Ambassador Haley on the Scourge of Socialism

As prominent voices on the left continue to argue for policies mirroring those used by socialist regimes, Ambassador Nikki Haley delivered remarks [[link removed]] at Hudson Institute on the strengths and successes of capitalism and the scourge of socialism.

Recalling her visit to Latin America, her time at the United Nations, and the free-market solutions she championed as governor of South Carolina, she made clear why capitalism remains the best economic system ever devised and the need to reject temptations towards socialism:

"Socialism is a total disaster and as Americans we must condemn it wherever it exists. ... This is a fight we must wage and win. We must promise each other and future generations that America will never become a socialist country."

She recounted her visit to Colombia where she saw firsthand the crippling effects of Venezuela's socialist turn:

"The socialist dictator Nicolás Maduro propped up by his Cuban socialist allies has run Venezuela into the ground. It was the richest country in Latin America when it was capitalist. It also had free and fair elections. Now Venezuelans are digging in trash cans and killing zoo animals for food. Millions are sick, starving, and denied the most basic political freedoms. The same day I stood on the Simón Bolívar Bridge, I met a Venezuelan family and held their beautiful baby girl. Her mom was emotional. She said she never wanted her daughter to grow up that way."

Speaking on capitalism's ability to improve livelihoods, she said:

"The world is getting cleaner, healthier, and wealthier. And the main reason is capitalism. Everywhere capitalism takes root, people do better. We should celebrate this, not apologize for it. I’ve seen capitalism from two perspectives, private life and public life. My family’s experience taught me that capitalism can lift up families and communities."

Read her op-ed adapted from the speech in the Wall Street Journal [[link removed]].

We are proud that Ambassador Haley, the recipient of our 2018 Global Leadership Award, is a longtime friend of Hudson Institute. She continues to exemplify Hudson’s mission of promoting American global leadership for a secure, free, and prosperous future.

Read the Speech [[link removed]] Watch the Event [[link removed]]

Quotes have been edited for length and clarity.

Hudson Highlights

In the Wall Street Journal [[link removed]], Walter Russell Mead explores what U.S. foreign policy would look like under a Sander's administration.

Aparna Pande analyzes Trump's India visit and the potential for a long-term alliance in The Print [[link removed]].

In National Review [[link removed]], Tom Duesterberg and Eric Brown detail why the U.S. and India must cooperate on hi-tech trade to mutually counter China.

Peter Rough takes stock of the growing divide between European democracies and the U.S. in Foreign Policy [[link removed]].

John Lee writes in The Hill [[link removed]]about how best to counter China's Belt and Road plan.

In The Hill [[link removed]], Mike Watson discusses U.S. leadership in reducing CO2 emissions and the "American way" to tackle climate change.

New Episode of The Realignment

On the latest episode [[link removed]] of The Realignment, Saagar and Marshall sat down with Vox's Jane Coaston to discuss the current state of the conservative movement.

Last week, they caught up with Senator Tom Cotton [[link removed]] to discuss the coronavirus outbreak, the Chinese Communist Party, and the case for strong American leadership abroad.

Commentary

Coronavirus

In the Washington Examiner [[link removed]], Rob Spalding discusses the mishandling of the coronavirus crisis by General Secretary Xi:

“'It's the first time that, really, the Communist Party has taken a black eye in really a profound way. ... It's exceptional in that they're admitting that they've done a poor job of handling it. ... It's actually a really effective method of deflecting criticism for the central party authorities by essentially blaming it on local authorities. ... It’s one of the pressure releases of their system.'"

On Fox News [[link removed]], Michael Pillsbury highlighted the latest administration actions on the coronavirus outbreak:

"President Trump has been successful in getting the Chinese to open up with information, for the W.H.O. team to get in there at all wasn't easy. ... The problem is Chinese nationalism and hardliners in China. What I see a lot in their press ... they want to be the ones that control the information. ... [They won't allow the staff at the] American CDC office in Beijing visit Wuhan, they won't give us a sample of the virus."

On Fox Business [[link removed]], Rebeccah Heinrichs discussed the on going lack of transparency by the Chinese Communist Party:

"It is a huge problem. Communism lacks transparency and when you have something as bad as this outbreak ... we need the Chinese government to share information on what they have. ... They are not cultivating trust into their government."

In Defense and Aerospace Report [[link removed]], Patrick Cronin highlighted the impact the coronavirus poses on Xi's legitimacy:

"The Communist Party mishandled the early stages of this coronavirus, they could have limited it more ... they allowed this to spread because they didn't want information to jeopardize the sanctity and unity of the party ... and Xi's power. ... Xi Jinping has been punctured ... there are real questions if he can survive [in leadership] beyond 2022."

Last month, Hudson Instituted hosted an event [[link removed]] on containing the coronavirus. Tim Morrison spoke about the interagency process established to tackle the coronavirus outbreak:

"And really, what we wind up finding is the biggest gap where we're dealing with is the information we get out of China, and can we trust it? Are we getting a fulsome picture? But for the purposes of the interagency, I think the process that the president set up is largely working. And hopefully, that continues to play out as the United States government gets its arms around, how do we respond to this particular outbreak?"

U.S. Defense Policy and National Security

Tim Morrison analyzed the Pentagon's call for a $9 billion increase in nuclear spending in Bloomberg [[link removed]]:

"'What you are seeing here is the beginning of a long overdue modernization of the U.S. nuclear triad. ... At approximately 6% of the U.S. defense budget, this is a modest investment in the ultimate guarantee of American and allied security.'"

In Providence Magazine [[link removed]], Rebeccah Heinrichs discusses the President's latest nuclear security actions:

"'The US Navy has fielded a low-yield, submarine-launched ballistic missile warhead. The move was met with skepticism from some strategists and outright condemnation from anti-nuclear advocates. But the concerns are overwrought; the move is smart and is an appropriate response to what US adversaries are doing.'"

In the National Institute for Public Policy [[link removed]], Heinrichs argued for taking a critical look at New START's upcoming extension:

"As the February 2021 deadline for the expiration of the New START nuclear arms treaty approaches, a growing chorus of voices insist that President Trump should decide now to extend the treaty."

President Trump's India Visit

On VOA News [[link removed]], Aparna Pande discussed the significance of President Trump's India trip:

"We have to look at the fact that both are nationalists and populists. They derive their strength from the people."

In Sunday Guardian [[link removed]], Pande discussed the potential for a U.S.-India trade deal:

"The two countries have a strong strategic partnership, economic and defence, bolstered by people to people ties based on shared values of democracy, pluralism and tolerance. ... A genuine trade deal is difficult for two populist and nationalist leaders, each of whom had promised Make in America/Make in India as their goal. So what we will have are a combination of defence deals and minor adjustments from each side on the commercial side."

In The Print [[link removed]], Husain Haqqani reflects on Eisenhower's visit to India 60 years ago and why President Trump is well-positioned to build strategic relationships in the region:

" ... India was less than enthused by then-burgeoning US alliance with Pakistan. Eisenhower travelled to Pakistan, Afghanistan, and India though he wrote in his memoirs that India was the magnet that drew him to the region. ... [Under Trump the] US will continue to engage Pakistan, as it should, but that relationship has lost its primacy. Even if the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan materialises, a second Trump administration is unlikely to spend the kind of time and energy the Eisenhower administration invested in dealing with Pakistan."

Quotes have been edited for length and clarity.

Upcoming Events

Wednesday, February 26

11:30 a.m.

C [[link removed]] rash Landing into Freedom: The Stories of Former North Korean Soldiers [[link removed]]

Featuring Patrick Cronin, Colonel Steve Lee, OH Cheong Song, LEE Unggil, and Representative Ted Yoho

In Case You Missed It

Read: Walter Russell Mead writes about the latest battles for control of Idlib and Aleppo in the Wall Street Journal. [[link removed]]

Read: S [[link removed]] eth Cropsey on the U.S. Navy's budget battles in The Hill [[link removed]]

Watch: A Conversation with U.S. CTO Michael Kratsios [[link removed]]

Read: Ben Judah on Bernie Sander's Russia policy in The Guardian [[link removed]]

Like [link removed] Tweet [link removed] Share [[link removed]] Forward [link removed] Preferences [link removed] | Unsubscribe [link removed]