Tuesday, March 21, 2017

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson To Skip NATO Meeting To Meet Chinese President Xi In Washington, And Will Then Travel To Russia

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson speaks in Washington, U.S. on March 6, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo

Reuters: Tillerson plans to skip NATO meeting, visit Russia in April - sources

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson plans to skip a meeting with NATO foreign ministers next month in order to stay home for a visit by China's president and will go to Russia later in April, U.S. officials said on Monday, disclosing an itinerary that allies may see as giving Moscow priority over them.

Tillerson intends to miss what would have been his first meeting of the 28 NATO allies on April 5-6 in Brussels so that he can attend President Donald Trump's expected April 6-7 talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping at Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, four current and former U.S. officials said.

Skipping the NATO meeting and visiting Moscow could risk feeding a perception that Trump may be putting U.S. dealings with big powers first, while leaving waiting those smaller nations that depend on Washington for security, two former U.S. officials said.

Read more ....

Update #1: Tillerson to skip NATO meet, visit Russia: report (The Hill)
Update #2: Rex Tillerson To Skip NATO Meeting, Will Visit Russia Instead (Zero Hedge)

WNU Editor: Prioritising China and Russia over NATO .... I suspect that this is not what German Chancellor Merkel wants to hear after her trip to Washington last week, nor do other European allies .... Tillerson no-show at NATO renews European disquiet about Trump (Reuters).


Bob Huntley said...

The Guy is already whipped.

B.Poster said...


Mr. Tillerson may well be "whipped", however, I'm not sure how we reach this conclusion from the article. Actually skipping a NATO meeting to focus on Russia and China seems a prudent policy.

After all Russia and China are big powerful countries who can harm us very badly, they can help us as well, and we are going to need their cooperation in a number of areas. In contrast, NATO countries especially the Eastern European countries are net liabilities who offer nothing of value and cost a great deal.

The headline is misleading. If we focus only on the headline, we would think these NATO countries are being ignored. This is not the case. The article points out that soon Mr. Tillerson will be meeting with the leadership of 26 of 27 NATO countries.

As for the Trump critics the article gives much credence to, it would be best if they are ignored. These people have nothing to offer. Their flawed thinking is endemic of that of team Clinton and does much to explain why they lost in spite of a huge advantage in resources.

Some just never learn and perhaps can't learn. Perhaps they should watch team Trump, take notes, and try and learn. If they are unable to learn from the past, they haven't seen anything yet. There defeat in the last presidential election is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg of the types of defeats they will suffer.

TWN said...

It all comes down to the Big Three, the rest of us are now just spectators.

B.Poster said...

Perhaps it is just the "big two" with Russia and China as the top powers and all others need to be working how they are going to position themselves in a world dominated by those two. To say that it is unhelpful to have both of them as de facto enemies is a major understatement.

"Big two". "big three" or whatever, in this context, it makes much more sense for Mr. Tillerson to focus his energies on two of the big three and to spend less energy on the largely irrelevant NARO countries who are a net resource drain on us.

Anonymous said...

Bposter... face palm.. stop counting Russia as big anything. .what do they have except a failing economy the size of Italy (despite outnumbering them)?they are poor as a failing state except for some rich oligarchs. ..and they are surrounded by countries that don't want anything to do with them. .that's not the definition of a super power. ..All Russia has is nukes, natural resources and Propaganda..and guess what? Natural resources won't mean anything in about 3 decades. ..time is ticking for mother Russia. .if they don't make it to a modern economy soon they'll be on the level of Pakistan. ..a county with nukes and that's about it. ..China and the US is where it's at. .but the word on China is also still out. .considering they outnumber the US by about 4:1 they are having a hard time overtaking the US economy. ..soon they'll age too much to do it, then their already high debt will spiral. ..so. .to be realistic only the US is a super power. ..Read up on the definition of super Power. ..it's Military, geographical advantage, economic strength and cultural influence. ..China qualifies. ..Russia not at all. ..wake up

B.Poster said...


Very respectfully please read something besides the Pollyannish bullsh!t you have been reading. Please read things and examine them critically instead of superficially.

An excellent place to start would be to read the links provided by the editor of this website. Much of your narrative is refuted by the evidence he presents. If you're willing to be taught, you can learn. If not, you may continue with your superficial analysis.

To learn will require an intellectual curiouisty and an open mind that you seem to lack. Very respectfully I don't have the time or patience to teach you even if you were willing and able to learn which doesn't really seem likely at this time.

While we cannot "know" the outcome of a war in advance, the point I made is nonetheless valid. Russia and China have both the means and willingness to hurt America in major ways right now and America needs the cooperation of both right now. In contrast, NATO countries have nothing to offer us right now nor can they hurt us right now unless we allow them to continue to screw us over as we have in the past. Furthermore their trajectory is downhill. Essentially the decision of the Sec of State to focus on Russia and China right now is a sensible one and besides I'd suggest it might be prudent to be respectful to a nation with thousands of nukes. This does NOT mean you defer to them in every way but respect is a good course of action. Doubly so when your success depends upon an amicable relationship with them.

As for China, we need to renegotiate the trade agreements and we need a "soft landing" when the $ looses it's role as world reserve currency. Amicable relations are going to be most helpful.