US foreign policy

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      America vetoes G7 proposal to combat Russia’s shadow fleet of oil tankers

      by

      The US has rejected a Canadian proposal to establish a task force that would tackle Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” of oil tankers, according to reports last night.Canada, which has the current Group of Seven presidency, proposed the measure ahead of a meeting of G7 foreign ministers in Quebec later this week.In negotiations to agree a joint statement on maritime issues, the US is pushing to strengthen language about China while watering down wording on Russia, the reports said.The “shadow fleet” refers to ageing oil tankers, the identities of which are hidden to help circumvent western economic sanctions imposed on Moscow since it launched its full-scale military invasion of Ukraine at the start of 2022.As well as vetoing Canada’s proposal to establish a task force to monitor sanctions breaches, the draft G7 statement seen by Bloomberg News shows the US pushed to remove the word “sanctions” as well as wording citing Russia’s “ability to maintain its war” in Ukraine by replacing it with “earn revenue”.G7 communiqués are not final until they are published through consensus. Further talks could still result in changes to the end-of-summit statement.US diplomats briefed their G7 counterparts that the move was because of Washington’s “re-evaluation of its position in multilateral organisations, rendering it unable to join any new initiatives”, according to the Bloomberg report.European countries are discussing plans that will let them carry out seizures of Moscow’s oil-exporting tankers in the Baltic Sea.The proposals include using international law to allow them to take control of vessels on environmental or piracy grounds. More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump policies could fuel illicit drug trade despite vow to curb fentanyl

      by

      Donald Trump’s policies could leave the US more vulnerable to dangerous synthetic drug trafficking from abroad, even as the administration has vowed to stop fentanyl from entering the country, former government officials say.This week, Trump imposed tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China, ostensibly as a tactic to stem the flow of illicit drugs into the US.Jim Crotty, the former Drug Enforcement Administration deputy chief of staff, called the approach “coercive” and said it has the potential to backfire. Federal funding cuts could also leave US borders more insecure, according to Enrique Roig, a former Department of State official who oversaw Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) portfolios and who has also worked with USAid.US overdose deaths began to decrease significantly for the first time in 2023, after rising for decades. But Crotty notes this progress is fragile.“We’re seeing this decrease in overdose deaths and everyone’s still trying to suss out exactly why. I don’t think now is the time that we want to stop any of those existing efforts because we know that at least some, or a combination of them, have been working,” Crotty said.Roig agreed: “All this has to be working together in concert.”Federal funding cuts could put the US behind when it comes to drug detection technology. The global drug supply has increasingly shifted towards highly potent synthetic substances such as fentanyl and newly emerging nitazenes. Often, these drugs arrive in the US in the form of powders or precursor chemicals that take up minimal space, and are difficult to detect by odor.Roig says advanced drug detection technology is therefore vital, but Trump’s federal funding and staff cuts mean less money for the latest technology and equipment, and fewer people to install it.Ram Ben Tzion, the CEO of Publican, which provides drug detection technology to government agencies outside the US, says cutting-edge methods detect suspicious shipments even before they get to the border. Publican uses large language models to flag shipments that “don’t make sense” and are likely to contain illicit substances. For example, his company once found fentanyl precursors in a shipment to a residential address in California. The shipment claimed to contain fashion items, but came from a Chinese construction company.Similarly, the UN Container Control Programme, which has historically received state department funding, helps authorities flag suspicious shipments before they reach their destination. This program has helped authorities around the world seize hundreds of tonnes of illicit drugs each year. Roig says federal funding cuts have stalled CCP’s implementation in Mexico, even though it’s a primary security target for Trump.Some of Trump’s measures are more showy than they are constructive, Crotty and Roig said. The designation of certain cartels as terrorist organizations “doesn’t do much of anything”.It’s symbolic, says Crotty, given that they were already designated transnational criminal organizations. Other measures are a harmful waste of money, according to Roig. Just this week, for instance, the administration suspended the use of military planes to deport immigrants, including those accused of drug related crimes, due to the extravagant cost.Roig says this measure was completely unnecessary, as “Ice already has its own fleet of airplanes” that are much cheaper.Crotty is concerned the aggression could backfire.“The Mexican people are protective of their culture and their sovereignty. If you push them too hard, could it do more harm than good?” he said.Mexico sent 10,000 troops to its US border to cooperate with Trump’s demands, but Crotty says “while in a vacuum that sounds like a whole lot”, Mexico’s border is vast, and drugs are often transported in “minute quantities”. So, the US needs Mexico’s cooperation when it comes to intelligence – otherwise “you’re not going to find the proverbial needle in the haystack”, Crotty said.Roig said that “it’s important that we do this in cooperation with Mexico and not alienate them,” adding that Trump’s aggressive stance toward China could harm the Biden administration’s progress negotiating with the Chinese government to cooperate on counternarcotics initiatives.Massive USAid cuts also threaten programs intended to curb the “root causes” of the drug trade, says Roig. Some USAid-funded programs simultaneously tackled drug smuggling and another one of Trump’s key issues, migration – as cartels that traffic drugs also traffic people.When Roig worked with USAid, he says he spent a lot of time on “community violence prevention efforts”, including programs to keep young people from joining international crime organizations and cartels. (Notably, the Trump administration has purged many websites describing USAid programs.)If the drug supply does increase, it could mean US overdoses begin to rise again as well. But Crotty is worried we won’t even know if that happens. Layoffs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention could leave fewer people to track overdose deaths, and Trump’s attack on government data sharing could keep everyone in the dark.“​​ CDC maintains the overdose death dashboard. A lot of that stuff is data driven. Are they still going to have access to the data?” he said.The Guardian contacted INL and UNODC for comment. More

    • 225 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s attacks on South Africa are a punishment for independence | Achille Mbembe and Ruth Wilson Gilmore

      by

      On 7 February, less than three weeks after taking office, Donald Trump issued an executive order: “Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa.” The order directed US agencies to halt aid to South Africa, condemned South Africa’s case against Israel at the international court of justice (ICJ) as an “aggressive position”, and declared that white Afrikaners be prioritized for resettlement in the US based on the duplicitous claim that they are “victims of unjust racial discrimination”.The humanitarian consequences of this executive order are devastatingly clear. On 26 February, notices were sent out terminating support for HIV organizations funded by the US President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief (Pepfar), initiated in 2003 by then president George W Bush. The termination of funding to Pepfar is catastrophic for South Africa. Studies predict this could result in more than half a million unnecessary deaths and up to half a million new infections.But Trump’s order is an escalation of an existing strategy to condemn, isolate and punish South Africa for charting an independent course for its people and their relationship to the international community at large.On 11 January 2024, the South African government presented its case at the ICJ, arguing that Israel’s military actions in Gaza – endorsed, funded and armed by the United States – constituted genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention. The ICJ case was not the first time that South Africa had broken with Washington on the global stage; in 2003, South Africa strongly opposed the invasion of Iraq, warning that the war amounted to “a blow to multilateralism”, in the words of its then president Thabo Mbeki.South Africa’s renewed appeal to multilateralism did not keep the Biden administration from responding to the ICJ case against Israel with immediate hostility. On 3 January, before arguments were even made, the state department spokesperson Matthew Miller declared: “We find this submission to be meritless, counterproductive, and completely without any basis in fact whatsoever.”While South Africa’s ICJ case was widely welcomed at home, some white actors with significant power in the country’s public sphere were hostile. Strident demands for South Africa to align with the west were issued by organisations such as the Johannesburg-based Brenthurst Foundation, among others. They found easy allies in Washington. In early 2024, several members of Congress argued that South Africa’s stance on Israel should disqualify it from receiving preferential trade benefits, including removal from the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which aims to improve economic ties between the US and sub-Saharan Africa.Last month’s executive order marks a dangerous new phase in the efforts to strangle South Africa’s international solidarities – but this time with an explicitly white supremacist twist, focused on the country’s efforts to redress the compounded, multi-generational inequalities of apartheid. Trump has long supported the far-right conspiracy theory that falsely claims white farmers in South Africa are subject to a government-backed campaign of violence. In August 2018, he tweeted that he had asked then secretary of state Mike Pompeo “to closely study the South Africa land and farm seizures and expropriations and the large-scale killing of farmers”.These views have been nurtured by organisations such as AfriForum, a rightwing Afrikaner group that has actively cultivated relationships with American conservative institutions since around 2017. In 2018, AfriForum representatives met with then National Security adviser John Bolton and conducted interviews on Fox News, promoting conspiracy theories about a non-existent “white genocide” in South Africa. A network of far-right white South Africans in the US, including Elon Musk, has similarly gained access and influence. Joel Pollak, an editor at Breitbart, is widely tipped to be Trump’s new ambassador to South Africa.These conspiracy theories aim to present white farmers as victims as South Africa moves toward remedy for dispossession. A 2017 government land audit found that white people, 9% of the population, owned approximately 72% of all privately owned farmland – a direct result of colonial dispossession that must be addressed as an urgent moral priority, as indicated in South Africa’s 1996 constitution.But if the target of Trump’s executive order is South African land reform, its principal casualty will be the beneficiaries of Aids treatment. One of the great successes of South Africa’s democracy has been its HIV treatment program. With approximately 5.9 million people receiving antiretroviral therapy through the public healthcare system, it is the largest HIV public health program on the planet. Pepfar has been funding a fifth of these costs, part of a program estimated to have saved 25 million lives worldwide.The Trump administration makes an intentional target of South Africa’s health policy. The deadly cruelty is the point.From Mexico to Greenland, Panama to Ukraine, the Trump administration is bullying allies to align with its vision of national primacy and ethnic supremacy. The rapid implementation of this new Trump doctrine requires Americans to join together with people across the world not only to oppose reactionary measures – but also to remain steadfast in their joint commitment to internationalism that enhances wellbeing. That commitment will require richer countries to spend in solidarity, not charity.The immediate task is of course the most urgent: rapid multilateral action is needed to secure the safety of the huge numbers of HIV patients whose lives are now in danger. The many pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities dotted through the global south should be turned to producing what people need, even as land and housing reform also necessarily shape regional agendas.But the risks posed by this executive order transcend its particular measures. There is enough; the problem is allocation, and the symbolic and conceptual as well as material means to realize human well-being.

      Achille Mbembe is a research professor in history and politics at the Wits Institute for Social and Economic Research in Johannesburg, South Africa.

      Ruth Wilson Gilmore is a professor of earth and environmental Sciences, and American studies, at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. More

    • 213 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      I lost my job at USAid. It’s devastating – but I still have hope | Christian Smith

      by

      When we rang in the New Year, I wasn’t remotely expecting politics to collide with my career, my family and me. In a matter of weeks, I had lost my job, my father and, I felt, my country.I spent a dozen years as a program officer for USAid, serving in countries in South America, Africa and Asia with my family. I loved my job working with governments and NGOs to improve the lives of those in need. Doing good and doing well, we said. I was helping to build an information system to improve aid transparency and efficiency when sudden news arrived.At 5pm on a Friday, we received an email saying our particular contract had been shut down. In all, 10,000 professionals were dismissed from their jobs, while Elon Musk called us a criminal organization and its staff – me included – a “ball of worms”. The wrecking had begun.At USAid headquarters, administrative assistants were ordered to take down all the pictures of the many people the agency helps around the world, as if it had been something shameful. Only clocks were left on the walls. More cravenly, the administration blocked access to the wall of names honoring those who had given their lives to the cause. Trump officials canceled USAid’s building contract and handed it over to US Customs and Border Protection.The same clocks on the walls that had once marked time over Americans helping people in need overseas may now mark time over Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents deporting people to those countries and others.The Trump administration is abandoning millions of people around the world and cutting off life-saving services. We are losing goodwill and influence – diplomatic, economic and moral. A good sign that closing USAid was a mistake: China is already moving in to fill the void, and strongly rightwing leaders like Hungary’s Viktor Orbán are applauding.The destruction is also almost certainly unconstitutional in a number of ways, and aspects continue to be reviewed, blocked or upheld by courts lagging behind the speed at which laws are being broken. A showdown on the reach of executive power has begun.These changes hit me very close to home. A significant number of my family are conservatives who voted for Trump, fueled by two decades of misinformation promoting hate and anger. Despite this, in the interests of our family integrity, we have learned to talk to one another respectfully. We avoid topics related to politics and focus on our love for each other, jigsaw puzzles and American football (until even that became “woke”).Blindsided at work, I was next blindsided at home. Two days after USAid was lost, my father died unexpectedly. Thankfully, my dad and I had been able to say we loved each other before he died. The kids and I flew out and we spent a beautiful week together with the family grieving his loss.However, in a strange moment at the end of the week, my mother told me that I shouldn’t talk about USAid because I didn’t know what I was talking about (as if I had no idea about the organization where I had spent my career). Armed with details from her trusted websites, she informed me that USAid was performing sex changes on children and funding terrorist groups. We defused the moment, but it demonstrated how unchecked deception fomented by wealthy interests so gravely distorts people’s views.Obviously, all of these sudden losses have given me pause to reflect.Despite some people’s attempts to reshape the US and its place in the world, we have not seen the end of American generosity. Humans are successful because we cooperate. We have obligations to each other as living beings. We also know that we can’t make ideas go away, and the best ones – like kindness and caring for others – are actually what bind us.The dismantling of USAid as an institution does not mean that the US’s generosity of spirit has also been eradicated. USAid was a longstanding independent agency established by John F Kennedy, receiving consistent bipartisan support because it advanced America’s foreign policy objectives by helping others.Such values have not disappeared. We can be certain that, in one form or another, US aid will return.

      Christian Smith is an American citizen and former USAid officer who lives between Dublin and Spain More

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      US suspends aid to South Africa after Trump order

      by

      The state department has ordered an immediate pause on most US foreign assistance to South Africa, according to a cable seen by the Guardian, officially implementing a contentious executive order by Donald Trump.The directive, issued on Thursday, implements Executive Order 14204 targeting what the administration called “egregious actions” by South Africa. It orders all state department entities to immediately suspend aid disbursements, with minimal exceptions.“To effectively implement EO 14204, all bureaus, offices and missions shall pause all obligations and/or dispersion of aid or assistance to South Africa,” reads the cable, signed by the secretary of state, Marco Rubio.The cable follows the 7 February order, amid a broader reassessment of US foreign aid which paused certain foreign assistance pending review.The order specifically cites “unjust racial discrimination” against white Afrikaners – descendants of Dutch colonizers who implemented the segregationist regime that denied basic rights to the Black majority until 1994.The South African-born billionaire Elon Musk, a Trump super-ally who heads the administration’s government efficiency team and has condemned his homeland for “openly racist policies”, is widely seen as influencing the administration’s stance toward a country where white South Africans, just 7% of the population, still disproportionately control most wealth and land.According to the cable, Rubio has delegated authority to Pete Marocco, a Trump loyalist who presided over the administration’s evisceration of foreign aid programs at USAid and the state department, to determine whether specific aid programs should continue. The guidance emphasizes there is “a very high bar for such requests”.Only Pepfar, the US global HIV/Aids program that provides life-saving treatment to millions of South Africans, will proceed without additional review, according to the cable. All other assistance programs require special permission, even those that had received prior exceptions under the January foreign aid pause.This is the latest sign of escalating tensions between the two generally friendly nations, starting when President Trump accused South Africa of using its new land law to discriminate against white citizens – claims the South African president, Cyril Ramaphosa, rejected as misinformation.The bill in question controversially permits government acquisition of private land without compensation in certain circumstances, though its supporters say such seizures would be rare and subject to judicial review.Trump has also criticized South Africa’s leading role in its genocide case against Israel at the international court of justice, while also offering refugee status to wealthy white Afrikaners who wanted to relocate to the United States, further incensing the country.The aid freeze also follows South Africa’s recent announcement that it is preparing a new trade proposal for the Trump administration, as officials anticipate the possible end of the African Growth and Opportunity Act – which has allowed billions in duty-free exports to the United States.Earlier on Thursday, South Africa issued a statement acknowledging the US withdrawal from the Just Energy Transition Partnership (Jetp), which has canceled previously funded climate projects following Trump’s revocation of international climate finance initiatives.The state department did not respond to a request for comment. More

    • 288 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Starmer is at his best right now – but he must accept there is no going back with Trump’s US | Martin Kettle

      by

      Keir Starmer, it turns out, is at his best in a crisis. He has faced two since he became prime minister last year, one domestic, the other international. The first came with the riots that followed the Southport killings, when Starmer’s response was impressive and effective. The second is Donald Trump’s attempt to stitch up Ukraine, where Starmer has been surefooted in trying to hold the line against a sellout to Russia. In both cases, he has looked like the right person in the right place at the right time.There was another example of this deftness on Wednesday in the Commons, when Starmer went out of his way to mark the anniversaries of the deaths of UK service personnel in 2007 and 2012. A total of 642 died in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars alongside their US allies. They would not be forgotten, he said. The name of JD Vance was not mentioned. Nor was the US vice-president’s contemptuous “some random country” insult this week. But Starmer’s reprimand was unerring.It is far too soon to say whether Starmer’s response to Trump’s embrace of Russia and to the US administration’s denunciations of Europe will be effective in the long run. What can be said is that, in public and private, the prime minister has so far led with tact and clarity and has scored one or two apparent successes against the run of play. Nevertheless, these are very early days. Trump boasted to Congress on Tuesday night that he was “just getting started”.Starmer’s ability in a crisis is an unexpected contrast with his leadership in the ordinary business of politics. Since July 2024, Starmer’s calm, methodical, long-game approach has succeeded only in squandering much of Labour’s election-winning goodwill, and in making him seem out of his political depth. But his deployment of these same unflashy tactics at moments of acute crisis, as in the case of Ukraine, could be gold dust. It has at least given the prime minister’s ratings a boost. There are echoes here of the rallying around Boris Johnson at the start of Covid. But remember where that ended up.It is useful to note that this low-key approach marks a notable break. Throughout the postwar period, British leaders faced with international crisis modelled themselves on Winston Churchill in 1940. Margaret Thatcher saw herself this way during the Falklands war. Tony Blair echoed it after 9/11 and over Iraq. Johnson pretended he was Churchill when Russia invaded Ukraine. Starmer’s calm approach evokes Clement Attlee more than Churchill. In every way he is unTrump.Yet Starmer has not got much to be calm about. The world of 2024 no longer exists. Trump has triggered a crisis in the North Atlantic alliance. At stake are two epochal things. First, whether Russia’s main western border will henceforward be with Ukraine, with Poland or with Germany. Second, whether the US accepts any role in ensuring future European stability. These are not small questions.There are three levels on which Starmer can try to deal with Trump, both now and for the coming four years. All of them tacitly and sometimes openly recognise the vast seriousness of the moment. All of them are predicated on the undesirability of what Trump is doing and the need to create alternatives. All of them, however, also rest on a determination not to make an enemy of the US.The first is to firefight the immediate problems that Trump creates. This involves constantly engaging with the US administration by whatever means are available to prevent or mitigate crises. It means building up defence spending. It means working with allies and so-called coalitions of the willing. It means using any leverage to earn a hearing. Essentially, it is an attempt to manoeuvre Trump to follow a different or less extreme course, while avoiding confrontation or denunciation. But it is all done under the pretence that nothing fundamental has changed.View image in fullscreenThis is essentially the strategy that Starmer is now pursuing on Ukraine. It is why he keeps talking to Trump – three times in the past week, perhaps contributing to Trump’s relatively polite mention of Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the speech to Congress. It is why he deploys King Charles’s soft power. It is why, perhaps, he will soon return to Washington with Zelenskyy and Emmanuel Macron in an overwhelmingly important effort to restore military aid and intelligence support to Ukraine.The second approach is to decide to suck it all up for four years, in the hope that things will then get easier. This means accepting the likelihood, though never saying so publicly, that Trump is always going to be destructive and mean-spirited. At the same time, it means working to keep US links – especially military and intelligence links – strong enough to be revived more effectively after 2028, when Trump is due to step down.For Starmer, this could mean a lot of firefighting over the next four years, without any certainty of a post-Trump dividend or British public approval. Such fires could break out on any number of issues, including not just Ukraine but also the Middle East, bilateral trade, Nato, US-EU relations and, judging by this week’s speech, Canada, Greenland and the Panama canal. Much will depend on Friedrich Merz and on Macron’s 2027 successor, too. Starmer and his national security adviser, Jonathan Powell, are also likely to have an intense under-the-radar interest in the candidates vying to succeed Trump.Which leaves the third strategy. This is to accept that Trump’s approach is now the US’s new normal and that there will be no comforting return to past arrangements. Whoever comes after Trump may be friendlier, more rational and less rude. Either way, US exceptionalism, isolationism and disengagement from Europe are likely to be here to stay. So too are the immensely tough consequences for countries like Britain, which can no longer rely on a US security and intelligence shield against Russia or any other hostile states. Rearmament is back. This will require something close to a war economy, and it cannot be created overnight.At present, Starmer has one foot in the first approach and another in the second. But it is the third approach that will loom largest as an option as the next four years unfold. None of these is a soft option, and all of them overlap. Starmer is right, for example, to oppose false binary choices between Europe and the US.Nevertheless, if Trump’s speech to Congress is to be taken seriously, this is a president who has changed sides in the battle of values between democracy and authoritarianism. Starmer may feel he has to tell Europe that Trump will still “have our backs”. But Trump could just as soon stab Europe in the back too. After all, that’s exactly what he just did.

      Martin Kettle is a Guardian columnist More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Hundreds of US diplomats decry dismantling of USAid in letter to Rubio

      by

      Hundreds of diplomats at the state department and US Agency for International Development have written to the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, protesting against the dismantling of USAid, saying it undermines US leadership and security and leaves power vacuums for China and Russia to fill.In a cable expected to be filed with the department’s internal “dissent channel”, which allows diplomats to raise concerns about policy anonymously, the diplomats said the Trump administration’s 20 January freeze on almost all foreign aid also endangers American diplomats and forces overseas while putting at risk the lives of millions abroad that depend on US assistance.More than 700 people have signed on to the letter, a US official speaking on the condition of anonymity said.“The decision to freeze and terminate foreign aid contracts and assistance awards without any meaningful review jeopardizes our partnerships with key allies, erodes trust, and creates openings for adversaries to expand their influence,” said the cable, a copy of which was seen by Reuters.The Republican president, pursuing what he has called an “America first” agenda, ordered a 90-day pause on all foreign aid on his 20 January return to office. The order halted USAid operations around the world, jeopardizing delivery of life-saving food and medical aid, and throwing global humanitarian relief efforts into chaos.“The freeze on life-saving aid has already caused irreparable harm and suffering to millions of people around the world,” the letter said, adding that despite statements on waivers being issued for life-saving programs, the funding remained shut.The president tasked billionaire and adviser Elon Musk with dismantling USAid as part of an unprecedented push to shrink the federal government over what both say is wasteful spending and abuse of funds.“Foreign assistance is not charity. Instead, it is a strategic tool that stabilizes regions, prevents conflict, and advances US interests,” the letter said.A state department spokesperson, when asked about the cable, said: “We do not comment on leaked internal communication.”In fiscal year 2023, the United States disbursed $72bn of aid worldwide, on everything from women’s health in conflict zones to access to clean water, HIV/Aids treatments, energy security and anti-corruption work.Upon evaluating 6,200 multiyear awards, the administration decided to eliminate nearly 5,800 of them worth $54bn in value, a 92% reduction, according to a state department spokesperson. USAid fired or put on administrative leave thousands of staff and contractors.The cable said the government’s failure to pay outstanding invoices to contractors and implementing partners has severe economic repercussions.“The resulting financial strain not only undermines confidence in the US government as a reliable partner, it also weakens domestic economic growth at a time of mounting global competition,” the cable said.Organizations and companies that contract with USAid last month sued the administration, calling the dismantling of the agency unlawful and saying funding had been cut off for existing contracts, including hundreds of millions of dollars for work that was already done.The US supreme court declined on Wednesday to let the administration withhold payments to foreign aid organizations for work they had already performed for the government, upholding a district judge’s order that called on the administration to promptly release payments to contractors. More