Gwynne Dyer: Need for deadly distraction

Gwynne Dyer

Last Sunday I wrote a piece on the political crisis in Venezuela. Then on Wednesday I wrote an article on Donald Trump's hyperbolic language about North Korea. But it never occurred to me that the next article would be about Trump, North Korea AND Venezuela. I forgot about the Reagan Gambit.

In October, 1983, US President Ronald Reagan had a little problem. A massive truck-bomb had killed 241 American Marines in their barracks at Beirut airport. That was more than a quarter of the total American force deployed as "peacekeepers" to Lebanon -- a deployment that had already become controversial in the United States. So Reagan had some explaining to do.

In another part of the world entirely, the tiny Caribbean island nation of Grenada, population 90,000, had another military coup -- a coup within the coup. A radical pro-Cuban politician called Maurice Bishop, who had overthrown the elected government, was executed by his fellow revolutionaries over some minor differences of opinion. A pity, perhaps, but of no more importance to the rest of the world than Grenada itself.

The Cold War was running quite hot in this period so, although the island had no strategic value, the American right was getting upset about Russians and Cubans building an airport on Grenada. In the normal course of events this would probably not have led to an American invasion, but Reagan badly needed a political distraction.

On October 25, precisely two days after the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, the US military began a full-scale invasion of Grenada on Reagan's orders. It was one of history's most one-sided battles -- only 19 Americans killed, although the US handed out 5000 medals for merit and valour -- but it did the trick.

A friend said to me at the time that Reagan had gone home and kicked the cat, which was true enough, but conquering Grenada didn't just make him feel better. There's only room for one lead story at a time, and Grenada pushed Beirut aside in the US media. When Reagan quietly pulled the remaining Marines out of Lebanon four months later, few people even remembered to ask what those other Marines had died for. And now Donald Trump, stumbling deeper each day into a confrontation with North Korea over nuclear-armed ICBMs he swore that Pyongyang would never get, may be looking for a way out. So on Sunday, he said: "We have many options for Venezuela -- and, by the way, I am not going to rule out a military option."

He said it although nobody had asked him if he was planning to invade Venezuela (It hadn't occurred to anybody that he might). And he said it from his golf course in New Jersey (Reagan made his Grenada decision on a golf course too). And it certainly did take North Korea out of the news for at least one or two cycles.

Trump has already given President Nicolas Maduro's beleaguered regime a propaganda gift by strengthening its argument that its opponents are all traitors and American spies. Does he realise that an American invasion of Venezuela would trigger both a bloody civil war and a prolonged anti-American resistance movement?

Probably not. He knows that Venezuela is a superpower in the "Miss Universe" universe, but he will not have read the full briefing paper unless they remembered to put his name in every paragraph (and he may have caught on to that trick by now).

It would be nice if this threat about Venezuela were evidence that Trump knows he is in over his head with North Korea and is looking for a face-saving way out, but it's not likely to be true. It's much more likely to be just another example of his scattershot approach to dealing with a problem: create as many other problems as possible, and the pressure will come off.

Ronald Reagan knew he had walked into a hornet's nest in Lebanon, and just needed to create a diversion while he found a way of getting American troops out of the Middle East. It's not clear that Trump even understands that he is in deep trouble, and that he is at risk of starting a nuclear war in order to prevent one. Stream-of-consciousness decision-making is unfailingly interesting, if you are using "interesting" in the sense of the faux-Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times." But in real life, that's the last place you want to live.

Gwynne Dyer is an independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.