Latest news with #JohnBolton
Yahoo
20 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump And Putin's Bromance Is Falling Apart, And A Relationship Counselor Has A Take On It That Is Spot-On
Historically, President Donald Trump and Russia's President Vladimir Putin have enjoyed a very special relationship ― at least if you're viewing it through Trump's perspective. As far back as 2013, Trump was envisioning a friendship with the Russian authoritarian leader, whose allegiance to Trump has proved more ambiguous through the years. 'Do you think Putin will be going to The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow — if so, will he become my new best friend?' Trump, the beauty pageant's then-owner, tweeted in June 2013. Later, Trump praised Putin as 'a big hero in Russia' and 'a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond.' (CNN has a more exhaustive list of Trump's effusive remarks about Putin, if you're into that sort of thing) Putin has spoken admiringly of Trump here and there, including a compliment about Trump behaving like a 'real man' after an assassination attempt last year. But many, including former U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton, believe Putin sees Trump as 'an easy mark' on the global stage. 'As a former KGB agent, Putin knows exactly how to manipulate him,' Bolton told the Kyiv Independent in March. (Of course, all of this is complicated by multiple investigations that have documented Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, which Trump won. Putin has denied any tampering.) Related: 18 Major Global Events That American Media Is Ignoring Right Now, And Why They Actually Matter To Us That very brief history brings us to the current day: Nearly four months into his second term, Trump's arguably one-sided bromance with Putin has apparently soured. Trump has become increasingly disillusioned with his political BFF as Putin continues to refuse to negotiate a ceasefire with Ukraine. 'I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP!' Trump wrote in a widely mocked Truth Social post last month. On Sunday, after Putin launched the largest aerial attack of Moscow's three-year full-scale war on Ukraine, Trump again criticized the Russian leader. 'I've always had a very good relationship with Vladimir Putin of Russia, but something has happened to him. He has gone absolutely CRAZY!' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'He is needlessly killing a lot of people, and I'm not just talking about soldiers. Missiles and drones are being shot into Cities in Ukraine, for no reason whatsoever.' Related: "I Am So Torn With What You Are Doing" — 11 Posts From MAGA Business Owners Who Are So Close To Getting It Then came Putin's response, which couldn't have gone over well with Trump. Trump seemed to be experiencing 'emotional overload,' the Kremlin mused ― the geopolitical equivalent of telling your wife she sounds crazy in the middle of an argument. What's going on with these two? Is the honeymoon stage over? Was there ever much of a bromance to begin with? To untangle all of this, we reached out to Tracy Ross, a couples therapist in New York City, who characterized Trump and Putin as very much a toxic couple. For years, Trump unhealthily idealized and even seemed to aspire to be like the Russian strongman leader, Ross said. It didn't seem to register for Trump that the relationship was unrequited. 'He seemed to exhibit denial in order to maintain his version of who Putin is and what their relationship was,' she said. 'Trump acted like someone with blinders on – rose-colored glasses, defending Putin's intentions and reasoning.' The way he continuously expresses alignment with Putin's positions — even making the audacious claim that Ukraine started the war ― mirrors an unhealthy relationship dynamic (not to mention, puts the U.S. at risk). 'The stakes are different but the dynamics are similar,' Ross said. 'In a toxic or unhealthy relationship dynamic, one person ignores, justifies or reasons away the behavior of the other that is damaging and even destructive.' Trump held tightly to his trumped-up, idealized version of Putin because he believed he was equally admired and respected by the other man, and that his loyalty would allow him to influence Putin's actions. That doesn't seem to be the case, which may come as a surprise to Trump, but not to outsiders, which — again — mirrors an unhealthy relationship dynamic 'when the world sees what you don't because you are too far in it, or invested in your version until something breaks through the denial,' Ross said. While it does appear that Trump is finally waking up when it comes to all things Vlads, the tone he's taking lately is the opposite of strong or statesmanly. Those Truth Social posts speak to Trump's insecurity and need for approval and validation. 'The 'Vladimir, STOP!' statement is oddly childish and groveling,' Ross said. 'It's the way you would speak to someone you are very familiar with and close to. He's trying to express his disapproval and yet hoping to maintain the perceived relationship, the emotional attachment he has to Putin.' It won't be effective, because Putin doesn't need the approval and validation the way Trump does, Ross said. The Kremlin's 'emotional overload' comment is a classic deflective response. It's textbook gaslighting, but then again, so was Trump calling his buddy 'absolutely CRAZY' earlier this week. 'Neither one is taking any accountability or trying to gain clarity,' Ross said. 'If this were a therapy setting, we would work on being interested in how they are impacting one another, trying to get them each to take responsibility instead of escalating, and trying to find resolution instead of upping the ante and continuing to place blame,' she explained. In a marriage, these kinds of petty and small interactions would only lead to more fission. In a geopolitical bromance, the same could be said ― but then it wasn't much of a bromance to begin with. 'Friendship requires reciprocity, taking each others' feelings and points of view into account, a back and forth, a give and take, and mutual respect and regard,' she said. The Trump-Putin rapport always felt asymmetrical and politically imbalanced, with Putin gripping the lion's share of the power. 'Trump often praised or defended Putin, while Putin remained measured or even condescending. There was admiration but it was one-sided,' Ross said. 'Given that this was more of a fantasy bond than an actual bond, a friendship reconciliation is unlikely to happen.' This article originally appeared on HuffPost. Also in In the News: People Can't Believe This "Disgusting" Donald Trump Jr. Post About Joe Biden's Cancer Diagnosis Is Real Also in In the News: Miss USA's 2024 "National Costume" Has Been Revealed, And It's Obviously An Interesting Choice Also in In the News: One Body Language Expert Spotted Something Very Telling When Donald Trump "Held His Own Hand" At His Recent Press Conference
Yahoo
20 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump And Putin's Bromance Is Falling Apart, And A Relationship Counselor Has A Take On It That Is Spot-On
Historically, President Donald Trump and Russia's President Vladimir Putin have enjoyed a very special relationship ― at least if you're viewing it through Trump's perspective. As far back as 2013, Trump was envisioning a friendship with the Russian authoritarian leader, whose allegiance to Trump has proved more ambiguous through the years. 'Do you think Putin will be going to The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow — if so, will he become my new best friend?' Trump, the beauty pageant's then-owner, tweeted in June 2013. Later, Trump praised Putin as 'a big hero in Russia' and 'a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond.' (CNN has a more exhaustive list of Trump's effusive remarks about Putin, if you're into that sort of thing) Putin has spoken admiringly of Trump here and there, including a compliment about Trump behaving like a 'real man' after an assassination attempt last year. But many, including former U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton, believe Putin sees Trump as 'an easy mark' on the global stage. 'As a former KGB agent, Putin knows exactly how to manipulate him,' Bolton told the Kyiv Independent in March. (Of course, all of this is complicated by multiple investigations that have documented Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, which Trump won. Putin has denied any tampering.) Related: 18 Major Global Events That American Media Is Ignoring Right Now, And Why They Actually Matter To Us That very brief history brings us to the current day: Nearly four months into his second term, Trump's arguably one-sided bromance with Putin has apparently soured. Trump has become increasingly disillusioned with his political BFF as Putin continues to refuse to negotiate a ceasefire with Ukraine. 'I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP!' Trump wrote in a widely mocked Truth Social post last month. On Sunday, after Putin launched the largest aerial attack of Moscow's three-year full-scale war on Ukraine, Trump again criticized the Russian leader. 'I've always had a very good relationship with Vladimir Putin of Russia, but something has happened to him. He has gone absolutely CRAZY!' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'He is needlessly killing a lot of people, and I'm not just talking about soldiers. Missiles and drones are being shot into Cities in Ukraine, for no reason whatsoever.' Related: "I Am So Torn With What You Are Doing" — 11 Posts From MAGA Business Owners Who Are So Close To Getting It Then came Putin's response, which couldn't have gone over well with Trump. Trump seemed to be experiencing 'emotional overload,' the Kremlin mused ― the geopolitical equivalent of telling your wife she sounds crazy in the middle of an argument. What's going on with these two? Is the honeymoon stage over? Was there ever much of a bromance to begin with? To untangle all of this, we reached out to Tracy Ross, a couples therapist in New York City, who characterized Trump and Putin as very much a toxic couple. For years, Trump unhealthily idealized and even seemed to aspire to be like the Russian strongman leader, Ross said. It didn't seem to register for Trump that the relationship was unrequited. 'He seemed to exhibit denial in order to maintain his version of who Putin is and what their relationship was,' she said. 'Trump acted like someone with blinders on – rose-colored glasses, defending Putin's intentions and reasoning.' The way he continuously expresses alignment with Putin's positions — even making the audacious claim that Ukraine started the war ― mirrors an unhealthy relationship dynamic (not to mention, puts the U.S. at risk). 'The stakes are different but the dynamics are similar,' Ross said. 'In a toxic or unhealthy relationship dynamic, one person ignores, justifies or reasons away the behavior of the other that is damaging and even destructive.' Trump held tightly to his trumped-up, idealized version of Putin because he believed he was equally admired and respected by the other man, and that his loyalty would allow him to influence Putin's actions. That doesn't seem to be the case, which may come as a surprise to Trump, but not to outsiders, which — again — mirrors an unhealthy relationship dynamic 'when the world sees what you don't because you are too far in it, or invested in your version until something breaks through the denial,' Ross said. While it does appear that Trump is finally waking up when it comes to all things Vlads, the tone he's taking lately is the opposite of strong or statesmanly. Those Truth Social posts speak to Trump's insecurity and need for approval and validation. 'The 'Vladimir, STOP!' statement is oddly childish and groveling,' Ross said. 'It's the way you would speak to someone you are very familiar with and close to. He's trying to express his disapproval and yet hoping to maintain the perceived relationship, the emotional attachment he has to Putin.' It won't be effective, because Putin doesn't need the approval and validation the way Trump does, Ross said. The Kremlin's 'emotional overload' comment is a classic deflective response. It's textbook gaslighting, but then again, so was Trump calling his buddy 'absolutely CRAZY' earlier this week. 'Neither one is taking any accountability or trying to gain clarity,' Ross said. 'If this were a therapy setting, we would work on being interested in how they are impacting one another, trying to get them each to take responsibility instead of escalating, and trying to find resolution instead of upping the ante and continuing to place blame,' she explained. In a marriage, these kinds of petty and small interactions would only lead to more fission. In a geopolitical bromance, the same could be said ― but then it wasn't much of a bromance to begin with. 'Friendship requires reciprocity, taking each others' feelings and points of view into account, a back and forth, a give and take, and mutual respect and regard,' she said. The Trump-Putin rapport always felt asymmetrical and politically imbalanced, with Putin gripping the lion's share of the power. 'Trump often praised or defended Putin, while Putin remained measured or even condescending. There was admiration but it was one-sided,' Ross said. 'Given that this was more of a fantasy bond than an actual bond, a friendship reconciliation is unlikely to happen.' This article originally appeared on HuffPost. Also in In the News: People Can't Believe This "Disgusting" Donald Trump Jr. Post About Joe Biden's Cancer Diagnosis Is Real Also in In the News: Miss USA's 2024 "National Costume" Has Been Revealed, And It's Obviously An Interesting Choice Also in In the News: One Body Language Expert Spotted Something Very Telling When Donald Trump "Held His Own Hand" At His Recent Press Conference
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Bolton says US-Iran nuclear talks are ‘fruitless'
Former national security adviser John Bolton argued during a recent interview that nuclear deal negotiations between the U.S. and Iran are 'fruitless' and Israel's potential strikes against Tehran's nuclear facilities are entirely 'warranted.' 'I think we're really at a very important point here, whether, whether Trump is going to try and continue these negotiations, which I think are going to be completely fruitless, or whether Israel is going to do what it has to do to protect its very existence,' Bolton said Friday evening in an appearance on NewsNation's 'On Balance.' The U.S. and Iran's officials have sat down for five rounds of talks regarding Iran's expanding nuclear program, with the most recent meeting taking place in Rome last week. There, both sides indicated that they are moving closer to forging a new deal. President Trump withdrew from the Obama-negotiated deal with Iran in 2018, during his first White House term, and imposed sanctions on Tehran. Trump has warned Iran that if ongoing diplomatic talks go sideways, military action could take place. The president earlier Friday signaled that the two countries are 'fairly close' to reaching a new agreement. 'I think we have a chance of making a deal with Iran,' Trump told journalists at the White House. 'They don't want to be blown up,' he added. 'They would rather make a deal, and I think that could happen in the not-too-distant future.' Israel has reportedly been preparing to strike Iran's nuclear facilities if U.S.-led talks go nowhere. Trump confirmed on Wednesday that he warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to refrain from striking Tehran as it could jeopardize ongoing discussions. 'It's not a warning. I said, 'I don't think it's appropriate.' I just said I don't think it's appropriate,' Trump said. 'We're having very good discussions with them, and I don't think it's appropriate right now.' Bolton, a defense hawk and a frequent critic of the president's approach to foreign policy, said the 'actual opinion in Israel is overwhelmingly in favor of taking military action against Iran's facilities.' An Israeli Democracy Institute poll, released in late April, found that 45 percent of Israelis are in favor of striking Iran, while 41.5 percent are against it. Just over half of the respondents, 52 percent, of Jewish Israelis are in favor of strikes, while 34.5 percent oppose them. Among Arab Israelis, a large majority, 76 percent, are against military strikes, while only nine percent said the opposite, according to the survey. 'I think a preventive attack is entirely warranted. The US should support it. In fact, if asked, or if asked, we should help them and in fact we should volunteer to help them,' Bolton told host Leland Vittert on Friday. 'It's unfair to say that the Iran nuclear program is only Israel's problem, let's face it, it's our problem, too,' he added. Saudi Arabia's Defense Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman also warned Iranian officials during a closed-door meeting on April 17 that Tehran should take up Trump's opportunity to negotiate a deal or the Islamic republic would risk military strikes from Israel, Reuters reported on Friday, citing two Gulf sources and two Iranian officials. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Ya Biladi
3 days ago
- Politics
- Ya Biladi
United States : John Bolton continues his pro-Polisario and pro-Algeria lobbying
مدة القراءة: 2' John Bolton is back on the international stage, this time advocating for the Polisario Front. As calls mount to classify the Polisario as a terrorist organization in the United States, the former National Security Advisor under the Trump administration argues in an op-ed that «U.S. should support a referendum allowing Sahrawis to determine their own future». In a surprising twist, Bolton justifies his call for the U.S. to back the Polisario by warning about «Chinese and Russian influence mounting across Africa, suggesting that continued American support for Morocco could open the door to their increased presence in the region. Bolton leans heavily on historical arguments, referencing Security Council Resolution 690, which established MINURSO in 1991 with U.S. support. His position closely mirrors those of Algeria and the Polisario, who have long demanded a self-determination referendum for Western Sahara and the implementation of the African settlement plan. However, Bolton omits a crucial historical fact: the UN abandoned the referendum option in the early 2000s. Under the leadership of former Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the UN dissolved the commission responsible for identifying eligible participants for the proposed vote. It's a significant omission, particularly for Bolton, who served as U.S. Ambassador to the UN from 2005 to 2006 under President George W. Bush. «The Polisario is Not Under Iran's Influence» Bolton also pushes back against accusations that the Polisario is aligned with Iran. After criticizing what he describes as Morocco's «obstacles» to holding a referendum, Bolton defends the Polisario's reputation: «The Polisario's opponents are trying a new line of propaganda, alleging without evidence that the Polisario has come under Iran's influence. This misinformation may well be intended to divert U.S. attention from Morocco's decadeslong stonewalling against a referendum». Bolton adds: «Sahrawi opponents have gone as far as claiming that Polisario fighters were among foreign militias Iran trained in Syria under the now-fallen Assad regime». He cites reports by The Washington Post and other publications, which state that both the Syrian government and the Polisario have categorically denied these allegations. «But Morocco's friends in the West continue to spread them», Bolton claims. «Perhaps influenced by this anti-Sahrawi propaganda, legislation has been introduced in the House to designate Polisario as a terrorist group», referring to legislation introduced by Republican Congressman Joe Wilson. Context and Contradictions Bolton further argues that the Sahrawis «never succumbed to the radicalism that swept the Middle East after Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution. Claims that Sahrawis are susceptible to Tehran-based Shiite propaganda are belied by the long-standing presence in the camps of U.S. religious, nongovernmental organizations providing educational and medical services». However, it's worth noting that in October 2019, the U.S. government offered a reward of up to $5 million for information leading to the identification or capture of Adnan Abu Walid al-Sahraoui, a former Polisario member who became a leading terrorist figure in the Sahel under the banner of ISIS. More recently, Robert Greenway, director of the Allison Center for National Security at the Heritage Foundation—a prominent Republican think tank—reminded President Trump that the Polisario killed five American citizens in 1988. For the record, John Bolton has been a vocal critic of Trump's decision on December 10, 2020, to recognize Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara.
Ya Biladi
4 days ago
- Politics
- Ya Biladi
United States : John Bolton continues his pro-Polisario and pro-Algeria lobbying
Estimated read time: 2' John Bolton is back on the international stage, this time advocating for the Polisario Front. As calls mount to classify the Polisario as a terrorist organization in the United States, the former National Security Advisor under the Trump administration argues in an op-ed that «U.S. should support a referendum allowing Sahrawis to determine their own future». In a surprising twist, Bolton justifies his call for the U.S. to back the Polisario by warning about «Chinese and Russian influence mounting across Africa, suggesting that continued American support for Morocco could open the door to their increased presence in the region. Bolton leans heavily on historical arguments, referencing Security Council Resolution 690, which established MINURSO in 1991 with U.S. support. His position closely mirrors those of Algeria and the Polisario, who have long demanded a self-determination referendum for Western Sahara and the implementation of the African settlement plan. However, Bolton omits a crucial historical fact: the UN abandoned the referendum option in the early 2000s. Under the leadership of former Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the UN dissolved the commission responsible for identifying eligible participants for the proposed vote. It's a significant omission, particularly for Bolton, who served as U.S. Ambassador to the UN from 2005 to 2006 under President George W. Bush. «The Polisario is Not Under Iran's Influence» Bolton also pushes back against accusations that the Polisario is aligned with Iran. After criticizing what he describes as Morocco's «obstacles» to holding a referendum, Bolton defends the Polisario's reputation: «The Polisario's opponents are trying a new line of propaganda, alleging without evidence that the Polisario has come under Iran's influence. This misinformation may well be intended to divert U.S. attention from Morocco's decadeslong stonewalling against a referendum». Bolton adds: «Sahrawi opponents have gone as far as claiming that Polisario fighters were among foreign militias Iran trained in Syria under the now-fallen Assad regime». He cites reports by The Washington Post and other publications, which state that both the Syrian government and the Polisario have categorically denied these allegations. «But Morocco's friends in the West continue to spread them», Bolton claims. «Perhaps influenced by this anti-Sahrawi propaganda, legislation has been introduced in the House to designate Polisario as a terrorist group», referring to legislation introduced by Republican Congressman Joe Wilson. Context and Contradictions Bolton further argues that the Sahrawis «never succumbed to the radicalism that swept the Middle East after Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution. Claims that Sahrawis are susceptible to Tehran-based Shiite propaganda are belied by the long-standing presence in the camps of U.S. religious, nongovernmental organizations providing educational and medical services». However, it's worth noting that in October 2019, the U.S. government offered a reward of up to $5 million for information leading to the identification or capture of Adnan Abu Walid al-Sahraoui, a former Polisario member who became a leading terrorist figure in the Sahel under the banner of ISIS. More recently, Robert Greenway, director of the Allison Center for National Security at the Heritage Foundation—a prominent Republican think tank—reminded President Trump that the Polisario killed five American citizens in 1988.
