I may have written my comments a bit prematurely, and of course I did not include any verbal support to the statement. Anyway, here goes a bit for "backup". The real fight is not over trade or migrants, but "power" of which state within the primarily European continent. Power only is maintained by various elements of control. The most crucial element of control is really language, and "speaking" permissions, or lack of. English is the common language for translation of all commerce, and political debate. Different languages are translated in and out, and all through differing national conversations. BUT, English has become the "common denominator".



Presently, there are really more MANDARIN language speakers, and SPANISH language speakers. Although there is "MASS-FOCUS" on other really secondary level, and tertiary issues, the real global conflict is supremacy for common language, which will ultimately determine the resolution of the power-plays, and present bloody skirmishes worldwide.



Language determines power to establish law and power. The physical battles/ struggles are mere repetitive hitting of selected buttons, or even just one- like on a joy-stick. They are inconsequential in the timeless mirror of history. The real root is language. The real fight is for supremacy of language.



Who wins that is the winner. The struggle between China and the US is over language not trade. The US political leadership is so ignorant of the real "seat" of power. But, it is not only the political leadership in the US. The Chinese and Arabs are probably more cognizant within their political ranks of real power than especially the US. Of the English speaking nations, the British are the real leaders, with the real ability to maintain global networks, especially due to Australia and New Zealand, and prior international military and business controls.



The US has a lot of historical power due to marriages into European families from early 1800's, but those alliances are not where the real roots are. Obama did not decimate the US position, with him, the US had a chance to support the British class and social hierarchies. Trump has unfortunately crossed too many lines. I personally doubt if Clinton would have improved anything at all. I rank the US pretty much down with some of the petty dictatorships, which could be effectively and totally wrong. That is my "opinion", I admit I could be totally wrong. The political leadership is really just icing on the cake. If the intrinsic product is rotten, the icing is destroyed by the reek from within, and under that icing.



At this point, there is such a destruction of integrity of the spoken and written word in the US, and internationally, that citizens worldwide are confronting chaos because essential bottomline verbal projections of individual goodwill have been flaunted as meaningless publicly. There is no goodwill of any state, or any leadership worldwide. Everyone knows it, and is either running for their lives, running around in circles, or becoming addicted to fantasy-lands, or whatever-is-anyone's choice of poisons.



We are watching the real tragedy internationally of destruction of "states of civil society" citizens effectively being slaughtered indiscriminately within their own borders, by political leadership from all directions, by their words.



That expression about speaking with a forked-tongue is really the symbolic phrase for what I have just described.



Presently, the US and Canada are losing on sustaining English as the primary "tongue" on the continents of America. China is the real leader. Spanish is dancing around the globe. The Arabs wannabe. The Hindus would be better. Which one do you want to start to learn how-to-read and write?



Brexit allows England to establish it's own independent alliances, regardless of European predicaments and language conflicts.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers#/media/File:List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers.png