BRINKMANSHIP HAS REPLACED COMPROMISE IN ALL OF OUR POLITICAL AFFAIRS

If I were to choose a word to define our political world in this 2016 winter of our discontent, it would be “brinkmanship.”  This term is defined as:  the art or practice of pursuing a dangerous policy to the limits of safety before stopping, typically in politics.  We are surrounded by examples of brinkmanship and they are dangerous indeed.

In Pennsylvania, our democratic governor and republican legislature continue to practice brinkmanship on a scale that not even the most jaded political observers thought possible.  We are entering into a second year in which the passing of a constitutionally mandated state budget seems unachievable.  Political ideologies have replaced political compromise.  As school districts and social service agencies scramble to keep the doors open, irreparable damage is being caused to the Commonwealth.

In the presidential election Donald Trump practices brinkmanship to the limits of acceptable populist politics and behavior on the campaign trail. His insults against Latinos and Muslims are borderline racist and have invoked angry reactions abroad and religious rebukes from the Pope.  His use of profanity and insults against other candidates are uncivil and in bad taste.  None of this conduct will cease until it begins to have a negative effect on his political campaign.

Congress has continued to toy with brinkmanship in 2016 mostly through omission and “kicking the can down the road.” The national debt, Social Security and Medicare reform and funding for road, bridge and electric grid infrastructure simply get ignored.  One has the feeling that only a significant crisis, like the 2008 financial meltdown, will reverse this edge of the cliff mentality and result in positive action.

In the Syrian conflict, the major actors: The United States, Iran, Turkey, Kurdish fighters,  Saudi Arabia, Russia, the Syrian leader, Bashar al-Assad and Syrian rebel groups are all practicing brinkmanship.   Syria has become the worst humanitarian disaster in the history of the Middle East.  The citizens of an entire country are either being massacred by the ongoing violence, starved to death, or forced to become part of the large migration into Europe, where they are not welcome.  While all the actors agree that only a political solution can stop this destruction of a nation, all attempts to broker a cease fire have been feeble at best. Apparently, only when the groups supporting Assad gain the advantage will this policy change.

 

 The ongoing blow-up in the oil and gas markets, now well over a year old, is a classic example of brinkmanship.  In the past the OPEC countries, lead by Saudi Arabia developed a consensus on oil and gas production to cause minimal disruption to the world economy.  In November of 2014, the Saudis went their own way and decided not to cut production no matter how low the price of oil became.  The result has been major economic dislocations in Brazil, Russia, Venezuela, Nigeria and in the United States shale belt. This brinksmanship is designed to cripple the Saudi’s mortal enemy Iran, now back in the oil market, and to bankrupt other producers around the world.  This policy is causing economic and political dislocations in Saudi Arabia as well, so the political danger on the Saudi home front from this brinkmanship is real and growing.

 

Other recent examples of brinkmanship abound, including North Korea firing missiles, knowing that the world would react with sanctions and possible force; Russian involvement in the Ukraine and Isis taking terrorism to a new level, forcing the civilized world to take action to destroy it.  Many scientists would argue that the brinkmanship of world leaders in failing to react vigorously to climate change has placed humanity on the path of no return.

 

With the exception of the Iran nuclear agreement, political compromise, defined as a way of reaching an agreement in which each person or group gives up something that was wanted in order to end an argument or dispute, has not been in vogue in 2016.  This is not an optimistic trend. 

 

Continuing to live on the brink will eventually result in disaster and force political compromise back into play.  The cumulative damage before rationality returns will be enormous in terms of lost human life, broken political institutions and failed international relations.