Beethoven Piano Concertos at Severance – a potpourri of pianists

For months, Cleveland area classical music lovers had been looking forward to a cycle of Beethoven’s five piano concertos, plus the Triple concerto – all featuring pianist Igor Levit and under the direction of Music Director Franz Welser-Möst.  Speculation was that the cycle was to be recorded for later release. 

A few weeks ago, Cleveland Orchestra patrons received this message from Franz Welser-Möst, who has been undergoing treatment for cancer: "I am terribly sorry that I can’t be with you for the upcoming concerts in November. The side effects of the immunotherapy don’t allow me to travel right now. But, I know you will never-the-less, with or without me, enjoy the wonderful playing of your Orchestra. I look forward immensely to return to make great music for you in 2025. I miss you. Thank you!"

We wish Franz a speedy and complete recovery.  Cleveland Orchestra Associate Conductor Daniel Reith stepped up to lead all the programs.

Shortly after Welser-Möst’s announcement, Igor Levit withdrew from the series.

Five pianists stepped in to perform the piano concertos: Orion Weiss, in the Triple Concerto alongside violinist Augustin Hadelich and cellist Julia Hagen; Sir Stephen Hough, Garrick Ohlsson, Minsoo Sohn, and Yunchan Lim in the remaining concertos. 

Orion Weiss is a Cleveland area native – in fact he grew up just a few blocks from my grandmother’s home in Lyndhurst.  I’ve seen him perform several times dating back to when he was a student at the Cleveland Institute of Music.  I’ve also seen Augustin Hadelich perform several times, including a staggeringly brilliant performance of Tchaikovsky’s Violin Concerto last year.  Beethoven’s Triple Concerto is not a showpiece – it was written for one of the composer’s royal piano pupils who was probably not very advanced.  The greatest technical challenges are reserved for the cellist, who must play in the instrument’s upper registers – which Julia Hagan did with accuracy, aplomb, and musicality.  Hadelich’s joy in performing this concerto – which contains chamber music within it – was palpable.  Weiss brought sparks to the piano part, and all three soloists performed with a sense of communing – something much needed after a difficult and divisive week.  Daniel Reith and the orchestra provided an appropriately scaled accompaniment. 

Soloists and orchestra following the Triple Concerto.

Following intermission pianist Sir Stephen Hough took to the stage to perform Beethoven’s Piano Concerto No. 3 in C minor, Op. 37.  I must confess that this is far from my favorite piano concerto, even among Beethoven’s concerti.  After hearing Mozart’s concerto in the same key, Beethoven exclaimed to a friend “We shall never have an idea such as that!”  Aside from key signature, there is nothing comparable about the two works.  But Hough brought something special to the piece, a defiant quality that most pianists too often filter out, which hints at the Beethoven that is to come.  The pianist was creative in his deployment of inner voices, with some daring pedaling in the slow movement which allowed harmonies to blend in the way that the composer intended – but which many pianists in their never-ending quest for clarity are loath to allow.  Hough immediately launched from the hushed Largo to the final Rondo so abruptly that it startled some in the audience – which would no doubt have delighted Beethoven.  The orchestra’s contribution was equally bold and decisive. 

Hough and the orchestra acknowledging applause.

Garrick Ohlsson was the soloist for Beethoven’s even numbered concertos.  Unfortunately, near-constant coughing from one audience member behind and to my left (I was in Row T, keyboard side) disrupted my concentration.  The Second Concerto (which was actually written first but published second) was given a lovely, chamber-like quality by Reith and the orchestra.  Despite a minor kerfuffle in the opening movement, Ohlsson’s performance was one of bounce, poetry, and wit.  Despite its mostly lyrical nature, pianists will tell you the Fourth concerto is a beast to play.  I would swear I heard Ohlsson play it at Severance about 20 years ago.  The performance was a model of poise, clarity, and musicality by both pianist and orchestra.  One feature I noticed was Ohlsson’s careful attention to trills and ornaments – each integrated into the piece.  Both performances were enthusiastically received, and the pianist gifted the audience with an appropriate encore: the slow movement from Beethoven’s “Pathetique” Sonata.

Ohlsson after the G major Concerto

The cycle was rounded out with Beethoven’s First Concerto (which was actually composed after the second) and the Fifth Concerto – the so-called “Emperor.”

Beethoven’s First Concerto must have been quite shocking the first time it was heard in Vienna toward the end of the 18^th Century.  In terms of pianism, it goes far beyond anything Mozart dared – with rapid passagework, arpeggios, constant pianistic gear-shifting, and even a glissando.  Minsoo Sohn, who I’d never heard of, was the soloist.  The outer movements were brisk and propulsive, with the pianist employing a wider dynamic range than would have been possible on the pianos of the time.  In the opening movement, Sohn chose the most extroverted of the composer’s three cadenzas, said to be in the spirit of the Beethoven’s own famed improvisations.  The central movement was given chamber music clarity.  The performance was very warmly received, and the pianist played a lovely encore: the Aria from J. S. Bach’s Goldberg Variations – with a rare sense of repose and tasteful embellishments in the repeats.

Sohn’s pupil, Yunchan Lim – who won the Van Cliburn competition last year – was soloist in the “Emperor” concerto.  It hardly needs pointing out that Beethoven did not choose the imperial name for this concerto – simply referring to it as a Concerto in E-flat major for piano and orchestra.  Unfortunately, the name has led to an interpretive approach which too often brings to the work a sense of pomposity and portentousness – as if it was intended for Henry VIII in the late stages of his life.  Lim had none of that.  His treatment of the work was within the classical mode, with an opening movement notable for its lean, lithe approach and brisk tempos.  The central movement was, by contrast, a bit heavier than it needed to be; but this was forgotten when Lim gracefully segued into the final Rondo – delivered with an almost balletic sense of rhythm.  Technically, Lim’s performance was unimpeachable, although some purists may have been offended by the pianist’s penchant for moving several ground bass notes an octave lower than written – beyond the limits of Beethoven’s own keyboard.  The bulk of the audience was highly enthusiastic – myself included.  For his encore, perhaps as a tribute to his teacher, Lim returned to the Goldberg Variations, turning in a reflective rendition of the work’s 13^th Variation.  At a time when much of the country – and the world – is on edge, it was a welcome moment of shared relaxation.

Lim and company following the “Emperor” Concerto.

In conclusion, the substitute pianists were all wonderful.  But Levit’s cancellation irks me.  I can't imagine Arthur Rubinstein would have ever cancelled a concert because the conductor had to withdraw.  In fact, in over 70 years as a pianist, Rubinstein almost never canceled - he even played two concerts in one day when his manager accidentally double-booked him.  The only exception was when he was in his 80s and came down with Shingles.  As for the past two weeks, the loss was Levit’s – not the audience’s.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Fire and Water at Severance Hall

This weekend Guest conductor Tan Dun led the Cleveland Orchestra in a compelling program of 20^th and 21^st Century music – including two compositions by the conductor himself.

Igor Stravinsky was one of the most eclectic of Classical composers.  Take, for example, his 1908 composition Fireworks.  It was composed as a wedding present for the daughter of his early supporter and advocate, Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov – and almost sounds as if it could have been composed by Stravinsky’s elder compatriot.  Brilliantly orchestrated, there are sections which are reminiscent of Dukas’ The Sorcerer’s Apprentice.  Tan Dun kept the tempo relatively measured and fussiness to a minimum in his no-nonsense presentation of the work. 

Then the conductor led the orchestra in his own Water Concerto, featuring percussionist Mark Damoulakis, assisted by Thomas Sherwood and Tanner Tanyeri.  Tan Dun’s compositions are of the type that my old music professor would have sneeringly called “sonority music,” meaning the focus was not on thematic development and structure but rather on sound itself.  The work began strikingly, with Damoulakis making his entrance from the back of the hall, while playing a waterphone.  As the composer’s imaginative orchestral accompaniment – which included sounds reminiscent of whale song – proceeded, the percussive trio’s instrumentation was expanded to include water basins, water drums, water gongs and tubes, and a sieve.  The water basins were lit from below, which created intoxicating shimmering effects along the sides and ceiling of the stage.  Whatever my professor would have thought, the audience was raptly attentive and highly enthusiastic.

Applause following the Water Concerto;

Lowering of the state extension.

Following intermission, the concert continued with Britten’s Four Sea Interludes from Peter Grimes.  While the opera these derive from isn’t performed as often as those of Mozart, Wagner, or Verdi, the Sea Interludes, composed to cover scene changes, turn up on concert programs with some regularity.  The opening Dawn interlude was darkly atmospheric, but the Sunday Morning interlude was marred by some rough playing from the brass and balances that didn’t sound right from my seat in Row H.  Things settled down in the Moonlight interlude, before the Storm interlude which sounded appropriately chaotic even though the playing was anything but.   

The evening’s final work was Tan Dun’s Concerto for Orchestra, preceded by remarks from the conductor.  When one thinks of a Concerto for Orchestra, Bela Bartok’s masterpiece comes to mind – in which particular instruments or groups thereof are highlighted.  Tan Dun’s Concerto reminds us that the original meaning of “concert” was to plan together; devise; arrange; to act in harmony.  As with the Water Concerto, the composer’s orchestration pushed the concept of symphonic music to the limit as the Concerto evoked an Eastern Bazaar, Indian raga, and China’s Forbidden city.  A most interesting work that bears further hearing.    

 

Ravel, Salonen, and Sibelius at Severance

Guest conductor Esa-Pekka Salonen led the Cleveland Orchestra at this evening’s concert at Severance Hall, which featured his own 21^st Century work placed in between two works composed roughly 100 years earlier.

The concert began with Ravel’s Le Tombeau de Couperin.  Personally, I prefer the piano version of this work, which not only more faithfully recreates the keyboard patterns of some of Couperin’s harpsichord writing, but includes two additional movements.  But there were numerous delights in the orchestra’s rendition under Salonen, from the rustic quality of the Forlane to the bracingly swift tempo in the Rigaudon.    

Following a stage change, cellist Senja Rummukainen joined Salonen and the orchestra for the conductor’s own Cello Concerto, which was completed in 2017.  As any conductor should, Salonen clearly knows the potential of the orchestra, and nearly every conceivable instrument filled the stage, including marimba, vibraphone, flexatone, bongos, and speakers.  The latter were used in the second movement where the cello engages in a dialog with itself – this was quite striking as the dialog had an organic quality, like high-pitched whale song.  Elsewhere the concerto, which was firmly tonal, featured vast, evocative tapestries of sound.  Rummukainen, who made her Cleveland debut with this weekend’s concerts, displayed surety of technique – particularly in the treacherous upper registers, coupled with profound musicality and a sense of proportion.

The concert’s concluding work was Symphony No. 5 in E-flat major, Op. 82 by Jean Sibelius, given a masterly performance by Salonen and the orchestra.  The work is rather unusual in form.  It’s in three movements instead of the usual four, but the opening movement is really a combination of two movements that the composer sketched separately.  I have never followed the notion that the country of one’s upbringing guarantees an authentic performance of music from that locale.  But in Salonen’s case, it seems as if he was born to lead the music of his fellow Finn.  Much of that came down to Salonen’s skillful handling of Sibelius’ tempo changes and the buildup toward climaxes – so that when the majestic theme surfaced in the finale, it felt like the major event it was.  Salonen is a no-nonsense orchestra leader, who eschewed a baton for the Ravel but used one for the other works.  I hope he returns to Cleveland again – soon. 

As mentioned previously, I’ve been experimenting with different areas of the main floor.  This time I was in the middle section of Row H.  The overall sound was a bit less blended than in the back, but very pleasing nonetheless.

This was one of the more sparsely attended concerts I’ve attended at Severance since the post-COVID return to concertizing.  For those who stayed home, the loss was theirs – unless they happen to watch the concert telecast on Adella or Medici.tv.  I noticed a distinctly younger demographic among those who attended in person, which augers well for the future. 

Rachmaninoff with Chan and Bronfman at Severance

After leading the Cleveland Orchestra on its European tour, music director Franz Welser-Möst – who was treated within the last year for cancer – opted out of the first three weeks of concerts at Severance Hall.  We wish him a speedy return to full vigor.

This was the first concert of the 2024-2025 season that Daniel and I attended.  Over the past year, I’ve noticed an increasing noise problem coming from the back of the main floor.  As we’ve customarily gotten seats in Row W – the last – the problem has been quite distracting.  So, I decided to experiment and this time we were seated in Row N on the left aisle.

Elim Chan was called on to substitute for Welser-Möst, and the opening half of the program featured pianist Yefim Bronfman in Rachmaninoff’s Third Piano Concerto in D minor, Op. 30.  Bronfman has long been a friend of the orchestra.  That this concerto requires technique to burn is well known, what is less grasped it that it also requires musicality.  Yes, Virginia, it takes just as much musical understanding to convincingly perform Rachmaninoff as it does with Brahms – it’s just a different kind of musicality.  Bronfman’s performance was similar in spirit to Rachmaninoff’s own: a dramatic through-line ran through the whole piece.  He offered the work intact – without the disfiguring cuts that Rachmaninoff, in a fit of insecurity, endorsed for several of his larger works, including the Second Symphony and Second Sonata.  Bronfman chose the larger of the two cadenzas in the opening movement, and though I prefer the shorter cadenza (as did the composer), one can only state that whoever can play this concerto so masterfully should feel free to play whichever cadenza he chooses.  Chan and the orchestra provided an accompaniment which was attentive to the composer’s dynamic markings and well-balanced with Bronfman’s titanic style.  The hall, which seemed half-full of pianists (many of whom moved their fingers in time with the soloist, leapt to its feet at the concerto's rousing conclusion.

Bronfman receiving a richly deserved ovation.

Following intermission, Chan replaced the originally programmed Petrushka ballet score by Stravinsky with Rachmaninoff’s Symphonic Dances, Op. 45 – his last completed major work.  This may seem like an incongruous change from the Stravinsky, but Rachmaninoff originally conceived the work as a ballet suite.  Here Chan, who conducts sans baton, really shone.  Tempi were unusually flexible without becoming chaotic.  The second movement, which sounds as if it depicts a haunted ballroom dance, featured some daring ritardandi, which allowed Rachmaninoff’s lingering melodies to unfold with tantalizing succulence.  The final movement, where some of the composer’s string figurations are frankly erotic, was appropriately sensual without becoming vulgar.  Individual highlights from this evening’s performance were gorgeous violin, saxophone, and clarinet solos, along with riveting percussion work throughout – capped off by the final tam-tam blow.  Chen singled them out during the sustained and enthusiastic ovation that followed.

Both performances were simply the finest I’ve ever heard of these works in concert.  What more need I say?  Only that from our seats in Row N, the sound was a bit less blended, with strings a bit more prominent than we were used to hearing.  We’re going to be experimenting with various places in the hall over the next few months, so it remains to be seen (or heard) where our niche will reside. 

My review of Misha Dichter - the complete RCA recordings.

My latest Amazon review is of Sony's three disc set of Misha Dichter's RCA recordings. I was torn between whether to give the set three or four stars. The final rating is based strictly on the performances. Engineering and piano issues, along with the disappointing presentation, would bring it down to three stars.  Click here to read it. 

Highs and lows - the Cleveland Orchestra experience

My initial plan was to write a simple review of last night’s Cleveland Orchestra concert at Severance Hall, but a litany of issues which have recurred with the concert planning and concertgoing experience over the last several months have led me to conclude that there are issues with the organization which must be addressed. 

First, the concert: Daniel and I attended last night’s Summers at Severance concert with a special guest, Daniel’s younger sibling Asareel.  This was Asareel’s first experience with a Classical music concert and it's always a thrill for me to introduce a young person to a more elevated cultural experience.  The concert featured guest conductor Petr Popelka and solo violinist James Ehnes.  The proceedings began about 15 minutes late due to a medical issue with a patron on the main floor.  Of course, such unfortunate events take place and once the EMT’s arrived, the patron was brought out on a stretcher and the concert began.  For an unknown reason, the EMT’s did not take the patron into the main foyer, but remained in the area behind the main floor where their work and chatter were plainly audible.  As a result, I was unable to gain much from Cesar Franck’s Le Chasseur maudit (The Accursed Hunstman) – a symphonic poem which was unfamiliar to me. 

After a quick stage change, the concert continued with Erich Wolfgang Korngold’s Violin Concerto, Op. 35.  I only know this work through the Heifetz recording.  Although it incorporates several themes that Korngold used in his film scores, it deserves to be heard more often.  There are fewer violin concertos in the active repertoire than there are of, say, piano concertos.  So why not include a 20^th century concerto with such memorable tunes and virtuosic writing?  Ehnes’s performance was resplendent with soaring lyricism and musical virtuosity, receiving a deserved standing ovation.  Ehnes generously performed two encores, including a slow movement from a Bach Sonata. 

Following intermission, the concert concluded with the Symphony No. 6 in D major, Op. 69 by Antonín Dvorak – and here is where the real trouble began.  There were three unruly audience members in the center section of the last row on the main floor – right near our party.  (I did not see them during the opening half of the program.)  During the opening movement, they were chatting and giggling as they looked at videos on one person’s cell phone.  At one point, an usher intervened, whereupon they got up and went to the standing area behind the seats.  By the second movement, they were back in their seats and up to their hijinks again.  Once more, an usher appeared and they left – this time for good, I thought.  Then I saw one member of their party making her way to another seat in the far left near the front.  I was only able to marginally enjoy the remainder of the Symphony, including the Scherzo which is one of Dvořák’s most memorable movements.  As we left the concert, an astonished Asareel asked “what was up with those people?  How rude!”  There you have it: an 18-year-old who had never been to a Classical music concert knew more about appropriate behavior than the offending parties, who appeared to be in their 30s. 

Most of the ushers seen last night were unfamiliar to me.  Perhaps the regular ushers were on summer break.  I could plainly hear two of the ushers conversing during the Korngold Concerto.  Certainly, they should be advised by whoever trains them that sounds carry at Severance. 

Further, there is the orchestra's website.  It’s slow.  It times out – so that pages do not load or payments are not processed.  This happens about half the time I try to buy tickets online.  When it occurs, I receive a popup advising me to call the box office, during which I navigate through their 1990s style phone tree, and am invariably routed to a voicemail.  Eventually, I am called back and, if I’m not busy doing something else, can finally get my tickets.  Otherwise, we end up playing phone tag.  Cleveland is hardly short on IT resources who would be happy to assist the orchestra in improving the website performance (which is probably a question of server capacity) in exchange for some free tickets. 

 

The orchestra received a $50 million dollar donation from the Mandel family a few years ago.  Has it occurred to them to use some of that money to, say, fix the website, train the ushers (or replace them if necessary), and reopen the restaurant – which has been closed since COVID? 

 

It is incidents such as those above which leave me giving serious consideration to cancelling my Cleveland Orchestra subscription.  Anyone who knows me can affirm that one of the main reasons I stay in Ohio is due to the cultural amenities Cleveland has to offer – our orchestra is first among those amenities.  I certainly don’t stay in Ohio for the weather or the state’s backward politics.  I happen to work from home and could relocate to anywhere within the United States.  Daniel’s job means he is in great demand (he’s constantly being contacted by recruiters) and there are states where we be paid to move due to the demand for Daniel's skill set.  Over the last season, incidents such as those described above have led me to reevaluate whether it’s worth the time and expense to see live concerts or if I should just content myself with broadcasts and recordings – the latter of which I have plenty.  We still plan on attending numerous concerts in the upcoming season – but if the concertgoing experience does not improve, it may well be our last season doing so. 

Project 2025 – a disaster for American preparedness

The bulk of this post was written before the assassination attempt on former President Trump.  However, the events of July 13^th have no bearing on the content of this post.

By now you’ve heard about Project 2025, MAGA Republicans’ and the Heritage Foundation’s plans for a “reform” of the Federal government if Donald Trump is elected in November.

Trump has distanced himself from Project 2025, saying that he doesn’t know anyone involved with it. In fact, his own Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt, is working for P2025.  One of the architects of P2025 is John McEntee, Trump’s Director of White House Personnel when he was in office.  A board member, Russell Vought, was named policy director of the Republican National Committee this past May.  Further, Trump’s own Agenda 47 bears a striking resemblance to P2025.

You’ve no doubt read some of the major items of P2025, but here’s a quick refresher:

Social issues and Reproductive Rights:

• End marriage equality
• Complete abortion ban - without exceptions
• Restrictions on contraceptives
• Use taxpayer money for religious schools and include Christian beliefs in public school curricula
• Pack the Supreme Court with Justices who will ban all DEI initiatives and enable the above

Medicare and Social Security:

• Raise the retirement age
• Cut Social Security benefits
• Cut Medicare
• Repeal the Affordable Care Act
• End price controls on medications, such as the Biden-era price cap on Insulin

Environment:

• Defund the EPA
• Deregulate Fossil Fuel production
• Increase Artic drilling

National Security:

• Defund the FBI and Homeland Security
• Use the military to break up domestic protests
• Retire senior military personnel and stack the upper-ranks with Trump supporters.

 

Let’s talk some more about the military items, which are not getting the publicity much of the rest of P2025 is receiving.

Buried among the nooks and crannies of P2025 are items detailing benefit cuts for veterans and active-duty military personnel.  Part of that is to move part of the VA to the private sector.  Part includes benefit cuts to disabled veterans.  What an outrageous slap in the face to those who have been harmed defending our nation.

Do we really want our active duty and retired military to have to jump through more hoops?  Particularly those who are disabled or need mental health care? 

Our nation’s defenders are not especially well paid.  You may have heard “they get free room, board, and food on Uncle Sam’s dime.”  That’s not exactly true.  Military personnel receive a modest salary, from which certain things are deducted, along with some supplements. 

Live on base or on a ship?   That’s $380 per month deducted from your pay since the food is provided.  And if you only serve part time on the ship, and get food elsewhere some days?  Too bad, they take the whole $380 anyway.  It doesn’t help matters that most base galleys have limited hours which often do not fit well with the realities of military scheduling.  Low ranking personnel, such as Army and Marine Privates, Navy Recruits, Sailors and 3^rd Class Petty Officers (E1-E4), live in barracks.  This is exactly what happened with a young Sailor friend of mine when he was at his post-boot camp technical school and after he had been assigned to his ship.  

There are also supplemental allowances added to base salary, such as a uniform allowance.  An enlisted Sailor’s wardrobe includes Dress Blues, Dress Whites, Service uniforms, camo-style Type III Working uniforms, and, if on a ship, Coveralls.  Sailors are expected to have at least one of each Dress uniform, two Service uniforms, three Type III uniforms, and three Coveralls.  There are also accoutrements to the various uniforms, from the proper footwear to straps to hold dress shirts in place to rank and rating patches – all of which the Sailor must pay for.  Being American made, uniforms are expensive; and service members are expected to keep them well maintained – dry cleaning is recommended for Service uniforms.  Plus, one must remember many of those entering the military are teenagers who are still growing and will need replacement uniforms.  If the Sailor keeps in good shape and maintains his uniforms, they won’t have to be replaced as often and he can keep the unspent allowance.  This encourages military personnel to be thrifty and healthy by taking good care of their clothes and their bodies.

Once promoted to E-5 (Sergeant or Petty Officer 2^nd Class), they are moved out of the barracks and provided with a housing allowance.  That’s what happened with my dad when he was promoted to PO2 in the 1950s, and that’s what happened to my young sailor friend.  The housing allowance varies based on the cost of living where the sailor is stationed, and my young friend happens to be stationed in one of the most expensive locations in the US.  It’s certainly not his fault that the Navy decided to build one of its largest bases there.   Thus, his housing allowance is relatively high.  The apartment building where he lives is on base and part of a private/military cooperative effort.  In exchange for the convenience of living on base, they take his entire housing allowance.  He’s currently looking for a less expensive apartment off base, which will allow him to pocket any leftover housing allowance and use that money to get a used car.  (My dad rented a room above a woman’s garage.)  If you think that means he’s ripping off the taxpayers, then remember: once he moves off base, his on-base dwelling becomes available to another newly promoted Sailor.   

P2025 proposes to “reform” these types of allowances by making military personnel return any unspent allowance.  This is a false economy because active-duty personnel will not be incentivized to maintain their uniforms and find less expensive housing.  They will simply neglect their uniforms and find the nicest place their allowance will cover.  P2025 also proposes to penalize married military couples who live together by making them share the same housing allowance, even though families require more space than single people.

I recently spoke with my Sailor friend about some of these points.  This person is politically moderate and not partisan.  But when I advised him of these proposals, his reaction was what you’d expect of a Salty Sailor: “[Unprintable quote redacted.]”

Here’s a fact that Putin enablers among the GOP and lefty-loonies like Jill Stein would like you to forget: America has enemies – two of which pose an existential threat to our nation.  The first of these is Russia.  Putin's stated goal is to reestablish the de-facto empire that existed under the USSR.  True, initially Putin played nice with us after 9/11, but the government over which he seems to have an iron grip has become increasingly hostile since George Bush took us to war with Iraq in 2003.  Trump and his enablers seem content to appease Putin on everything from his brutal invasion of Ukraine to his open interference in our nation’s elections and politics.  Joe Biden is the only President who has strongly stood up to Putin – not Bush 43, not Obama, and certainly not Trump - over whom Putin seems to hold some unspoken power.  As for China, though they are not exactly an enemy, they do not wish us well and mainly have exploited us for their own economic benefit.  Trump makes a big noise about China, but his businesses have benefited from Chinese (and Russian) investment.  Under Joe Biden, China has dropped from America’s number one importer to third place – behind Canada and Mexico. 

We have enemies aside from Russia and China, such as North Korea and Iran, but only Russia and China have the military potential to engage in a war with us which would be catastrophic for the planet.  China’s bullying of Taiwan is surpassed only by Russia’s bullying of Ukraine.  History has taught us the dangers of appeasing bullies.  Prior to 1939, the European powers declined to enforce the Versailles treaty and stood by while Hitler’s Germany rearmed.  Following Kristallnacht, not one European leader spoke out about what happened – only U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt issued a rather tame rebuke.  When Hitler invaded Austria, the world did nothing.  He continued to build his military, ranted about how ethnic Germans were being treated by the Czechoslovakian government (just as Putin would use the supposed treatment of ethnic Russians by the Ukrainian government 80 years later) and then was given tacit approval to invade the Sudetenland by Neville Chamberlain. 

Thus, we must maintain the world’s strongest defense as a deterrent to Russian and Chinese military aggression.  Trump and his P2025 supporters are content to throw uncountable money at the military-industrial complex to fill defense contractors' pockets.  But when it comes to the well-being of military personnel, they could not care less.

All branches of the US military are already dealing with shortfalls in recruiting and retention.  With unemployment at historic lows, fewer and fewer want to take on an arduous, potentially hazardous job with low pay.  As the nation moves slowly toward cannabis legalization, few want to subject themselves to periodic urinalysis tests which, if positive, could result in a dishonorable discharge and a blot on their resume.  That’s exactly why President Biden has pushed so hard to raise military pay and improve benefits. 

When I read of P2025’s plans for the military, knowing how they will affect recruitment and retention once implemented, I can’t help but wonder: Who stands to benefit if our military is less prepared; if the ranks are thinned from cratering recruitment and retention; if service members’ morale is low?

America’s enemies, that’s who.   And it would be very interesting to know where the backers of Project 2025, including the Heritage Foundation, are getting their money.  Is there a Russian connection?  Is there a Chinese connection?