Putin, Vladimir V

Subterms

    More stories

    • 50 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Can Liberalism Save Itself?

      by

      Liberalism is under siege. It is not just a problem for America’s Democratic Party, which once again may face either losing an election to Donald Trump or claiming victory with a bare majority. Around the world, the entire outlook of political liberalism — with its commitments to limited government, personal freedom and the rule of law — is widely seen to be in trouble.It wasn’t long ago that liberals were proclaiming the “end of history” after their Cold War victory. But for years liberalism has felt perpetually on the brink: challenged by the rise of an authoritarian China, the success of far-right populists and a sense of blockage and stagnation.Why do liberals find themselves in this position so routinely? Because they haven’t left the Cold War behind. It was in that era when liberals reinvented their ideology, which traces its roots to the Enlightenment and the French Revolution — and reinvented it for the worse. Cold War liberalism was preoccupied by the continuity of liberal government and the management of threats that might disrupt it, the same preoccupations liberals have today. To save themselves, they need to undo the Cold War mistakes that led them to their current impasse and rediscover the emancipatory potential in their creed.Before the Cold War, President Franklin Roosevelt had demanded the renovation of liberalism in response to the Great Depression, emphasizing that economic turmoil was at the root of tyranny’s appeal. His administration capped more than a century in which liberalism had been promising to unshackle humanity after millenniums of hierarchy — dismantling feudal structures, creating greater opportunities for economic and social mobility (at least for men) and breaking down barriers based on religion and tradition, even if all of these achievements were haunted by racial disparities. At its most visionary, liberalism implied that government’s duty was to help people overcome oppression for the sake of a better future.Yet just a few years later, Cold War liberalism emerged as a rejection of the optimism that flourished before the mid-20th century’s crises. Having witnessed the agonizing destruction of Germany’s brief interwar experiment with democracy, liberals saw their Communist ally in that battle against fascism converted into a fearful enemy. They responded by reconceptualizing liberalism. Philosophers like the Oxford don Isaiah Berlin emphasized the concept of individual liberty, which was defined as the absence of interference, especially from the state. Gone was the belief that freedom is guaranteed by institutions that empower humanity. Instead of committing to make freedom more credible to more people — for example, by promising a bright future of their own — these liberals prioritized a fight against mortal enemies who might crash the system.This was a liberalism of fear, as another Cold War liberal intellectual, the Harvard professor Judith Shklar, said. In a way, fear was understandable: Liberalism had enemies. In the late 1940s, the Communists took over China, while Eastern Europe fell behind an Iron Curtain. But reorienting liberalism toward the preservation of liberty incurred its own risks. Anyone hostage to fear is likely to exaggerate how dangerous his foes actually are, to overreact to the looming threat they pose and to forsake better choices than fighting. (Ask Robert Oppenheimer, who signed up to beat the Nazis only to see paranoia spoil the country he volunteered to save.)During the Cold War, concern for liberty from tyranny and self-defense against enemies sometimes led not just to the loss of the very freedom liberals were supposed to care about at home, it also prompted violent reigns of terror abroad as liberals backed authoritarians or went to war in the name of fighting Communism. Millions died in the killing fields of this brutal global conflict, many of them at the hands of America and its proxies fighting in the name of “freedom.”Frustratingly, the Soviet Union was making the kinds of promises about freedom and progress that liberals once thought belonged to them. After all, in the 19th century liberals had overthrown aristocrats and kings and promised a world of freedom and equality in their stead. Liberals like the French politician and traveler Alexis de Tocqueville, though concerned about possible excesses of government, imagined democracy as a form of politics that offered startling new opportunities for equal citizenship. And while such liberals placed too much faith in markets both to emancipate and to equalize, they eventually struggled to correct this mistake. Liberals like the English philosopher John Stuart Mill helped invent socialism, too.The Cold War changed all that. It wasn’t just that socialism became a liberal swear word for decades (at least before Senator Bernie Sanders helped revive it). Liberals concluded that the ideological passions that led millions around the world to Communism meant that they should refrain from promising emancipation themselves. “We must be aware of the dangers which lie in our most generous wishes,” the Columbia professor and Cold War liberal Lionel Trilling explained.The Cold War transformation of liberalism wouldn’t matter so profoundly now if liberals had seized the opportunity to rethink their creed in 1989. The haze of their geopolitical triumph made it easy to disregard their own mistakes, in spite of the long-run consequences in our time. Instead, liberals doubled down. After several decades of endless wars against successor enemies and an increasingly “free” economy at home and around the world, American liberals have been shocked by blowback. History didn’t end; in fact, many of liberalism’s beneficiaries in backsliding new democracies and in the United States now find it wanting.A great referendum on liberalism kicked off in 2016, after Mr. Trump’s blindsiding election victory. In books like Patrick Deneen’s best-selling “Why Liberalism Failed,” there was an up-or-down vote on the liberalism of the entire modern age, which Mr. Deneen traced back centuries. In frantic self-defense, liberals responded by invoking abstractions: “freedom,” “democracy” and “truth,” to which the sole alternative is tyranny, while distracting from their own errors and what it would take to correct them. Both sides failed to recognize that, like all traditions, liberalism is not take it or leave it. The very fact that liberals transformed it so radically during the Cold War means that it can be transformed again; liberals can revive their philosophy’s promises only by recommitting to its earlier impulses.Is that likely? Under President Biden’s watch, China and Eastern Europe — the same places where events shocked Cold War liberals into their stance in the first place — have attracted a Cold War posture. Under Mr. Biden, as under Mr. Trump before him, the rhetoric out of Washington increasingly treats China as a civilizational threat. Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine has once again made Eastern Europe a site of struggle between the forces of freedom and the forces of repression. Some like to claim that the war in Ukraine has reminded liberals of their true purpose.But look closer to home and that seems more dubious. Mr. Trump is the likely 2024 Republican presidential nominee (if not the potential winner of the election). Yet liberals seem to be betting their success less on a positive vision for America’s future and more on the ability of courts to protect the nation. Even if one of Mr. Trump’s many prosecutors manages to convict him, this will not rescue American liberalism. The challenge cuts deeper than eliminating the current enemy in the name of our democracy if it is not reimagined.Since his election in 2020, Mr. Biden has been championed by some pundits — and by his administration itself — as the second coming of Franklin Roosevelt. But Roosevelt warned that “too many of those who prate about saving democracy are really only interested in saving things as they were. Democracy should concern itself also with things as they ought to be.”Mr. Biden, despite an ambitious agenda of so-called supply-side liberalism, doesn’t seem to have internalized the message. And for their part, voters do not yet seem fully convinced. A liberalism that survives must resonate with voters who want something to believe in. And liberalism once had it, revolving not around fear of enemies but hope in institutions that lead to what Mill called “experiments in living.” He meant that people everywhere would get the chance from society to choose something new to try in their short time. If their hands are forced — especially by a coercive and unequal economic system — they will lose what is most important, which is the chance to make themselves and the world more interesting.If there is any silver lining in the next phase of American politics, which Mr. Trump continues to define, it is that it provides yet another opportunity for liberals to reinvent themselves. If they double down instead on a stale Cold War ideology, as they did after 1989 and 2016, they will miss it. Only a liberalism that finally makes good on some of its promises of freedom and equality is likely to survive and thrive.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.Samuel Moyn is a professor at Yale and the author of the forthcoming book “Liberalism Against Itself: Cold War Intellectuals and the Making of Our Times.” More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Ukraine Is Still Grappling With the Battlefield Prigozhin Left Behind

      by

      He shored up Russian forces at their most vulnerable and drew Ukraine into a costly fight for Bakhmut, giving Moscow time to build defenses that are slowing Ukraine’s counteroffensive.As the Russian military reeled on the battlefield in Ukraine last autumn, a foul-mouthed, ex-convict with a personal connection to President Vladimir V. Putin stepped out of the shadows to help.Yevgeny V. Prigozhin for years had denied any connection to the Wagner mercenary group and operated discreetly on the margins of Russian power, trading in political skulduggery, cafeteria meals and lethal force.Now, he was front and center, touting the Wagner brand known for its savagery and personally recruiting an army of convicts to aid a flailing Russian war operation starved for personnel.The efforts that Mr. Prigozhin and a top Russian general seen as close to him, Gen. Sergei Surovikin, would undertake in the subsequent months would alter the course of the war.Both men have since been taken out of action.Mr. Prigozhin is presumed to have died in a plane crash on Wednesday, an incident that came two months after he launched a failed mutiny, and which U.S. and Western officials believe was the result of an explosion on board. Several said they thought Mr. Putin ordered the plane destroyed, suggestions the Kremlin on Friday dismissed as an “absolute lie.”A military column of the Wagner group drives along the highway linking Russia’s southern cities with Moscow during the rebellion on June 24.ReutersGeneral Surovikin, who U.S. officials have said had advance knowledge of the mutiny, hasn’t been seen in public since the day of the revolt, and according to Russian state news media was formally dismissed from his post leading Russia’s aerospace forces this week.On the battlefield, Ukrainian forces are still grappling with their impact.Mr. Prigozhin led the brutal fight in Bakhmut through the winter and into the spring, relying on unorthodox recruitment of prison inmates to quickly bolster Russia’s badly depleted frontline forces. The battle, one of the bloodiest of the war, sapped Kyiv of trained soldiers ahead of the counteroffensive, while Russia lost personnel Moscow saw as largely expendable.“When the Russian military was at its most vulnerable, he provided an important reserve force to buy time for them,” Dara Massicot, a senior policy researcher at the RAND Corporation, said of Mr. Prigozhin.And Wagner, she added, was “taking the most casualties and losses at a time when the Russian military was still reeling and trying to cope with mobilization.”An Orthodox priest gave funeral rites for Wagner group mercenaries in February on the outskirts of Bakinskaya, a village in Russia’s Krasnodar region.Nanna Heitmann for The New York TimesHe effectively helped turn Bakhmut into a symbol beyond its strategic importance, one where Kyiv continues to devote extensive resources. And Russia is now building out its own army with convicts, adopting his strategy.The long-fought battle for Bakhmut also gave the Russian military, initially under the leadership of General Surovikin, a chance to flow in newly mobilized personnel and establish what became known as the “Surovikin line” of defense. The wall of mines, trenches and other fortifications has proved difficult for Ukrainian forces to penetrate in the counteroffensive.Mr. Prigozhin’s forces eventually took a devastated Bakhmut. And his contribution to the Russian war effort at an important moment, coupled with a newfound public stature owing to scores of expletive-laden comments and videos on social media, fed his ego.“Prigozhin would have you believe they were the only thing saving the Russian military. In reality they were out front, but they couldn’t do what they did without the Russian Ministry of Defense,” said Ms. Massicot.The grisly battle stoked his hatred of the Russian military to such a degree that he ultimately mounted a shocking uprising to eliminate its leadership, running gravely afoul of the unspoken rules of Mr. Putin’s system in the process.“Prigozhin over time developed a kind of main character syndrome,” Ms. Massicot said. “And in Russia, there is only one main character. He sits in the Kremlin.”The mutiny came after Mr. Prigozhin’s usefulness on the battlefield had faded.Mr. Prigozhin in an image taken from video posted on the Telegram account of his company, Concord, with Wagner mercenaries in Bakhmut, Ukraine, in May.Concord, via Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesRussia’s shift to defense had stabilized the lines. The personnel crisis became less acute. In late May, Wagner left the battlefield.“Wagner’s strategic utility likely peaked during the winter and spring,” said Michael Kofman, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “After that, it is difficult to see how Wagner would have proven decisive in this war. Their greatest utility was not in defending but in fighting for cities.”Mr. Prigozhin’s presumed death at the age of 62 capped the life of a man who rose from a Soviet prison to Moscow’s most elite circles of power, ultimately erecting a private empire that fed off Mr. Putin’s increased appetite for confrontation and desire to reassert Russia on the world stage.While amassing a personal fortune from government catering and construction contracts, Mr. Prigozhin crafted a role for himself at the tip of Russia’s geopolitical spear, his stature growing alongside Mr. Putin’s willingness to take risks.He thrived in the secretive space between formal Russian power and its targets. Russia’s invasion of Crimea and eastern Ukraine in 2014 popularized the concept of “hybrid warfare” and “gray zone tactics,” which Mr. Prigozhin adopted as his freewheeling outfit’s specialties.“With the creation of Wagner in 2014 and all of the deployments we have seen since, he established a way to really revolutionize how a private military company could be used in this targeted, coordinated way to advance Russian geopolitical interests,” said Catrina Doxsee, an associate fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.Wagner assault teams helped Moscow execute a final land grab in eastern Ukraine in 2015. For years, the mercenary group carried out select missions in Syria, relieving the Russian military of the need to deploy large numbers of ground troops so it could achieve its goals with air power and a limited footprint.Mr. Prigozhin attracted global renown when his St. Petersburg troll factory intervened in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and helped stir up right-wing populism in Europe. Later, he expanded his security services into Africa, all the while finding business opportunities, from mining to oil, that came easily to a person operating a private army with the Kremlin’s imprimatur.A Russian gold processing plant in the desert outside al-Ibediyya, Sudan. Wagner commanders often extracted lucrative mining concessions from African leaders in exchange for providing security. Abdumonam Eassa for The New York Times“The opportunity grew from a more interventionist policy by Russia,” Mr. Kofman said. “If Russia and Putin weren’t interested in a revived Russian role in the Middle East, if they weren’t interested in prospecting in Africa for influence and resources, those opportunities wouldn’t have been there.”“The Kremlin was interested in those who could deliver on that expanded vision,” Mr. Kofman added. “And Prigozhin, ever an opportunist, sensed those prospects.”Mr. Putin’s full-fledged invasion of Ukraine would become as existential for the Kremlin as it would for Mr. Prigozhin, bringing the risk-taking to extremes that tested the system and the individuals within it.At first, Mr. Prigozhin seemed to thrive. But as his ego grew, his usefulness to the Russian military waned, an unstable blend that exploded in the June mutiny, rupturing a relationship with Mr. Putin that went back to the 1990s in their mutual hometown, St. Petersburg.The tycoon had spent nearly a decade behind bars in the 1980s, having been found guilty by a Soviet court of robbery and other crimes, including one incident in which prosecutors alleged he choked a woman into unconsciousness before making off with her gold earrings.While he made inroads with Mr. Putin after the Soviet Union’s collapse, he didn’t come from the world of former KGB associates who would rise along with the Russian leader to dominate the country’s levers of power. Mr. Putin seemed to emphasize that on Thursday when he noted that Mr. Prigozhin was a “talented person” who in life made many mistakes.“I think some of these miscalculations came from believing that he was part of the system,” Ms. Doxsee said. “But I don’t think Putin ever stopped believing that he was anything other than a useful outsider.”Part of the crashed private jet that reportedly carried Mr. Prigozhin, near the village of Kuzhenkino, Tver region, Russia, on Thursday.Alexander Zemlianichenko/Associated Press More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Chris Christie Meets With Zelensky in Surprise Trip to Ukraine

      by

      Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination, made an unannounced visit to Ukraine on Friday to meet with President Volodymyr Zelensky, whom he praised for demonstrating “the resolve it takes to survive a war and ultimately win it.”Mr. Christie is the second 2024 G.O.P. hopeful to visit Mr. Zelensky in Kyiv, signaling his support for Ukraine in a war that has divided the Republican candidates and Republican voters. Former Vice President Mike Pence traveled to Ukraine in June.Escorted by a Ukrainian security detail, Mr. Christie visited sites near Kyiv that were devastated during Russia’s drive toward the Ukrainian capital in the first months of the invasion, including Bucha, a Kyiv suburb where Russian soldiers massacred more than 400 people last April.“There are hundreds of millions of people in our country who support you,” Mr. Christie told local officials in Moshchun, a village northwest of Kyiv, during a visit to a memorial overlooking a trench used by Ukrainian soldiers during a battle in March of last year.The United States has provided Ukraine with billions of dollars in military and security assistance since Russia’s invasion more than a year ago, with President Biden often framing the extraordinary level of support as part of an existential fight for democracy against authoritarian aggression as well as being vital to national security interests.A majority of Americans continue to approve of U.S. aid to Ukraine in the conflict, but that support has softened over time, owing mostly to increasing Republican opposition. The percentage of Republicans saying the United States is providing “too much” support to Ukraine has grown to 44 percent from 9 percent since the Russian invasion in February 2022, according to polling by the Pew Research Center.That shift has been led by former President Donald Trump, whose first impeachment resulted from his 2019 phone call to Mr. Zelensky pressuring him to investigate Mr. Trump’s political rivals after freezing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to Ukraine. Mr. Trump, who maintained that he did not pressure Mr. Zelensky, has said defending Ukraine is not a vital national interest for the United States.In a CNN town hall in May, he refused to say whether he would continue President Biden’s policy of supplying weapons and ammunition to Ukraine if he returned to the White House, or whether he supported Mr. Zelensky or Russian President Vladimir Putin in the conflict.“I want everybody to stop dying,” Mr. Trump said.Mr. Christie said that in his meeting with Mr. Zelensky, which was closed to reporters, the Ukrainian president “spoke about his desire for there to be bipartisan support for Ukraine.” He said the subject of Mr. Trump did not come up. “There was no conversation from him about the race that I’m in,” Mr. Christie said. He said Mr. Zelensky told him, “Whoever the next president is, I need to have that person feel a partnership with Ukraine.”Ukraine policy is an area in which Mr. Christie, a 2016 Trump rival-turned Trump adviser-turned Trump critic, has sought to draw a sharp contrast between himself and the former president, calling Mr. Trump a “puppet of Putin” and mocking his recent claim that he could negotiate “in one day” a truce between Mr. Zelensky and the Russian leader.“Move over Churchill, Trump is here to save the day,” Mr. Christie tweeted last month.“I think he really likes strongmen,” Mr. Christie said late Thursday of Mr. Trump in an interview aboard a train to Kyiv. “I think those are his role models in terms of the way he would like to control power if left to his own devices.”Mr. Christie also criticized the Biden administration for not doing more to support the Ukrainian war effort, in particular its delays in supplying Mr. Zelensky’s government with F-16 fighter jets, which Mr. Biden had resisted doing for a year before approving the move in May. “I would have been sending them months ago,” Mr. Christie said. He also favors NATO membership for Ukraine.A New York Times/Siena poll this week showed Mr. Christie trailing far behind Mr. Trump, who remains the overwhelming favorite in the race, with the support of 54 percent of likely Republican primary voters.“I wish you political luck,” Anatolii Fedoruk, the mayor of Bucha, told Mr. Christie during his visit to the city.“We all hope for that, right?” Mr. Christie replied, clapping him on the back. More

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Your Tuesday Briefing: Putin Addresses Russia

      by

      Also, Pakistan’s military fired three top commanders.President Vladimir Putin during a televised speech yesterday. Sergei Ilnitsky/EPA, via ShutterstockPutin addressed the revoltPresident Vladimir Putin addressed the rebellion over the weekend by the Wagner mercenary group, led by Yevgeny Prigozhin, in a short televised speech yesterday. In his first public comments since Saturday, Putin tried to project unity and stability as questions swirled about the strength of his grip on power.Putin appeared visibly angry as he denounced the rebellion as “blackmail” and claimed that “the entire Russian society united and rallied everyone.” He did not mention Prigozhin by name.“They wanted Russians to fight each other,” he said. “They rubbed their hands, dreaming of taking revenge for their failures at the front and during the so-called counteroffensive.”Earlier in the day, Prigozhin also spoke publicly for the first time since Saturday. He said that he wasn’t seeking to oust Putin and denied that he had any intention of seizing power. He said that he was only protesting the new law that he said would have effectively halted Wagner’s operations in Ukraine.“We went to demonstrate our protest, and not to overthrow the government in the country,” Prigozhin said. Now, the future of the Wagner group remains unclear and Prigozhin could still face charges.Analysis: The short-lived rebellion — the most dramatic challenge to Putin’s authority in his 23-year reign — could undermine his power in the long-term.The war: Ukraine’s leaders are hoping to capitalize on the chaos in Russia to make gains on the front lines. The counteroffensive is off to a halting start, but leaders are urging patience and say the main push is yet to come.Imran Khan has accused the military of orchestrating his removal, an allegation that officials deny.K.M. Chaudary/Associated PressA crackdown in Pakistan’s militaryPakistan’s military fired three senior army commanders and disciplined 15 top officers over their conduct during recent protests that supported Imran Khan, the former prime minister. Analysts said it was the strongest action the military has taken against its own in decades.The crackdown sent a message that support for Khan would not be tolerated in the ranks. The punishments also underscored that the military would use an increasingly strong hand to quash support for Khan, who was ousted from power last year but has made a comeback in the months since.Details: Violent demonstrations erupted last month after Khan was briefly arrested on corruption charges, accusations that he denied. A military spokesman said that the members of the military who had been disciplined had failed to secure military installations against attacks by protesters.Arrests: Since the protests, at least 5,000 of Khan’s supporters have been arrested. A military spokesman said at least 102 will be tried in military courts, which has drawn widespread criticism from human rights groups.Inflation in Suriname is near 60 percent, and people are protesting.Adriana Loureiro Fernandez for The New York TimesU.S.-China relations complicate lendingMiddle- and lower-income countries are grappling with untenable debts after years of low interest rates encouraged borrowing. The rivalry between China and the U.S. is now complicating their ability to get relief on time.For decades, the I.M.F. has regularly prescribed austerity as a condition for financial aid. But in recent years, China has emerged as a major lender for developing countries across the world, and its loans are accompanied by fewer demands.Now, the I.M.F. and the U.S., its most influential participant, have balked at providing some relief to debt-stressed countries until Chinese financial institutions participate. Otherwise, they say, Chinese lenders are free-riding on debt forgiveness extended by others. But as Beijing grows increasingly assertive, it has refused to bow to the West.As a result, countries such as Ghana, Ethiopia and Pakistan — each facing escalating debts, much of it to state-owned Chinese lenders — are caught in the crossfire.Case in point: Suriname was offered low-interest loans from the I.M.F., but the agency was adamant that Chinese creditors restructure $545 million in debt — loans Suriname had used to build roads and housing. The impasse delayed relief as inflation soared and children went hungry.THE LATEST NEWSAround the WorldKyriakos Mitsotakis has pledged to keep the country on the road of economic and political stability.Louisa Gouliamaki/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesKyriakos Mitsotakis, the leader of a conservative Greek party, was sworn in for a second term after a landslide victory. It’s another win for the right in Europe.An anticorruption candidate stunned Guatemala’s establishment by advancing to a runoff in the presidential race against a former first lady.Sierra Leone’s main opposition party accused the military of attacking their headquarters after weekend elections.A study found that loan officers in Uganda were more likely to offer credit to heavier-looking people. In a place where food can be scarce, obesity can signal financial security.U.S. NewsClimate change is intensifying flood risks in some of the country’s most populous areas.A shortage of cancer drugs is forcing doctors to give priority to patients who have the best chance of survival.Yasufumi Nakamori, a senior curator at the Tate Modern in London, will become director of the Asia Society in New York.A Morning ReadJes Aznar for The New York TimesIn the Philippines, an annual rodeo on the island province of Masbate is both a competition and a celebration of the country’s unique cowboy culture, with roots in the Spanish and American colonial eras.“Where there’s cattle, there’s rodeo,” said a livestock farmer who directs the festival’s rodeo events. “It is not necessarily American.”ARTS AND IDEASTony Cenicola/The New York TimesInside Barbie’s dream houseIn 1962, American women were denied mortgage applications because of their sex or marital status. But that year, Barbie bought her first home. It had a record player and a television set, but no kitchen. She was there to have fun, not to be a housewife.In the years since, Barbie’s Dreamhouse has been a mirror for social, political and economic changes across the U.S. It responded to the sexual revolution, to the environmental movement and even to pandemic remote work.Throughout that time, Barbie’s house has given little girls a subliminal, maybe even subversive, blueprint for economic liberation. Notably, the Dreamhouse was all her own — Ken wasn’t on the deed.Barbiecore: Hot pink and magenta are surging in popularity in home décor. The forthcoming “Barbie” movie is serving as a catalyst.PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookDavid Malosh for The New York Times. Food Stylist: Simon Andrews.This shish kebab is marinated in spiced yogurt.What to ReadThe novel “Banyan Moon” traces a family from 1960s Vietnam to present-day Florida.What to Listen toHere are nine new songs from our playlist.Now Time to PlayPlay the Mini Crossword, and a clue: Bit of fire (five letters).Here are the Wordle and the Spelling Bee. You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. See you tomorrow. — AmeliaP.S. Take our photo-based geography quiz.“The Daily” is about the rebellion in Russia.You can reach us at briefing@nytimes.com. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Worrying About the Judge and the Jury for Trump’s Trial

      by

      More from our inbox:The Revolt in RussiaMigrants and New York’s SuburbsClimate Education: New Jersey’s ExampleThe special counsel, Jack Smith, released an indictment of former President Donald J. Trump this month.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Don’t do it, liberal America! Don’t get caught up in the melodrama of the Florida trial! The former president craves attention. The news media collude by granting him free publicity. Why give this despicable man what he wants?And the trial outcome? Yes, it seems that Jack Smith has an open-and-shut case. Yet there is a reasonable likelihood that we have a shut-and-shut-down judge. This is the bad luck of the draw.Judge Aileen M. Cannon has myriad tactics at her disposal to delay, disrupt and derail the proceedings. She can influence jury selection, undercutting chances of a unanimous guilty verdict. Even if the jury reaches that conclusion, it is the judge who sets the sentence. This could be a slap on the wrist.Why not assume that the chances of conviction and a serious sentence are small and turn your attention to other matters of national significance?If you must follow the legal adventures of the former president, it’s better to focus on the likely trial in Georgia and Mr. Smith’s Jan. 6 investigation.David B. AbernethyPortola Valley, Calif.The writer is professor emeritus of political science at Stanford University.To the Editor:Re “Trial Judge Puts Documents Case on Speedy Path” (front page, June 21):So Judge Aileen M. Cannon has set a trial date for August. I’m suspicious. She will have total power over the sentence as well as the ability to dismiss the case. Is she helping Donald Trump by getting the whole matter resolved quickly in order for it to be done before the election?How dare she ignore calls to recuse herself, given her record? She must be removed.Sandy MileySherrill, N.Y.To the Editor:Re “Leaving Trump’s Fate to 12 Ordinary Citizens Is Genius,” by Deborah Pearlstein (Opinion guest essay, June 16):In ordinary times Professor Pearlstein’s belief in the wisdom of the jury system in trying Donald Trump would be warranted, but these are not ordinary times. Mr. Trump has primed his followers to threaten and intimidate anyone who might oppose him.No matter the strength of the case, I believe that at least some jurors will vote to acquit because they justifiably fear for their safety.David LigareCarmel Valley, Calif.To the Editor:Central to the case against Donald Trump are the details about the highly classified documents he took. And the key problem is that the defense’s right to see the government’s evidence conflicts with the absolute need to keep that material secret.There is then the possibility that the judge might agree to suppress such crucial evidence. Could people with the highest security clearance review the documents and present affidavits and witnesses in court supporting the government’s assertions?This might provide a litmus test for the integrity of the judicial process.Arnold MitchellScarsdale, N.Y.To the Editor:Re “Judge’s Record in Trump Case Raises Concern” (front page, June 15):While I understand that any judge presiding over an unprecedented and historic case like this will receive scrutiny, I am appalled at how easily a Latina woman is denigrated for her inexperience and for bristling when she is questioned.Such descriptions hold no weight for this 49-year-old working mother and small-business owner. I’ve heard it all before ad nauseam.Speaking as a liberal, I hope that Judge Aileen M. Cannon proves all of her naysayers wrong and goes down in history as an amazing jurist.Would a male judge have had the same questions raised about him at the same stage of his career? I highly doubt it. So much of this article reads like water cooler talk about the new female boss.Shantha Krishnamurthy SmithSan Jose, Calif.To the Editor:It was not the Watergate break-in that brought Richard Nixon down; it was the cover-up and obstruction of justice. Similarly, it was not the taking or storage of classified documents that resulted in Donald Trump’s indictment; it was the lying to the F.B.I. and D.O.J. and obstruction of justice.Mike Pence and Joe Biden stored government documents, but promptly cooperated with the government and returned the documents. It’s not complicated.Alan M. GoldbergBrooklynTo the Editor:I already know how I would vote if I were on the jury of the Trump trial.Good luck finding 12 Americans who don’t.Eliot RiskinRiverside, Conn.The Revolt in Russia Dmitri Lovetsky/Associated PressTo the Editor:Re “How Revolt Undermines Putin’s Grip” (news analysis, front page, June 26):An autocrat must always appear strong. An act of treason and rebellion was committed against Russia, and Vladimir Putin blinked. His mentor Stalin is turning over in his grave.A severe crack has now developed in Mr. Putin’s power structure that he may not have enough cement to repair.Ed HoulihanRidgewood, N.J.To the Editor:What kind of world have we come to when we’re rooting for the mercenaries?Elliot ShoenmanLos AngelesMigrants and New York’s SuburbsEd Day, the Rockland County executive, is one of many county leaders who have taken legal steps to try to stop New York City from sending migrants their way.Gregg Vigliotti for The New York TimesTo the Editor:“New York City and Suburbs: A Rift Widens” (front page, June 18) highlighted the opposition of Ed Day, the Rockland County executive, to migrants being housed in hotels in the suburbs.Although some suburban residents oppose migrants coming to our communities, there are others who want to give migrants a chance to have a better life. I have met many Westchester residents who want to donate food and clothing to migrants.And — if the federal government would make it easier for the migrants to work legally — we could try matching employers who can’t find employees to work in their industry with migrants who would like to work legally in the suburbs.Churches and synagogues in the suburbs would welcome the opportunity to have congregants “adopt” individual migrants and to provide them with personal attention and help so they could live a better life.Ed Day does not speak for the suburbs.Paul FeinerGreenburgh, N.Y.The writer is the Greenburgh town supervisor.Climate Education: New Jersey’s Example Desiree Rios for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Schools Encourage 7-Year-Olds to Fix Climate Change, Not Fear It” (front page, June 17):Three cheers to my former home state, New Jersey, for having the guts and the smarts to take on climate change in its education system. The effects of our climate’s unsettling behavior will continue to be felt by all, whether you agree that it’s happening or deny it.The youngest of us will experience its effects longer than my generation of grandparents, so of course it is totally logical to begin with them in their early education years.The great purpose of education is to prepare all ages to live meaningfully in the world as it is and as it changes. Surely, teaching the young how to bend with the arc of change and sway with its seasons could not be more relevant today.I wish New Jerseyans well with this, but even more I wish them insight into what they are doing so they can become ambassadors to the other states and, yes, the federal Department of Education as well.Well done, New Jersey!Bill HoadleySanta Fe, N.M. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      In Russian Schools, It’s Recite Your ABC’s and ‘Love Your Army’

      by

      The curriculum for young Russians is increasingly emphasizing patriotism and the heroism of Moscow’s army, while demonizing the West as “gangsters.” One school features a “sniper”-themed math class.A new version of the ABC’s in Russia’s Far East starts with “A is for Army, B is for Brotherhood” — and injects a snappy phrase with every letter, like, “Love your Army.”A swim meet in the southern city of Magnitogorsk featured adolescents diving into the pool wearing camouflage uniforms, while other competitors slung model Kalashnikov rifles across their backs.“Snipers” was the theme adopted for math classes at an elementary school in central Russia, with paper stars enumerating would-be bullet holes on a target drawn on the chalkboard.As the war in Ukraine rolls into its 16th month, educational programs across Russia are awash in lessons and extracurricular activities built around military themes and patriotism.These efforts are part of an expansive Kremlin campaign to militarize Russian society, to train future generations to revere the army and to further entrench President Vladimir V. Putin’s narrative that “a real war has once again been unleashed on our motherland,” as he declared in a sober address at a ceremony last month.The drumbeat of indoctrination essentially started with Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea, but the full-scale invasion of Ukraine has accelerated it. The Ministry of Education and Science releases a constant stream of material, including step-by-step lesson plans and real-life examples — like a video of a student concert that used poetry, dance and theater to explain the history of Russian foreign intelligence.“It includes all levels, from kindergarten to university,” said Daniil Ken, the head of the Alliance of Teachers, an independent Russian union, who works from voluntary exile. “They are trying to involve all these children, all students, directly in supporting the war.”Members of the Russian Young Pioneers attending an induction ceremony, organized by the Russian Communist Party, at Red Square in Moscow in May.Maxim Shipenkov/EPA, via ShutterstockFor years, Russia’s leaders sought to condition its citizens to accept Moscow’s leadership, partly by barring politics from schools. Now the Kremlin hopes to persuade the public to actively back the war effort, and when it comes to younger males, to fight.Yet it also wants to avoid fanning too high a patriotic flame, lest it push Russians to start questioning the purpose of the war. Much the way Mr. Putin has refrained from enacting multiple conscriptions of soldiers to avert prompting antiwar sentiment, the Kremlin has left parents some leeway to avoid propaganda lessons. In that, they may be hoping to avoid the disconnect that emerged in the Soviet era, when the education system portrayed the country as the land of Communist plenty, even as ordinary Russians could see that the shelves were bare.“They want enthusiasm, but they realize if they push too hard it could galvanize an organized opposition,” said Alexandra Arkhipova, a social anthropologist who studies public reactions to the war. “They do not want people to protest.”Interviews over the past month with sociologists, educators, parents and students, and a review of extensive material online posted by the schools themselves and by local news outlets, show a comprehensive government effort to bolster military-patriotic content through all 40,000 public schools in Russia.The cornerstone of the initiative is a program called “Important Conversations,” started last September. Every Monday at 8 a.m., schools are supposed to hold an assembly to raise the Russian flag while the national anthem is played, and then convene an hourlong classroom session on topics like important milestones in Russian history.The minister of education, Sergei Kravtsov, did not respond to written questions. When the program was introduced last fall, he told the official Tass news outlet, “We want the current generation of schoolchildren to grow up in completely different traditions, proud of their homeland.” Both an official Telegram channel and a website disseminate materials for the classroom.“Important Conversations” has been supplemented by programs with names like “Lessons in Courage” or “Heroes Among Us.” Students have been encouraged to write poetry extolling the Motherland and the feats of Russian soldiers. Myriad videos show elementary school children reciting lines like, “All the crooks are fleeing Russia; they have a place to live in the West; gangsters, sodomites.”In this photograph provided by state media, Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, is shown meeting with the country’s education minister, Sergei Kravtsov, in Moscow, in 2021.Sputnik/via ReutersLessons draw heavily on earlier conflicts, particularly the Soviet Union’s success defeating Nazi Germany. Suggestions based on that earlier time sometimes seem antiquated, like encouraging students to knit socks for the troops.“It is very theatrical,” said Ms. Arkhipova, the social anthropologist. “It serves as a kind of proof that the entire war is the right thing to do because it mirrors World War II.”Countless schools have been renamed to honor dead soldiers, and memorials are rife. They include a “Hero’s Desk” in classrooms that often displays the picture of an alumnus who is supposed to be honored.Veterans are trotted into classrooms frequently to detail their experiences. In late April in Dmitrov, a small city near Moscow, three soldiers addressed a roomful of students aged 10 to 15, some waving small Russian flags. A video of the session shows one fighter talking about wanting to protect his homeland against “fascist filth.”Overall, however, there is no monolithic propaganda machine because the decision on how to implement “Important Conversations” has largely been left to local school administrators.Some teachers take a hard ideological approach. A video posted by the Doxa news outlet showed a teacher demanding that students pump their fists in the air while singing a popular song called, “I Am Russian.” The teacher barks: “The thrust should be to the sky, to NATO.”Other teachers do not even mention the war, particularly in places like Moscow, where many parents disapprove of attempts to indoctrinate their children.Yuri Lapshin, formerly the student psychologist at an elite Moscow high school, said in an interview that while researching a paper, he found examples of unique interpretations of the program. One math teacher, for example, told students that the most important conversation in the world was about algebra, so he dedicated the class to that. On a day supposedly focused on the concept of “fatherland,” a biology teacher lectured about salmon spawning in the rivers where they hatched.Even when the war lessons occur, they sometimes fall flat. At an assembly with two fighters, students from a St. Petersburg technical college basically mocked them. They questioned why fighting in another country meant they were defending Russia, and how God might view murdering others, according to a recording of the assembly. Administrators rebuked at least five students for their questions, local reports said.Children holding portraits of Russian soldiers who were killed in the war in Ukraine as they take part in the opening ceremony of a memorial in their honor in Crimea in May.Alexey Pavlishak/ReutersSasha Boychenko, 17, a high school senior, attended four “Important Conversations” sessions in Vladivostok last fall before her family left Russia. Bored students laughed at the historic displays, she recalled. “After the class, we wondered why we had come,” she said in an interview.Alexander Kondrashev, a history teacher in Russia for 10 years, said he was awaiting a revised version of the textbooks this fall. An early copy obtained by the Mediazona news organization found one fundamental change; all references to Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, as the springboard for Russia as a Christian nation have been expunged.“Nobody perceives ‘Important Conversations’ as learning something that will come in handy in life, like physics, math, geography or the knowledge from history lessons,” Mr. Kondrashev said in an interview.Noncompliance takes various forms. The Alliance of Teachers advised parents that they can formally opt out of the classes, while some have their children show up late or call in sick on Mondays. Defiance makes certain parents nervous, experts said, especially given about a dozen cases where school officials reported on unenthusiastic parents or students.A woman named Zarema, 47, said she worried about her three sons in school in Dagestan. While she sends her youngest son, a sixth grader, to the “Important Conversations” class, she told him never to engage politically. “We are all scared of everything here now,” she said, asking that her full name not be used while criticizing the war.Russia has largely presented the war as an economic opportunity in poorer areas, while being far less aggressive in major cities.Cadet students in February at the Victory Museum, which is dedicated to Russia’s World War II victory over Nazi Germany.Nanna Heitmann for The New York Times“They are trying to target the people who have fewer resources,” Greg Yudin, a Russian sociologist doing research at Princeton University, said in an interview “They give you an option that promises money, status, benefits and in addition to that you will be a hero.” Even if they persuade only 20 percent of the youth to join the army, that is still a lot of brigades, he noted.Toward that end, the Ministries of Education and Defense have announced that military training will be mandatory next year for 10th-grade students. Girls will learn battlefield first aid, while the boys will be instructed in drill formation and handling a Kalashnikov, among other skills.At universities, the curriculum in the fall will include a mandatory course called “The Fundamentals of Russian Statehood.”The course is still in development, Mr. Yudin noted, but he said that what details have emerged tended to echo Mr. Putin’s worldview of Russian exceptionalism and the idea that the battle waged against Western dominance for the past 1,000 years would continue for another 1,000.“The single best possible way for them to get this society mobilized is to brainwash the young,” Mr. Yudin said. More

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      An Erdogan Loss in Turkey Would Stir Relief in the West and Anxiety in Moscow

      by

      European leaders would be delighted to have “an easier Turkey,” while Russia could lose an important economic and diplomatic partnership should the Turkish leader lose power in Sunday’s elections.Sunday’s presidential election in Turkey is being watched carefully in Western capitals, NATO headquarters and the Kremlin, with Turkey’s longtime mediating role in the complex and often vexing relations between the parties riding on the outcome.With President Recep Tayyip Erdogan slightly trailing his challenger, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, in recent polls, the prospect that the Turkish leader could lose the election is concentrating diplomatic minds.Officially, people on the Western side won’t talk about their preferences, to avoid being accused of interfering in Turkey’s domestic politics. But it is an open secret that European leaders, not to speak of the Biden administration, would be delighted if Mr. Erdogan were to lose.As Carl Bildt, the former Swedish prime minister, said on Friday, “We all want an easier Turkey,” a strategically important member of NATO that has, under Mr. Erdogan, become an increasingly troublesome partner for the European Union, which has largely abandoned the idea of Turkish membership.Russia, too, has much riding on the election’s outcome. Under Mr. Erdogan, Turkey has become Russia’s indispensable trading partner and at times a diplomatic intermediary, a relationship that has assumed an even greater importance for the Kremlin since the invasion of Ukraine.Throughout his 20 years in power, Mr. Erdogan has pursued a nonaligned foreign policy that has frequently frustrated his putative Western allies and provided a welcome diplomatic opening for Moscow — perhaps never more so than after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.Mr. Erdogan with then-Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in 2016. It is an open secret that European leaders and the Biden administration would be delighted if the Turkish leader were to lose Sunday’s election.Kayhan Ozer/Turkish Presidential Press ServiceBy refusing to enforce Western sanctions on Moscow, Mr. Erdogan has helped undermine efforts to isolate the Kremlin and starve it of funds to underwrite the war. At the same time, the stumbling Turkish economy has feasted recently on heavily discounted Russian oil, helping Mr. Erdogan in his quest for a third, five-year term. Mr. Erdogan has further irritated his allies by blocking Sweden’s bid for membership in NATO, insisting that Stockholm first turn over scores of Kurdish refugees in the country, especially from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which both Ankara and Washington consider a terrorist organization.More broadly, for the European Union and Washington there is the strong feeling that Turkey under Mr. Erdogan has moved farther away from European values and norms like the rule of law and freedom of the press.Kaja Kallas, Estonia’s prime minister, said in an interview that NATO and the European Union viewed the election differently. It is a defense alliance, she said, and “Turkey is one of the allies that has great military capacities” to help NATO in a key part of the world. “So I don’t think anything changes in terms of NATO in this regard whoever wins the elections.”For NATO, of course, the hope is that a change of leadership in Turkey will end the standoff over approval of Sweden’s membership in the military alliance, ideally before a summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, in July.In Washington, Mr. Erdogan’s drift toward authoritarianism, his ties to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and his disputes with NATO have exasperated officials — and even led some members of Congress to suggest that Turkey should be banished from the NATO alliance.While the United States, the European Union and, to a lesser extent, NATO stand to gain from an opposition victory, Mr. Putin almost certainly will be seen as the loser if Mr. Erdogan is ousted.Not only has Mr. Erdogan refused to join Western sanctions against Russia and provided a market for its oil and gas, Turkey has also become a source for Moscow of much-needed imports and a crucial link to the global economy amid tightening Western sanctions. The Kremlin also sees in Mr. Erdogan’s often confrontational nationalist rhetoric the potential to disrupt the NATO alliance.For its part, Turkey has benefited not only from cheap Russian energy, but also from Russian investment and revenues from Russian tourism, which have risen since the start of the war. Russia is building Turkey’s first nuclear power plant and, since war began, has announced plans to make the country a hub for its natural gas trade.A campaign poster for Mr. Erdogan in Kayseri, Turkey.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesThe two long-serving leaders also share an authoritarian streak and confrontational rhetoric toward the West, emphasizing historical grievances against other world powers. Mr. Erdogan’s relationship with Mr. Putin has allowed him to play the role of statesman as a mediator for Moscow’s war on Ukraine, most recently by brokering a deal to allow the export of Ukrainian grain.But Mr. Putin and Mr. Erdogan’s partnership has always been based on mutual self-interest rather than ideological affinity, and the two countries compete for influence in the Caucasus and Middle East. Most notably, the two leaders back different factions in the armed conflicts in Syria and Libya. Relations grew tense after Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet in 2015.Mr. Erdogan has stopped short of offering Mr. Putin direct support in the war in Ukraine, and his government has angered Moscow by allowing the sale of Turkish armed drones to Kyiv.In another worrying sign for the Kremlin, Mr. Kilicdaroglu, the opposition leader, accused Russia this past week of interfering in the country’s election by spreading “conspiracies, deep fakes and tapes that were exposed in this country yesterday.”That was a reference to an alleged sex tape that surfaced on Thursday, prompting a minor presidential candidate to leave the race.“Get your hands off the Turkish state,” he wrote in Turkish and Russian, though adding: “We are still in favor of cooperation and friendship.”Mr. Kilicdaroglu has promised to maintain economic ties to Russia if he wins the presidency, but it remains unclear whether he would maintain Mr. Erdogan’s delicate balancing act in Ukraine.As an indication of the sensitivity of the situation, when the United States ambassador to Turkey, Jeff Flake, met with Mr. Kilicdaroglu last month, he drew Mr. Erdogan’s ire. Saying that he would no longer meet with Mr. Flake, the Turkish president added, “We need to teach the United States a lesson in this election,” Turkish news media outlets reported.Europe’s leaders, while silently rooting for an Erdogan defeat, are growing concerned about the potential for post-election turmoil, especially if Mr. Erdogan loses narrowly or the election goes to a second-round runoff in two weeks.“It is a watershed election,” Mr. Bildt said. “But democracy is at stake. And my second concern is that we get a result” that means a division of powers — a powerful presidency under Mr. Erdogan and a Turkish Parliament controlled by an unstable opposition coalition.“The risk of constitutional stalemate is quite high,” Mr. Bildt said.Michael Crowley contributed reporting from Washington. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Ron DeSantis Calls Putin a ‘War Criminal,’ Clarifying Earlier Comment on Ukraine

      by

      The Florida governor and presumed G.O.P. presidential candidate previously described the Russia-Ukraine conflict as a “territorial dispute” and did not mention the Russian president.Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida this week clarified his description of the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a “territorial dispute” and said that Vladimir V. Putin, the Russian president, was a “war criminal” who should be “held accountable.”Mr. DeSantis, a Republican who is expected to announce a presidential campaign in the coming months, made his latest comments in an interview with the British broadcaster Piers Morgan, who shared them with The New York Post and Fox News, both owned by Rupert Murdoch.Last week, Mr. DeSantis made one of the most significant statements of the 2024 presidential campaign to date, to the influential Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who has criticized the Biden administration’s approach to Ukraine. “While the U.S. has many vital national interests,” Mr. DeSantis said in his statement, “becoming further entangled in a territorial dispute between Ukraine and Russia is not one of them.”Mr. DeSantis did not mention Mr. Putin then and criticized President Biden’s policy as a “blank check” to Ukraine with no clear objectives, one that distracts from U.S. problems.The line about a “territorial dispute” was heavily criticized by foreign policy hawks, as well as Republicans in Congress and, privately, some Republican donors. It also put Mr. DeSantis’s views more in line with those of former President Donald J. Trump.But Mr. DeSantis used an apparently lengthy interview with Mr. Morgan early this week to clarify his statement to Mr. Carlson.“I think he is a war criminal,” Mr. DeSantis said of Mr. Putin, for whom the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant related to war crimes. “I don’t know about that route,” he said of the arrest warrant, “but I do think that he should be held accountable.”To Mr. Morgan, Mr. DeSantis insisted that his comment about a “territorial dispute” had been “mischaracterized,” but he acknowledged he could have been clearer.“Obviously, Russia invaded” in 2022, Mr. DeSantis said. “That was wrong. They invaded Crimea and took that in 2014 — that was wrong.”The change appeared not to have been lost on Mr. Carlson. Just hours after Mr. DeSantis’s new comments about Mr. Putin were made public, Mr. Carlson attacked what he said were people who give in to the news media, asserting that they are forced “to repeat whatever childish slogan they’ve come up with this week.” In a mocking voice, he said, “Vladimir Putin is a war criminal.”While he was a congressman from Florida, Mr. DeSantis faulted President Obama’s administration for not doing more, as Russia annexed Crimea.“What I’m referring to is where the fighting is going on now, which is that eastern border region, Donbas, and then Crimea,” Mr. DeSantis said. He added, “There’s a lot of ethnic Russians there. So, that’s some difficult fighting, and that’s what I was referring to, and so it wasn’t that I thought Russia had a right to that, and so if I should have made that more clear, I could have done it.”But he added, “I think the larger point is, OK, Russia is not showing the ability to take over Ukraine, to topple the government or certainly to threaten NATO. That’s a good thing. I just don’t think that’s a sufficient interest for us to escalate more involvement. I would not want to see American troops involved there. But the idea that I think somehow Russia was justified” in invading is “nonsense.”He added that he did not believe that the conflict would end with “Putin being victorious. I do not think the Ukrainian government is going to be toppled by him, and I think that’s a good thing.”Mr. DeSantis’s stance on Russia has been of significant interest to Republicans looking for an alternative to Mr. Trump. A large swath of Republican voters have come to say that the U.S. is providing too much support for Ukraine.The governor has a record as a congressman that has left different people believing he shares their foreign policy views, even when those people are on opposite ends of the spectrum.But his comments to Mr. Carlson were roundly condemned by a number of Republican senators, former Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming and prospective 2024 rivals like Chris Christie, the former governor of New Jersey. And the lack of initial criticism of Mr. Putin was noted, particularly as Mr. DeSantis, in his initial statement to Mr. Carlson, derided the notion of regime change in Russia. More