"The US Is Quietly Torpedoing Its Relationship With ..." Topic

…Pacific Island Partners

"Earlier this month, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report on the status of assistance being provided to the Freely Associated States (FAS) of the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau. The report revealed that the Trump administration has failed to properly staff necessary – and legally required positions – in a timely manner, preventing the FAS from satisfying their own reporting obligations.

Actions speak louder than words, and the administration's actions – or lack thereof – in its dealings with the FAS are undermining the United States' interest in a region that U.S. Indo-Pacific Command Commander Admiral Samual J. Paparo described as "the Department of Defense's priority theater."

As any World War II scholar can attest, the small islands that are spread out over the Pacific Ocean were critical for the United States' ability to defeat the Japanese. Today, these islands make up roughly 20 independent countries and territories that have legal control over not only the land, but more than 7 million square miles of maritime territory. This area, which is twice the size of the United States, remains important for the same military reasons that existed 80 years ago. In addition to national security, the Pacific is also economically important, with hundreds of billions of dollars of goods being shipped through it every year, including significant portions of American imports and exports…"

link

Armand

This article claiming that the Trump administration is "quietly torpedoing" America's relationship with Pacific Island partners is a classic example of alarmist commentary that exaggerates routine challenges into strategic disasters by a former advisor to Palau to help keep the no-strings-attached USAID $$ flowing in despite increasing US concerns of corruption and fraud.

The article leans heavily on a GAO report that highlights delays in staffing joint oversight committees under the Compacts of Free Association. While these delays are worth addressing, they hardly amount to "torpedoing" the entire relationship. New administrations routinely face hiring freezes, transition issues, and bureaucratic adjustments. Similar implementation delays occurred under previous administrations as well.

It is important to note that core COFA funding—billions of dollars committed over the next two decades—remains largely protected because it is directly tied to U.S. national security interests and are no longer disbursed by USAID, but directly from the US State Department with more oversight and scrutiny. These agreements provide critical military access and strategic denial against China in a vitally important region. The United States is not walking away from these commitments.

Many of the problems facing the Freely Associated States the author describes, such as population decline, skilled labor shortages, and governance challenges, predate the current administration. Attributing all of them to recent U.S. policy shifts is overly simplistic. On immigration and deportation matters, the U.S. has every right to enforce its own laws and borders and in this case block pass-through travelers from China. Pacific nations are not exempt from these policies.

The article spends a lot of time being angsty about the restructuring of USAID and reduced emphasis on multilateral climate initiatives. Like I said, the Trump admin is cracking down on easy money. These changes reflect a deliberate shift toward more efficient, results-oriented engagement rather than open-ended spending and performative diplomacy.

China's growing influence in the Pacific is a serious long-term challenge that began accelerating during the first Obama administration and intensified under Xi Jinping. Since the launch of the Belt and Road Initiative in 2013 — with its maritime "blue economic passage" reaching the Pacific around 2017-2018 — Beijing has pursued an aggressive, multi-pronged strategy. Multiple Pacific nations signed BRI memoranda, leading to major infrastructure projects such as stadiums, ports, airports, and roads funded by Chinese loans and built by Chinese firms. This effort included high-profile diplomatic switches: Solomon Islands and Kiribati switched recognition from Taiwan to China in 2019, followed by others. China has engaged in widespread influence peddling, including reported bribery of officials and elites to secure contracts and political outcomes. There are well-documented cases of elite capture, opaque lending terms that raise debt concerns, and efforts to shape local media and public discourse in Beijing's favor. The 2022 security pact with Solomon Islands marked a significant escalation, raising alarms about potential dual-use facilities.

These activities are not at all reactive to U.S. staffing delays as the author claims. No, they reflect a deliberate, sustained campaign of economic leverage, corruption risks, and strategic encroachment that predates recent American policy adjustments by over a decade. The United States maintains unique strategic advantages through the Compacts of Free Association that Beijing cannot easily replicate, but China's designs in the South Pacific are clear – isolate and dominate Australia using much the same logic as Imperial Japan did in WW2, albeit with different measures.

Ronald Reagan is spinning in his grave.

Ha!…

Armand

SBm +1

Oh dear -- seems the prospect of turning off the easy money spigot via the out of control USAID to corrupt regimes has a few folks here in high dudgeon!

SB +1

Everything he does sends them into high "high dudgeon". 🙄

Not everything 35th….but sometimes he is wrong, and reverse engineering his mistakes can miss the bigger picture. USAID cuts to Ukraine and Africa were significant, alongside would health support, I believe.

The support for the Pacific islands could be seen as a way to help counter spreading Chinese influence. And Trumps withdrawal from the TranscPacfic agreement in the first term damaged Pacific trade to the tune of billions of dollars in losses rather than saving money, weakening the U.S. presence there. My opinion… China, China, China.

Correction, my last post

(Everything he does sends them into high "high dudgeon".)

Should have read:

It would seem, everything he does sends them into high "high dudgeon".

I did not copy correctly out of my original text. Did not highlight the portion of my previous line, or it dropped it when I moved down to the next line, highlighting. It happens.

noggin2nog: you are quite right, and the corruption is even in full daylight ! Not that I care, other actions, like the insane war against Iran allied with a government (Israel), is much worse because the corruption only costs Americans money, but the forementioned war demands its price in Europe (I see you are British, please come back !).

But posts like yours unfortunately only create stifles and jailtime… Anyway, I thought it good to applaud you before we are censored !

Well … that is one way to look at it …

like the insane war against Iran allied with a government Deleted by Moderator (Israel),

Yes, as it is OK for militant islamists to get nuke WMDs. And try to remove the only democracy in the region. Off the land that has been theirs's for over 3500 years. Verses islam which came late to the game in the 6th-7th Century.

I guess everybody reads history and facts in their own way… 🦄🌈

please come back !).

No need to rush …

According to Atul Gawande from Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, the shutdown of USAID has already caused approximately 600,000 deaths, with two-thirds of these being children. This figure highlights the immediate consequences of reduced funding for infectious disease control and malnutrition programs.

Trouble with the Isaelis re-occupying Israel is that the Palestinians have also been there for 3000 years plus. The PLST and other Sea Peoples were settled by the Pharaoh; as the Philistines they occupied much of the coast during Biblical times not part of Israel; and the lost tribes may also have stayed put (I don't know when they became lost ?).
Not as clear cut as the Israelis tell us.

To back up my point:

"Just nine minutes after U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche announced murder charges against Cuban leader Raúl Castro for the 1996 shootdown of two civilian aircraft flown by exile group Brothers to the Rescue, a coordinated rapid response network was already mobilizing across the U.S. to defend Castro and the Communist Party of Cuba.

At 1:54 p.m. on Wednesday, the Party for Socialism and Liberation, a Marxist political organization deeply embedded in a "Hands Off Cuba" campaign, published six pre-produced graphics denouncing the indictment as a "BASELESS INDICTMENT OF RAUL CASTRO" and "A PRETEXT FOR ANOTHER WAR."

Hours later, at 3:18 a.m. early Thursday morning, Vijay Prashad, executive director at Tricontinental, a Marxist think tank, wrote on X, "Cuba is not a menace to the world. The United States is a menace to the world. The world stands with Raúl Castro, hero of the Cuban Revolution. The world turns its back on Donald Trump, clown of human destruction." Manolo De Los Santos, executive director of the People's Forum, a New York-based nonprofit, shared the message without a word, as did leaders from CodePink, another leftist organization."

Protecting Raúl Castro!

To add the ultimate kicker!

"… investigation has identified 145 nonprofits, labor groups, advocacy organizations and activist collectives across the U.S. that are mobilizing in support of the Cuban government and the Communist Party of Cuba. Together, the organizations report about $1 USD billion in combined annual revenue." 🙄

Yes, NfP's taking advantage of we the taxpayers of the U.S. to support a communist overseas. Only to oppose "one man".

According to Atul Gawande from Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, the shutdown of USAID has already caused approximately 600,000 deaths

This is a statistical construct, it has no basis in reality and CORE US aid funding is being delivered directly via the State department, heavily influenced by the local Ambassadors in relevant nations. USAID after we opened up that can of worms was a vast slush fund for unnacountable spending that grifted away – STOLE – hundreds of billions of dollars. Like $20 USD million on Iraqi Sesame Street, or millions for transgender surgeries in Guatemala, $12 USD million for male circumcisions in Africa, millions for pride parades in Peru and Ireland, tens of millions to fund Ukrainian media (the US funded 90% of Ukrainian media), and $18 USD billion on largely unnaccountable or wasted spending in Afghanistan. And all given to leftist and Democrat-linked NGOs…

Trouble with the Isaelis re-occupying Israel is that the Palestinians have also been there for 3000 years plus. The PLST and other Sea Peoples were settled by the Pharaoh; as the Philistines they occupied much of the coast during Biblical times not part of Israel; and the lost tribes may also have stayed put (I don't know when they became lost ?).
Not as clear cut as the Israelis tell us.

Totally false. The Philistines and Sea Peoples were GREEK, not Arab "Palestinians." The area of Israel has been under continual Jewish settlement for 5000 years. The modern "Palestinians" have zero cultural or genetic history with the original Phillistines. They are ethnic Arab peoples who arrived with the conquest of the region by Islamic armies in the 7th century. The nomenclature of the region, as you KNOW, was largely known as JUDEA until Rome renamed it after a Jewish revolt to try and stamp out Jewish identity. From Judea to "Syria Palestina" under the Roman Empire, the name carried forward under the Byzantines, then conquering Arab powers and Caliphates, continued under the Ottoman Empire and them the British Palestine Mandate.

When the province was partitioned by the UN, MOST of the land was given to the Arabs, created the nation of JORDAN and parts granted to Syria, Lebanon and Egypt. A small sliver became Israel. The Arabs living in Israel did NOT have a Palestinian identity, that did not exist. This identity was largely manufactured and imprinted by the SOVIET UNION who sponsored the creation of Egyptian revolutionary socialist Yasser Arafat's "Palestinian Liberation Organization" as an asynchronous warfare tool against the US and Israel.

So while there is a "Palestinian" identity today, it dates back to the 1960s, not to the 3000 BC or so duration of Jewish presence in the land.

Sorry, not buying the 600,000 deaths in the timeframe involved. Not actual deaths, "estimated" deaths.

But just my view based on the below research.

"The 600,000 estimate comes from Boston University epidemiologist Brooke Nichols."

Just like I don't buy the "estimated" number of lives they claimed to save.

"Historical Baseline: Over the last two decades, USAID-supported programs prevented roughly 2.3 to 5.6 million deaths annually from HIV, malaria, tuberculosis, and acute malnutrition"

They have no idea if people would or would not have died. They base it all on estimation's.

I'm sure some lives have been saved. Just as I'm sure there is graft going on and a lot of wasted taxpayer dollars.

In addition there is money and jobs involved in obtaining that "taxpayer" money.

"While the academic modelers lose nothing, large international NGOs and humanitarian contractors did experience massive financial disruption. Organizations that relied heavily on USAID subcontracts to manage field operations had to lay off thousands of workers and shut down programs abruptly. Critics argue that these specific groups have a direct financial incentive to amplify dire projections to pressure the government into reversing the cuts."

As to those doing the research in "academic" institutions:

"Yes, it is statistically accurate to say that the vast majority of university professors and global public health researchers are politically progressive and lean heavily anti-Trump.While the researchers conducting these studies emphasize that their mathematical models are based on objective historical data and epidemiology, their political alignment is a central argument used by the administration to dismiss their findings.The tension between these academics and the administration stems from a mix of political identity, deep ideological differences on global policy, and direct professional conflict."

These institutions have been hit hard by administration cuts:

"The relationship between these specific academics and the administration is exceptionally hostile because the administration's policies have disrupted their professional world:

The Defunding of Science: Beyond cutting foreign aid, the administration has enacted a 90-day freeze on federal research grants, eliminated climate change and biomedical programs, and targeted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. This has led to high-profile departures of scientists from U.S. institutions.

Public Rhetoric: The administration has frequently attacked higher education, with President Trump publicly labeling university faculty as "Marxist maniacs". This has created an environment where academics feel personally and professionally under siege.Direct

Emotional Response: The primary modeler behind the 600,000 estimate, Dr. Brooke Nichols, openly stated in interviews that when she heard about the initial aid freeze, she was "terrified" and "livid" because she knew people would die. Her decision to build the tracker was born directly out of that distress. Another major figure citing the death tolls, Dr. Atul Gawande, explicitly served in the Biden administration as a USAID official."

Finally, the doctor himself:

"Gawande's political and policy profile is defined by several key areas:

Early Political Career & The ACA: Gawande has deep ties to Democratic politics, having served as a health policy advisor to Al Gore and Bill Clinton early in his career. His 2009 New Yorker article "The Cost Conundrum" was highly influential in shaping President Barack Obama's vision for the Affordable Care Act.

Biden Administration Role: He served on President Joe Biden's COVID-19 advisory board in 2020. He subsequently served as the Assistant Administrator for Global Health at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), where he managed international health programs."

So hardly qualifies as an unbiased observer.

SB +1

I responded to the first. You saved me from responding to the second.