to contain Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood. Netanyahu quickly developed an intimate relationship with the new U.S. leader, built on trust and mutual support.
Those ties enabled
Israel to maximize the benefits of having a friend in the White House. Those
benefits—including the U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran, Trump’s
decision to transfer the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, U.S. recognition of the
legality of Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria, of Israeli sovereignty
over the Golan Heights and of Israel’s rights to sovereignty in Judea and
Samaria fortified Israel’s position as a regional power and an attractive ally
and partner for states worldwide. Israel’s reinforced position also paved the
way to the formalization of Israel’s ties with several Arab states through the
Abraham Accords.
Little mention has been
made of international affairs during the course of the election campaign that
will come to a close on Tuesday. This is unfortunate because in the coming
months and years, Israel will face strategic and diplomatic challenges more
complex and fraught with danger than it has faced in the past.
Last week, UAE daily The
National published the content of an internal State Department
document that describes the policies the Biden administration intends to adopt
towards Israel and the Palestinians.
Titled, “The
US-Palestinian Reset and the Path Forward,” the memo was written by Deputy
Assistant Secretary of State for Israeli and Palestinian Affairs Hady Amr. Amr
has a long history of hostility towards Israel and support for
Palestinian terrorism. Shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, Al-Qaeda attacks on the
United States, Amr alleged that those attacks were the consequence of U.S.
support for Israel.
“We [Americans]
shouldn’t be shocked when our military assistance to Israel and our [U.N.]
Security Council vetoes that keep on protecting Israel come back to haunt us,”
he wrote.
Amr, who has accused
Israel of apartheid, has frequently advocated for U.S. engagement with the
Hamas terrorist group and for a three-way deal between Hamas, Israel and the
PLO.
According to The
National‘s report, the new administration intends to cancel the Trump
administration’s policy regarding Israeli exports to the U.S. That policy
determined that exports from Area C of Judea and Samaria, which are under full
Israeli control, will be marked as “Made in Israel.”
The new administration
intends to reinstate U.S. financial support for UNRWA and the Palestinian
Authority and will pressure Israel to permit Jerusalemites to vote in the
Palestinian elections. It will undertake to reopen the U.S.’s diplomatic
mission to the P.A. The memo also makes clear that the Biden administration
will reinstate the Obama administration’s policy of pressuring Israel to withdraw
to the 1949 armistice lines “with mutually agreed land swaps and agreements on
security and refugees.”
As to the Abraham
Accords, despite the memo’s deliberately vague diplomatic language, it is clear
that the Biden administration intends to subvert the accords in a way that will
indirectly reinstate the PLO’s veto over Arab-Israeli ties.
The contents of the
memo, as described in The National report, are not surprising
to anyone who paid attention to statements made throughout the 2020
presidential campaign and since by President Joe Biden and his advisers. But
the report does make clear the magnitude of the challenge Israel will face in
managing and maintaining its alliance with the United States in the coming
years.
This challenge grew even
more daunting last Wednesday and Thursday as Biden torpedoed U.S.-Russian
relations by calling Putin a “murderer” and threatening him; and Secretary of
State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan got into an ugly
public fight with their Chinese counterparts on live television.
The need to steer
Israel’s ship of state between a hostile ally and two rival superpowers with
whom Israel enjoys relatively reasonable if limited ties may well be the most
difficult challenge facing Israel’s prime minister in the coming years.
On Tuesday, as Israelis
go to the polls, they should pause a moment and ask themselves, “Which
candidate is most capable of competently protecting Israel in the regional and
international arenas in the coming years?” The answer isn’t hard to ascertain.
Caroline Glick is an award-winning columnist and author of “The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East.”
This article first appeared in Israel Hayom
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
HOOVER Daily Edited:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Hoover Institution or Stanford University. ++++++++++++++++++++++++ Recently I posted a memo in which I offered my own pessimistic views how America was being effectively challenged because it had lost its way in believing in itself, it's values and how the haters, within our own population, were gaining the upper hand. Now the WSJ has posted several op eds which validate my own thoughts: Western Culture Elites Are Giving Away Lenin’s Rope How
can a nation prevail in an ideological struggle when its leaders believe By Gerard Baker ‘The capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.” That quote, attributed to Lenin, was a colorful metaphor for what Marxists call the internal contradictions of capitalism. Belief in the inherent inevitability of the West’s imminent collapse sustained the Soviet Communists right up to the moment in 1989 when their own system proved more self-annihilating than anything capitalism could muster. But the old maxim has taken on a new and more plausible form today. It was on display last week in the first encounter between President Biden’s foreign policy team and the modern claimants to Marxism-Leninism’s primacy in the Chinese Communist Party. It was evident from the moment the two sides sat down that an emboldened Chinese leadership understands that the greatest ideological weapon it now holds in its increasingly existential struggle with America is the gleeful enthusiasm for self-destruction that characterizes so much of elite opinion in the U.S. When Yang Jiechi, the Communist Party’s foreign-affairs chief, lectured Secretary of State Antony Blinken about America’s human-rights record, its treatment of minorities and its system’s innate inequity, everything he said could have been lifted straight from the pages of the Democratic Party’s presidential election platform, culled from Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper stories, or jotted down in a student’s notes from lectures delivered daily at America’s top universities. In fact, it probably was. In response, a visibly discomfited Mr. Blinken mumbled something barely coherent that at least America deals with its problems in the open. He then complained, like a bested debater, that his opponent had gone over his allotted time. The larger truth is that the people who control America’s leading cultural institutions and now its government have been eagerly manufacturing ideological rope for the Chinese hangman, and they’ve stepped up production over the past year. The intellectual movement to which they subscribe has been the force behind the planned destruction—figuratively and literally—of the principal pillars of America’s authority in the world: the idea that the greatest nation on the planet was founded on universal ideals of human freedom and dignity. Instead, it insists, like those Chinese Communists, that all along this claim to a unique status in the world has been a fraud, mere sloganeering behind which America has been—and remains—a force for repression and exploitation. How can a nation prevail in a global ideological struggle when its leaders believe its values are intrinsically evil? Mr. Yang and his colleagues must have had a good laugh on their way back to Beijing. Indeed they are probably chuckling at much of what they see in the values and principles to which America’s new masters—sorry, nongendered leadership figures—demand loyalty. This isn’t about the maternity flight suits for fighter pilots or updated requirements for Army hairstyles the commander in chief proudly hailed earlier this month. It’s about the elevation of victimhood as the prime signifier of honor in modern America. Whether you’re an opportunistic young hoodlum looting Gucci or a member of the celebrity plutocracy seeking better publicity, don the mantle of a hapless innocent exploited by an inherently unjust system, and you’re golden. It’s hard to imagine a successful society in which the claim to being the victim of some oppressor—often a spurious claim—is the quickest route to advancement. It’s about the destruction of the idea of academic excellence that now seems to have much of the educational establishment in its grip. Democrats in control of major cities across the country are busy eliminating the opportunities for some of their most disadvantaged children that come from admission to selective schools on the basis of talent. We are told that’s discriminatory. Leveling down is the result. And of course it’s in the fanatical insistence on the qualities that divide rather than unite Americans—race, sexual orientation and multifarious “gender”—as the principal characteristics of identity. How bitterly ironic that Marxist theories of structural oppression that were discredited by the experience of America’s ideological adversaries in the last century are now rampant in the most influential strata of American society in this one. Lenin may get the last laugh. The Chinese have proved much more adept than their Russian predecessors at adapting the precepts of Marxism to economic reality. As Lenin predicted, they’ve had plenty of help from American capitalists in the process. But our cultural elites have also been busy exporting the hangman’s rope across the Pacific. At least the capitalists have been selling it to them. Much of modern America seems intent on giving it away. And: America’s
Back—Against a Wall Three
problems stand athwart Biden’s plans for a rules-based international order. By Walter Russell Mead Anyone who thought international
politics would calm down once Donald Trump left center stage has had a
rude awakening. After the Alaska confrontation between top U.S. and Chinese
officials and the slanging match between Presidents Biden and Vladimir Putin, the world is as fraught as ever.
American relations with Russia are at their lowest ebb since the Kennedy
administration and U.S.-China relations at their frostiest since Henry
Kissinger went to China in 1971, while Beijing and Moscow are more closely
aligned than at any time since the death of Stalin. It is not just the big boys who are testing the Biden team.
Officials at Washington’s Fort McNair tightened security after reports of
Iranian threats against the facility. North Korea is said to be moving toward
new tests of long-range missiles. The Taliban announced that it plans to impose
“Islamic rule” on Afghanistan when American forces leave. Meanwhile, U.S.
Special Forces have arrived in Mozambique to train local troops in the face of
a major offensive by ISIS-aligned militia groups. Authorities in Belarus have
largely crushed the democracy movement in that country, and the Burmese
military, despite facing unprecedented opposition at home and criticism abroad,
shows no sign of relaxing its grip on power. Relations with allies are also bumpy. The Biden administration
threatened sanctions against European companies participating in the Nord
Stream 2 project. And on a recent trip to Delhi, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin
warned India against purchasing S-400 missile systems from Russia. Bad relations with China and Russia and the troubled state of
the world can’t be blamed on the Biden team, but the ideas driving this
administration’s foreign policy are heading for severe and serious tests.
Central to the Biden approach is the belief that the path to global stability
involves reinvigoration of American leadership in the service of the
“rules-based international order,” sometimes called Rubio. Supporting
international institutions, promoting human rights and pushing back against
revisionist powers may cause short-term disruptions until adversaries recognize
the strength of the U.S. position, but ultimately a principled and
forward-looking American stand will prevail. This would be a happy outcome, and Monday’s announcements of
sanctions against Chinese officials and a firm involved in the repression of
Uyghurs in Xinjiang by the European Union, Canada, the U.S. and United Kingdom
offers hope that allied cooperation will grow. But there are three big problems
with this strategy, and the administration needs to brace for even more
turmoil. The first is that Russia and China are convinced that the U.S.
has sunk into irreversible decline. Despite Russia’s economic problems, Mr.
Putin has been gleefully and successfully defying Washington since his 2008
invasion of Georgia. In China a long record of economic progress, capped—as
official numbers tell it—by suppressing Covid-19, has ignited a sense of
triumphalism. Biden administration evocations of American values sound to
Chinese Communist Party ears like 19th-century Qing Dynasty officials bleating
obliviously about Chinese superiority as the Middle Kingdom fell helplessly
behind the West. What this means in practical terms is that both countries will
take a lot of convincing that “America is back.” Persuading them may require
more toughness and risk-taking than Team Biden can live with. The second problem is Europe. Washington’s Asian allies are for
the most part so worried about China that they welcome all the American
leadership they can get. Europe is a different matter. China is far away, and
Russia poses little direct threat to countries like Germany, France, Italy and
Spain. Curious observers should know more after Secretary of State Antony
Blinken’s scheduled meetings this week with European officials, but Team
Biden’s bet on a robust trans-Atlantic response in defense of the Rubio looks
shaky. As the EU sinks into yet another round of economic stagnation and
internal wrangling following its shambolic vaccine rollout, it may not be much
help beyond imposing the occasional round of largely symbolic sanctions. The third problem is trade. The part of the Rubio that most
foreign countries care most about is access to U.S. markets. During the Cold
War, American policy makers believed that opening U.S. markets, even without
full reciprocity from trade partners, was vital to the network of alliances
Washington was building around the world. Neither Biden Democrats nor Trump
Republicans are interested in the kind of economic statesmanship that seeks to
build American alliances through nonreciprocal trade liberalization. It remains
to be seen how attractive a Rubio without U.S. trade sweeteners will be.
The outlook is not
all bad. China’s capacity for self-sabotage in foreign policy is unmatched
since Wilhelm II. Russia’s continuing economic stagnation limits Mr. Putin’s
reach. America possesses an array of assets that no rival can match. But even
if Mr. Biden’s goal of restoring global stability through renewed U.S.
leadership is not a mission impossible, achieving it will require a mix of
strategic insight, steely will and ideological flexibility that no president
has brought to the table since the end of the Cold War. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ |
No comments:
Post a Comment