A Treaty Treatise
Let’s have some fun with the news of the world. What was the worst treaty in the history of the United States? Perhaps think about this in two ways: What deal did not accomplish the goals of the United States? And, second, which treaty was awful because it was one-sided or poorly conceived?
There are historians that say the Jay Treaty fits.
To read more articles by Mark Trahant, go to: Marktrahant.substack.com
George Washington did not want another war with Great Britain. The Jay Treaty was a capitulation of sorts (cough*Iran*cough) that did not hit any of the objectives that the administration had in advance. The deal was so bad that Washington kept it secret for as long as he could.
In June 1795 a boisterous crowd in Philadelphia demanded the Constitution be amended to allow for the impeachment of senators (if this sounds familiar it’s because Donald Trump recently called for the impeachment of Sen. Jack Reed.)
From the official U.S. Senate history:
A howling, stone-throwing mob marched on the Philadelphia home of Pennsylvania Senator William Bingham. In Frankfort, Kentucky, the state legislature denounced Senator Humphrey Marshall and demanded that the Constitution be amended to allow for the recall of United States senators. So angry were his constituents, as one writer observed, that Marshall was “burned in effigy, vilified in print, and stoned in Frankfort.” Many of the other senators who, on June 24, 1795, had provided the exact 20-to-10 two-thirds majority necessary to approve John Jay’s treaty with Great Britain experienced similar popular outrage.
A year earlier, at President George Washington’s request, Chief Justice of the United States John Jay had sailed to London to negotiate a reduction of tensions between the two nations. The president wanted Great Britain to withdraw its troops from the United States’ northwestern territories, to compensate slave holders for slaves British soldiers had abducted during the Revolutionary War, to pay shipowners for trading vessels seized by its navy, and to allow free trade with the British West Indies. Jay achieved only a limited success, however, gaining the withdrawal of troops and compensation to American merchants. He failed to obtain protections for American shipping or reimbursement for stolen slaves, and he prematurely conceded American responsibility to pay British merchants for pre-Revolutionary War debts.
There are so many interesting threads that make sense today. George Washington wanted the Jay Treaty to buy time. (And many historians say that’s why the treaty did eventually work out.) He did not want to keep fighting Great Britain and was willing to make extraordinary concessions to end conflict.
The Iran deal, of course, is not a treaty. It’s only a promise to stop shooting while negotiations continue. And like the Jay Treaty, the Iran deal buys time. Time for Trump and for Iran to rebuild its economy.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had dinner at Versailles (the palace that has the gaudy excess that architect Trump so aspires to copy). “I signed it in Versailles,” Trump said. “Just signed it.”
From the Journal:
Trump—who in an unexpected move signed the deal Wednesday in Versailles—said he was influenced by the stock market’s rise as he worked toward a resolution of the conflict. He said he didn’t want to be compared with former President Herbert Hoover, who was president during the 1929 market crash that led to the Great Depression.
“He was always the one I didn’t want to be,” Trump told reporters at the Hôtel Royal where he and other world leaders gathered for the Group of Seven meeting. “I didn’t want to see an economic catastrophe.”
Another point worth considering, especially in light of the president at Versailles. The Jay Treaty required the United States breaking its word to its oldest ally, France.
From the American Corner (a history) blog:
Congress disagreed, arguing that our treaty was with the monarchy of King Louis XVI and with no king there was no treaty. Using this same rationale, Congress also declared the United States would no longer repay our loans to France that we incurred during the American Revolution.
No king, no treaty.
This is sort of the same principle that Trump used to reverse the deal that Obama made with Iran. It was Obama’s deal. No longer president, no treaty. The word of the United States was not worth the paper where promises were written,
The irony is the Trump Memorandum of Understanding is more similar than different to the one Obama negotiated (only one huge difference: A $300 billion war that delivered nothing).
As the New York Times reported:
For years, President Trump has criticized the nuclear deal struck in 2015 between then President Barack Obama and Tehran, saying the agreement effectively gave Iran $1.7 billion in cash and other financial relief without a guarantee that the country would never obtain nuclear weapons.
Now, the question of whether Iran will get another financial windfall is one of the most sensitive issues looming over the preliminary peace agreement negotiated by the Trump administration.
The full text of the deal, according to a U.S. official who spoke with reporters on the condition of anonymity on Wednesday, requires the United States to develop a “definitive, mutually agreed plan with at least U.S.D. 300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of Iran.”
The Jay Treaty was important to the United States because it could not keep fighting a forever war with Great Britain. Trump’s Memorandum (doesn’t have the same ring as a treaty) has that element too. Yes, it’s not a great deal. But how much is it worth to stop the fighting now?
The post Jay Trump’s Treaty: The Idea of ‘No King, No Treaty’ appeared first on Native News Online.
