Let’s be clear: No matter what President Donald Trump may say, the national security of the United States does not require the construction of a massive arch in the middle of a traffic circle.
In a saner world, this would not need to be said. But on Friday, the president announced a new purpose for the 250-foot-tall tourist attraction he is seeking to build in the roundabout at the end of Washington’s Memorial Bridge. The arch will double as a “military complex,” Trump said, housing drones and ammo while providing a platform for snipers.
What possible threat aimed at Arlington National Cemetery — of all places — requires the construction of a marble-and-gold arch?
Throughout his second term, Trump has repeatedly invoked flimsy national security excuses to justify policy priorities both big and small. The arch might be the most ludicrous example yet: By claiming that this obvious vanity project is in fact a top Pentagon priority, the administration is clearly hoping it can convince U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to reconsider her injunction pausing its construction.
My guess is that the argument will get laughed out of court. But that leaves a bigger issue: Judges have long given presidents vast leeway when it comes to national security decisions. Trump’s obvious abuse of that privilege has started forcing them to rethink that stance, which could make it harder to deal with a real emergency in the future.
Now, about that arch. The monument/arms depot/sniper hideout that Trump is proposing would stand at the entrance to Arlington National Cemetery, where tens of thousands of pedestrians and motorists constantly crisscross one of the region’s busiest roadway intersections. It is, by any definition, a horrendous spot for an armory.
Trump asserted that this change was at “the strong request of the United States military” — but the Pentagon, notably, was unable to confirm that to reporters. Also conspicuously lacking from Trump’s announcement was any mention of exactly what kind of military or national security mission this new installation would be supporting. What possible threat aimed at Arlington National Cemetery — of all places — requires the construction of a marble-and-gold arch? Why not simply beef up security at Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, which is directly adjacent to the cemetery and, unlike the arch, already exists?
We have seen for more than a decade that norms and expectations modeled on the temperament and behavior of past presidents do not survive first contact with Trump.
The president has already tried a version of this argument to justify his new White House ballroom. He claimed in May that the structure was vital for national security because it would include a rooftop “DronePort” that would be “perhaps the most sophisticated anywhere in the World.” A drone port that spectacular would surely have no trouble defending the entire Washington region — including the traffic circle and his arch, which are less than 2.5 miles away.
U.S. law grants the president sweeping discretion to act unilaterally when facing a national emergency or a security threat. There are over 130 statutory powers available to the president upon a declaration of a national emergency, powers written into law under the presumption that a president would not abuse them. However, we have seen for more than a decade that norms and expectations modeled on the temperament and behavior of past presidents do not survive first contact with Trump, a petty narcissist who at this point blatantly admits that he needs to memorialize himself because “nobody will do it once I’m gone.”
The sweeping “national security reasons” rationale has been applied to countless Trump administration policy priorities, often torturing the commonsense definition of “national security” in the process. He has claimed, for instance, that wind farms and federal employee unions were dire threats that required exemptions to long-standing legal and regulatory processes, hoping to benefit from long-standing judicial deference to the executive branch on security matters. And after banning MS NOW, CNN and Politico from the White House, Trump claimed the media outlets were “a threat to our National Security.”
That deference appears to be eroding in the face of Trump’s abuses, as courts begin to treat the administration’s claims of national security with more scrutiny. As U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon wrote in a March opinion halting construction on the ballroom project, “Bald assertions of ‘national security’ cannot excuse the government’s failure to follow the law and then insulate those failures from judicial review.”
The next president will have an uphill battle in convincing the judiciary that their invocations of national security should not be looked at through Trump-colored glasses. Even more than that, they will need to undo the damage that Trump’s “boy who cried wolf” routine has done to the American public’s trust. Americans can clearly see the president’s pet projects for what they are. In a Washington Post/Ipsos poll conducted in July, 65% of U.S. adults said they were either “dissatisfied” or “upset” about his D.C. projects. Only 26% believed Trump’s goal was to “make Washington more beautiful.” Similarly, most voters are smart enough to understand that there is no security rationale for a triumphal arch.
There are only so many times, however, that one can hear the government falsely cry “national security” before learning to tune the words out altogether. Desensitizing the American people to the very real threats facing the world today, with Vladimir Putin’s Russia, Xi Jinping’s China and other dangers waiting to pounce — that would be a national security failure of, well, monumental proportions.
The post Trump’s new defense for his arch is absurd – and dangerous appeared first on MS NOW.
Author: Source Author
From MS Now.
Leave a Reply