logo
Trump Picked the Worst Possible Time to Hold a Military Parade

Trump Picked the Worst Possible Time to Hold a Military Parade

Yahooa day ago

This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME's politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox.
It's sometimes easy to go numb living here in Washington. On most days, the Vice President's motorcade rumbles under many of our office windows, traveling from the Naval Observatory to the White House in the morning and back shortly after his workday ends. It's not uncommon to spot a trio of white-topped helicopters zipping over the Potomac while crowds are having dinner down at The Wharf; one is transporting a head of state while the other two are decoys. And was that the Irish Taoiseach hanging out at Little Gay Pub and Kiki on St. Patrick's Day weekend? Yes, that nation's then-leader was visiting from Dublin and making the rounds on the LGBTQ circuit after his official day ended.
But the scene in my neighborhood the last two nights stood as a stark reminder that this weekend is shaping up to be surreal, even by D.C. standards. It's been hard to miss the military tanks rolling by on flatbed trucks around Eckington, Bloomingdale, and Shaw, heading past the city's convention center to get in position for a pricey parade on Saturday ordered by President Donald Trump. And if that spectacle were not shocking enough on its own, these giant weapons of war have been rumbling through residential streets in the U.S. capital at the same time as U.S. troops are deployed in the nation's second-largest city to help advance deeply unpopular immigration raids that have sparked protests across the nation.
The jarring split-screen reality is one that is arriving at perhaps the most tone-deaf moment so far of Trump's second term. Ostensibly, the parade is marking the quarter-century birthday for the U.S. Army. (It also just happens to be Trump's 79th birthday, which is a very convenient coincidence that has even some of the President's apologists rolling their eyes at the cover story.)
On the West Coast, as many as 2,000 National Guardsmen have been ordered up for active duty in Los Angeles, in direct violation of protocols that defer to each state's Governor, who is nominally the commander in chief of their reserve military. Trump also sent 700 Marines to Los Angeles to add to the uniformed legions that, to this point, have inflamed tensions, not quelled them. And there are whiffs that Los Angeles is merely a test case to see just how compliant Americans will be to see the world's greatest fighting force turn against the very people who pick up its tab. As Trump told reporters on Tuesday, those choosing to object publicly may come to regret it: 'For those people that want to protest, they're going to be met with very big force.'
So as Trump stands in Washington this Saturday, watching M1A2 tanks, Stryker armored vehicles, and M109s tear up some of D.C. iconic boulevards, an actual live military operation stands to be unfolding on the streets of Los Angeles—and maybe other cities as well, given Trump's orders are not limited to that one locality. D.C.'s airspace will be shut down for hours to make way for flying fortresses to buzz overhead. And a trick parachute troop plans to airdrop to the viewing platform to deliver Trump an American flag that is destined to land in his future presidential library.
It's one thing to watch a military display for show; it's another to watch live ammo be fired into the air to put down domestic demonstrations. The disconnect between Trump's stagings of brute force is striking and more than a little worrisome for those who have long thought civilian control of the military would have stopped such a craven choice.
Trump has long fetishized the military hardware he controls. During his first term, he sought to flash this power after seeing a similar demonstration on a visit to France for Bastile Day; his military brass convinced him it was a bad idea and not worth the price. Given his long-standing obsession with autocratic regimes, it's little surprise that he is plunging ahead with a flex that feels more like something we'd see in Moscow or Pyongyang.
The public is far from covering Trump's flank here. Trump's standing in polls sank underwater in March and hasn't recovered since, according to Nate Silver's modeling. A Quinnipiac poll out Wednesday puts Trump's approval rating at a measly 38%. He's even drawing a decided deficit on immigration and deportations—previously thought to be his best issues. Going back through post-World War II polling indices, Trump is faring worse than any President since 1953, save for how he was doing during his first term, according to analyst G. Elliott Morris.
So as D.C. streets are clogged with war tools staging for Saturday's pricey pageant—6,600 soldiers, 50 aircraft, and 150 military vehicles at a price of as much as $45 million—it's worth reminding ourselves that this is a show that seems to have little purpose beyond boosting Trump's ego. But as his legions of supporters like to say, forget your feelings. The American public is not behind this show, let alone the policies that the White House is hoping it distracts from.
The split screen between Washington and L.A. is disturbing, the implications dire. It's easy to forget that the nation and the world watch what happens in Washington far closer than the folks who live it day to day, and the war footing being adopted in a city fast approaching warzone timbre is not one that inspires confidence in America as the world's peacemakers. In fact, Trump's birthday blowout could be seen as a reboot of the entire post-Cold War ethos America has strived to convey for the last three decades—all over a parade coinciding with a domestic military crackdown.
Make sense of what matters in Washington. Sign up for the D.C. Brief newsletter.
Write to Philip Elliott at philip.elliott@time.com.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump moves to merge wildland firefighting into single force, despite ex-officials warning of chaos
Trump moves to merge wildland firefighting into single force, despite ex-officials warning of chaos

Associated Press

time34 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

Trump moves to merge wildland firefighting into single force, despite ex-officials warning of chaos

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — President Donald Trump on Thursday ordered government agencies to consolidate their wildland firefighting into a single program, despite warnings from former federal officials that it could be costly and increase the risk of catastrophic blazes. The order aims to centralize firefighting efforts now split among five agencies and two Cabinet departments. Trump's proposed budget for next year calls for the creation of a new Federal Wildland Fire Service under the U.S. Interior Department. That would mean shifting thousands of personnel from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Forest Service — where most federal firefighters now work — with fire season already underway. The administration has not disclosed how much the change could cost or save. Trump in his order cited the devastating Los Angeles wildfires in January as highlighting a need for a quicker response to wildfires. 'Wildfires threaten every region, yet many local government entities continue to disregard commonsense preventive measures,' the order said. The Trump administration in its first months temporarily cut off money for wildfire prevention work and reduced the ranks of federal government firefighters through layoffs and retirement. The order makes no mention of climate change, which Trump has downplayed even as warming temperatures help stoke bigger and more destructive wildfires that churn out massive amounts of harmful pollution. More than 65,000 wildfires across the U.S. burned almost 9 million acres (3.6 million hectares) last year. Organizations representing firefighters and former Forest Service officials say it would be costly to restructure firefighting efforts and cause major disruptions in the midst of fire season. A group that includes several former Forest Service chiefs said in a recent letter to lawmakers that consolidation of firefighting work could 'actually increase the likelihood of more large catastrophic fires, putting more communities, firefighters and resources at risk.' Another destructive fire season is expected this year, driven by above-normal temperatures for most of the country, according to federal officials. A prior proposal to merge the Forest Service and Interior to improve firefighting was found to have significant drawbacks by the Congressional Research Service in a 2008 report. But the idea more recently got bipartisan support, with California Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla and Montana Republican Sen. Tim Sheehy sponsoring legislation that is similar to Trump's plan. Before his election last year, Sheehy founded an aerial firefighting company that relies heavily on federal contracts. In a separate action aimed at wildfires, the Trump administration last month rolled back environmental safeguards around future logging projects on more than half U.S. national forests. The emergency designation covers 176,000 square miles (455,000 square kilometers) of terrain primarily in the West but also in the South, around the Great Lakes and in New England. Most of those forests are considered to have high wildfire risk, and many are in decline because of insects and disease.

An Israeli attack on Iran could send oil prices above $100 as tensions mount
An Israeli attack on Iran could send oil prices above $100 as tensions mount

CNBC

time39 minutes ago

  • CNBC

An Israeli attack on Iran could send oil prices above $100 as tensions mount

Beset by near-universal bearish outlooks just a month ago, oil prices could spike to more than $100 a barrel in the event of an Israeli attack on Iran, some analysts are warning. Crude prices spiked as much as 5% overnight — before paring gains — on fears of military escalation between Iran and Israel as President Donald Trump announced the withdrawal of some U.S. personnel from embassies and bases across the Middle East. The front-month August contract for global benchmark Brent crude was trading at $69 per barrel at 3:20 p.m. ET on Thursday, while the front-month July U.S. WTI contract was at $67.7 per barrel. "They [U.S. military personnel] are being moved out because it could be a dangerous place and we will see what happens... We have given notice to move out," Trump told reporters on Wednesday. The Pentagon has ordered the withdrawal of troops and non-essential staff from embassies in Baghdad, Kuwait and Bahrain. The jury is still out as to whether the moves are a pressure play ahead of upcoming U.S.-Iran nuclear talks, or whether the U.S., Israel and Iran are truly on the verge of conflict. The geopolitical risk premium is "already at least partially reflected in current oil prices," according to J.P. Morgan's global commodities research team, citing Brent crude trading at just under $70 a barrel, already above its model-derived fair value figure of $66 for June. "This suggests an elevated 7% probability of a worst-case scenario, where the price reaction is exponential rather than linear, with the impact on supply potentially extending beyond a 2.1 mbd (million barrels per day) reduction in Iranian oil exports," the bank's research team wrote in a note published Thursday. Iran is OPEC's third-largest crude producer. Israel appears ready to attack Iran, according to reports citing U.S. and European officials, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been pressing Trump to allow strikes. But the American president said in late May that he had warned Netanyahu against attacking Iran while negotiations with Washington were under way. U.S. Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff is currently set to meet with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Oman on Sunday for a sixth round of negotiations. Strait of Hormuz in focus Oil traders are focusing on the potential of a wider conflict shutting down the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint through which 20% of the volume of the world's total oil consumption passes daily. The British Navy on Wednesday issued a rare warning to ships in the region, saying it had "been made aware of increased tensions within the region which could lead to an escalation of military activity having a direct impact on mariners." It urged caution for vessels transiting "the Arabian Gulf, Gulf of Oman and Straits of Hormuz." Beyond that, J.P. Morgan warned, "a more general Middle East conflagration could ignite retaliatory responses from major oil producing countries in the region responsible for a third of global oil output." "Under this severe outcome," the bank's analysts wrote, "we estimate oil prices could surge to the $120-130/bbl range." Even before the latest uptick in tensions, some oil industry watchers were already making bullish calls despite a flood of announced OPEC+ supply coming onto the market, and lower global growth and demand forecasts due to trade and tariff tensions. Josh Young, founder and chief investment officer at Houston-based Bison Interests, told CNBC in late May that physical markets are more tightly supplied than previously thought, and with several oil rigs in the U.S. shale patch coming offline just as the U.S. summer driving season begins, markets should be preparing for Brent crude at $85 a barrel. "The pure inventory versus consumption would indicate $85 [per barrel], which is way higher than where we are right now. It's almost uncomfortable to say that, but that's the current price implied by inventories," Young told CNBC's Access Middle East. He cited his forecast figure as "fair value," arguing that "typically, you go from too cheap to too expensive. So I don't think we should be ruling out $100 oil this year. And I think if there is a geopolitical risk, it could get even higher." Without the geopolitical risk premium — namely, a conflict with Iran — Young still sees crude coming up to the $80 to $85 per barrel range, particularly in the event of trade deals being reached and Trump's tariffs being lowered. The outlook is boosted by this month's forecast from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which sees a decline in U.S. oil production for the first time since the Covid-19 pandemic due to slower drilling activity and a declining rig count. Such bullish forecasts are certainly not the norm, however. Without a military attack on Iran, J.P. Morgan's base case for oil "remains in the low-to-mid $60s oil for the remainder of 2025, and $60 in 2026." Goldman Sachs also maintains an oil price forecast in the $50 to $60 per barrel range for this and next year, despite noting an improving demand picture, downside risks to U.S. supply and geopolitical tensions. The recent rise in inventories due to OPEC+ output increases, "supports our cautious oil price forecast, with Brent expected to average $60 for the rest of 2025 and $56 in 2026," the bank's commodities team wrote. "However, small misses in OPEC+ supply suggest that lower-than-anticipated spare capacity represents an upside risk to our price forecast."

The Rare Earth Trap: How China Could Cripple America's Tech and Defense in One Move
The Rare Earth Trap: How China Could Cripple America's Tech and Defense in One Move

Yahoo

time40 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

The Rare Earth Trap: How China Could Cripple America's Tech and Defense in One Move

China may not have Silicon Valley, but it controls the minerals that make Silicon Valley run. From electric motors to missile systems, rare earth elements are the silent backbone of modern techand Beijing owns the playbook. In 2024, China produced 270,000 tons of rare earthsabout six times more than the it dominates global refining. When trade tensions flared again, Beijing didn't just talk tough. It added seven rare earths to its export control list, causing headaches for American manufacturers. Tesla (TSLA) flagged rare-earth magnet shortages as a bottleneck for its humanoid robot, while Ford was forced to idle a major Chicago plant due to supply disruptions. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 6 Warning Sign with MP. The pressure doesn't stop at consumer goods. The F-35 fighter jet alone requires over 900 pounds of rare earths. And yet, the U.S. has just one major rare-earth mineMP Materials' (NYSE:MP) Mountain Passand almost no refining capacity. Trump, aiming to break China's chokehold, invoked emergency powers in March to accelerate domestic mining and processing. He followed up with an investigation into the national security risks of mineral imports, with recommendations expected within 270 days. Still, even fast-tracked projects could take years, and in the meantime, tariffs could drive up prices for the very materials U.S. companies depend on. China's control runs deep. It can approveor delayexport licenses without explanation, leaving global supply chains exposed. The message is clear: if the U.S. wants to restrict chip exports, China can slow-roll the magnets that drive EVs and missiles. Trump has floated Greenland and Ukraine as alternative sources, but neither has proven, scalable capacity. Rare earths aren't rarebut reliable supply chains are. And as the trade war evolves, the world is learning that dominance in materials might be more powerful than dominance in manufacturing. This article first appeared on GuruFocus.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store