If every television observer had looked forward to events under the aegis of the United Nations, listening to the 45th president of the United States would be unanimous in saying, “What a dismal performance!”
Even the most “dedicated” Trump supporter could ill afford to tell the truth to any neutral crowd of listeners.
The veracity would require proofs galore were praises and acclaim realized to join a description of POTUS’ attempt at the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, September 26, 2018.
The Trump address, as any part of the listening audience would truthfully state, will be remembered for the “mocking laughter,” that followed the speaker’s claim in reference to his administration.
Trump, in the beginning sentence of his address told his listeners that the Trump administration has, so far, “accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country.”
That “first time” should have provided ample proof about the distaste and reaction of the same U.N. Assembly. It didn’t. More tangible evidence had to be availed of to support truth.
The next day, Trump chaired a session of the U.N. Security Council on weapons of mass destruction and nonproliferation, ostensibly to gain “support for his administration’s hard-line stance on the Iran nuclear deal.”
Trumpism once more filled the speaker’s theme.
“This horrible, one-sided deal allowed Iran to continue its path toward a bomb and gave the regime a cash lifeline when they needed it most.
“They were in big, big trouble. They needed cash. We gave it to them.”
Reactions to the Trump’s declarations arrived on the scene. Every other member country of the U.N. Assembly took turns “scolding” the United States for its “selfish” motives: Its undermining of the nuclear deal with Tehran was loudly stated.
Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran deal and the sanctions on Iran were vastly condemned by politicians representing their nations: from the president of Peru, to the vice-president of the Ivory Coast, to the foreign minister of Kazakhstan.
Standing out as the “most scathing attack,” came from Bolivian President Evo Morales who strongly mentioned the decades of “maligned American interference in the Middle East.”
Continuing his attack, Morales strongly lashed out at Trump for what the entire world had known: Trump’s acts like separating migrant parents from their children at the U.S.-Mexico border.
“The United States could not care less about human rights or justice,” the Bolivian president declared, as he continued to show his disdain of Trump.
Reportedly, it was learned: “If America’s allies were more polite, they seemed barely more impressed.”
British Prime Minister Theresa May was described as one who “insisted that the terms of the nuclear deal,” were the “best means of preventing Iran developing a nuclear weapon.”
She continued her remarks: “For many years, the scale and nature of Iran’s nuclear program raised serious international concerns.”
May took time to mention how the JCPOA was an important step forward, as she used the formal abbreviation of the agreement forged between Iran and world powers.
“We still retain the same objective in mind, namely preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and guaranteeing strict international control on the peaceful use of their nuclear program,” according to French President Emmanuel Macron.
“The JCPOA is imperfect, but it is a decisive step in that exact direction,” he proceeded to underscore the role of that world agency.
It was pointed out how Trump’s “harsh rhetoric and unilateral decision-making have allowed Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to play the role of the law-abiding victim, adhering to the terms of an agreement that the White House was described as “recklessly casting aside.”
In his remarks delivered before the General Assembly, Rouhani “blasted” the Trump administration’s disregard for the kind of multilateral decision-making that defines international institutions like the United Nations.
Trump’s audience were heard to state how he “lacks a genuine diplomatic strategy, whether on a new deal
with Iran or a host of other grievances.”
Trump critics have not abbreviated their impressions.
“He still lacks genuine diplomatic strategy, whether on a new deal with Tehran or a host of other grievances.”
The paramount criticism: “The U.S. president is far more occupied with his political image as a disrupter of the
status quo than the actual work involved in reworking existing compacts to his advantage.”
The Brookings Institution’s senior fellow, Thomas Wright, said: “Most presidents would outline a plan to deal with Iran after the nuclear deal or to transform NATO to cope with the threat from authoritarian states, or to resolve the trade war.
“But Trump is not one for detail or course correction. In his world, there was a problem, so he did something quickly. And now it is solved. To say anything else is to suggest the unthinkable…that he is not a magician.”
“It is unlikely that Trump will change for the better,” is the consensus of those who were clear about their commentaries on Trump.