US foreign policy

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      How the Iraq war altered US politics and led to the emergence of Trump

      by

      Twenty years ago, Lt Col Karen Kwiatkowski was working as a desk officer in the Pentagon, when she became aware of a secretive new department called the Office of Special Plans.The OSP had been set up to produce the kind of intelligence that the Bush administration wanted to hear, about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Kwiatkowski, then age 42, saw first-hand how the disastrous war was confected.“I had this huge faith in my superiors, that they must be there for a reason, they must be wise and strong and all of these fairytale type things, but I came to find out there are very incompetent people in very high positions,” she said.Kwiatkowski, who became a Pentagon whistleblower over the war, is now a farmer, part-time college professor, and occasional political candidate on the libertarian end of the Republican party in Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley. She says she was somewhat cynical about war and politics even before she was seconded to the Pentagon’s Near East and South Asia department in 2002. But seeing America’s governance subverted up close dramatically deepened her disillusion.“There’s a crisis of faith in this country,” Kwiatkowski said. “As always, when you have these crises of faith you see populist leaders, and the emergence of Trump certainly was a response to a crisis in faith. It’ll be interesting to see what happens next, because Americans have a lot less to be proud of than we think.”On the whole, she believes the experience of the Iraq war has imbued Americans with a healthy scepticism about what they are being told by the establishment – but not nearly enough.“I could go into the Walmart right now and ask everybody about WMD in Iraq and probably three out ten people, maybe more, will swear that it’s all true,” she said. “Our public propaganda in this country is supremely good.”Polling figures over the past two decades suggest that overall attitudes towards foreign policy are fairly stable. When the Chicago Council on Global Affairs asked Americans whether “it will be best for the future of the country if we take an active part in world affairs or if we stay out of world affairs”, 71% supported activism in 2002 and 64% still supported it in 2021.More generally, the Iraq invasion coincided with a collapse in public trust in government which had very briefly recovered from its post-Vietnam slump after the 9/11 attacks. Data from surveys by the Pew Research Centre, show the post-Iraq malaise is deeper and more enduring.“It said first and foremost to young people that the government can’t be trusted,” John Zogby, another US pollster, said. “It also said that the American military may be the strongest in the world but it has serious limits, and it can’t impose its will, even on smaller countries.”He added: “Americans will go to war, but they want their wars to be short, and they want them to make a positive difference.”There are still US soldiers on counter-terrorist missions in Iraq and Syria. The Authorisation to Use Military Force that Congress first granted to the Bush administration in the run-up to the 2003 invasion has yet to be repealed by the Senate, and has been cited by the Obama and Trump administrations in justifying operations in the region.Coleen Rowley, an FBI whistleblower who exposed security lapses leading to the 9/11 attacks, wrote an open letter to the FBI director in March 2003, warning of a “flood of terrorism” resulting from the Iraq invasion. She says now that two decades on, nobody has been held accountable for the fatal mistakes.“I think the real danger is that their propaganda was very successful, and people like Bush and Cheney have now been rehabilitated,” Rowley said. “Even the liberals have embraced Bush and Cheney.”The terrible mistakes made leading to and during the Iraq war forced no resignations and neither George W Bush nor his vice-president, Dick Cheney – nor any other senior official who made the case the war and then oversaw a disastrous occupation – have ever been held to account by any form of commission or tribunal.However, the taint of Iraq arguably altered the course of US politics by hobbling those who supported it.“In some ways you can argue Iraq is what led to Obama being president as opposed to Hillary Clinton,” said Daniel Drezner, professor of international politics at the Fletcher school of law and diplomacy at Tufts University. “I don’t think Obama wins the 2008 Democratic primary if Hillary hadn’t supported the war.”The war also opened a schism in the Republican party, strengthening an anti-intervention faction that eventually triumphed with the 2016 election of Donald Trump.George W Bush and his former vice-president have drawn some positive liberal press for their low-key opposition to some of the excesses of the Trump era, but Kenneth Pollack, a Middle East and military expert at the American Enterprise Institute, they paid a political price by becoming marginalised within their own party.“The system has punished those people. If you were a Bushie, if you were a neocon, you’re no longer welcome to the party,” Pollack said. “I would say there has been a lot of accountability, but it’s been accountability in a traditionally American way.”Those excluded included traditional conservatives with less extreme domestic social positions than Maga Republicans. The drive to war was fueled by partisanship – the Bush administration was contemptuous of Democrats and all opposition – but it also served as an accelerant to the extremism that led to Trump and the 6 January insurrection.“It’s very hard to say how much Iraq was responsible for that, but it does seem to me that it was an important element in making our partisanship worse,” Pollack said.Pollack is a former CIA analyst and a Democrat who backed the invasion, believing the evidence on Saddam Hussein’s WMD and supporting the humanitarian argument for ousting a dictator.Pollack jokes that he is the only person to have since apologised. It is not entirely true as a few other pundits, like the conservative commentator, Max Boot, have also been contrite, but there have been no public expressions of remorse from former senior officials who took the fateful decisions. It is one of the important ways in which the US has still not had a proper reckoning for the war.Pollack, who has stayed in touch with several of the Bush team for a forthcoming book on the US and Iraq, said that some express private regret for specific decisions and choices, but others remain unrepentant.“I’ve heard it said to my face that: ‘Nope, I wouldn’t change a thing. I’d do everything all over again the exact same way’, which I find shocking,” he said. “I don’t see how you look at American behaviour during this period and not have regrets.” More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘I’m a little hard to pin down’: country star Brad Paisley becomes unlikely Ukraine advocate

      by

      Wearing white cowboy hat, black suit and black tie, country singer and guitar virtuoso Brad Paisley strode on stage in the East Room of the White House before a bipartisan audience.It was a Saturday night and, fittingly, he began the 40-minute set playing his hit song American Saturday Night – but with an amended lyric. “I had to change the second line because it mentioned Russia, and I don’t do that any more,” he explained.When Paisley delivered its substitute – “There’s a Ukrainian flag hanging up behind the bar” – no one applauded louder than Joe Biden in the front row.It was a moment that illustrated Paisley’s engagement with Ukraine’s fight for survival and, before a gathering of governors from blue and red states, his efforts to bridge political divides. The 50-year-old from West Virginia, a three-time Grammy winner, describes himself as hard to categorise but optimistic that America can move beyond what has been called a cold civil war.That night last month at the White House, Paisley compelled Spencer Cox, the Republican governor of Utah and an amateur musician, to join him in a duet. He also performed a new song, Same Here, marking the first anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.Speaking by phone Nashville, Tennessee, Paisley recalls: “You had most of the states represented and you had all sides. I could see it in the room: let’s not lose what this is saying because it works. Face to face, left to right, it works. That’s the thing about something like this: when you put it out there, it’s going to be uncomfortable, but that’s OK. Art can be uncomfortable. I welcome the discussion.”The commercial release of Same Here features a voiceover from the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, speaking proudly about his country and people. Paisley’s royalties for the track will be donated to the United24 crowdfunding effort to help build housing for thousands of displaced Ukrainians whose homes were destroyed in the war.He describes the song – the first from his new album, Son of the Mountains – as an expression of empathy. “It’s about anybody who longs for freedom. Around this time last year, when I was seeing all this begin to happen, I was moved by the images of people fleeing – mothers, daughters, grandmothers crossing the border, all huddled in the backseat of a car, fleeing for their lives as the husband stayed behind to fight.“It’s unlike anything I’ve seen in my lifetime. It’s unlike anything any of us have seen in our lifetimes. It just felt so helpless to watch this and be a witness to this with nothing we could do. Maybe the most exciting thing for me in having this out is the idea that this is going to help rebuild homes for people, and it’s also raising some awareness.”Zelenskiy has worked tirelessly to promote his cause and build support around the world. The former actor, comedian and screenwriter delivered a rousing speech to the US Congress in Washington and has given video addresses at the Golden Globe and Grammy awards.Paisley reflects: “It’s an amazing thing. Who would have thought? You almost can’t write the script – they did, actually, that was his TV show – but he seems to be the right man at the right time in a way that just seems divine. It’s unbelievable.”The Ukrainian president was happy to collaborate with Paisley and even had some songwriting suggestions. “When he heard it, I got word that there were a few lines that he wondered about and so we worked on those and made sure that it came off the way it did.“It’s funny how much better it is now than when we began in the sense that it’s truly remarkable to hear this voice in the middle of this conflict with a melody. He had great suggestions. I don’t know if he’s got aspirations to write songs or not.”Paisley’s public shows of support for Ukraine has drawn attacks from bots – fake, automated accounts that became notorious after Russia employed them in an effort to meddle in the 2016 presidential election.It would be no surprise to find Paisley caught in political crossfire. The perils facing country music artists who venture into the political arena were spelled out when the Dixie Chicks faced fierce blowback for their condemnation of President George W Bush’s invasion of Iraq.During the 2016 election, a survey by the trade publication Country Aircheck found that 46% of industry professionals favored Republican Donald Trump while 41% preferred Democrat Hillary Clinton. Many stars prefer to remain apolitical, which may be pragmatic considering the risk of alienating half their audience.Nashville, the home of country music, has a Democratic mayor, but is surrounded by Republican red in Tennessee. Paisley does not declare himself to be either Democrat or Republican. “The bottom line is I defy category. I definitely am one of the more confusing people that way. The minute you affiliate, ‘Here’s what I am,’ are you all those things? I’m certainly not all of those things on either side.”“I’m a little hard to pin down. There will be songs when this album comes out where a lot of liberals will go, ‘Wait a minute, you can’t say that!’ I have written an album that does not pull punches. If I believe in something or if I want to tell a story, it’s on here on this album. I have literally bled for it – I’ve cut my hand a couple of times playing the guitar. I’ve written it to the degree that I’ve really tried to scope every word all the way from the very first line to the last line of this album.“The far left may say, ‘What are you doing?’ Harlan Howard, one of our great songwriters in country music, they used to give him flak. So many of the songs were cheating songs, drinking songs. They’re like, ‘Why do you write about that so much?’ He said, ‘When people stop, so will I!” He laughs. “That’s the thing people do. If people don’t do that any more then we’ll have to write country songs about all the other things. But there are songs in here about things people do.”It would not be the first time that Paisley has faced criticism from the left. Next month marks the 10th anniversary of Accidental Racist, Paisley’s ill-fated collaboration with rapper LL Cool J.Paisley began the song with an anecdote about a Black man taking offence at his Confederate flag T-shirt, explaining: “The only thing I meant to say is I’m a Skynyrd fan” – a reference to the southern rock band that often used the flag. He went on to sing about white people are “caught between southern pride and southern blame” a century and a half after the civil war.Paisley insisted that he was trying to foster an open discussion of race relations, but critics said it was tone deaf. An analysis by Ta-Nehisi Coates in the Atlantic was headlined: “Why ‘Accidental Racist’ Is Actually Just Racist.” Demetria Irwin of the Black culture website the Grio called it “the worst song in the history of music”. Actor and comedian Patton Oswalt tweeted: “I can’t wait for Brad Paisley & LL Cool J’s next single: “Whoopsy Daisy, Holocaust, My Bad.”Did he learn lessons from the experience?“You can’t think of everything, and at some point the art you make should exist as the way you want it to exist, but if it can be better, and somebody has an opinion, you should listen to them. If it’s a valid opinion, if it’s not a bot, if it’s not some sort of strange agenda. In that sense, it’s all been a part of my journey for sure, learning from these things.”The entire nation has been on a vertiginous learning curve in the 10 years since Accidental Racist, witnessing a racial reckoning that has a reframing of American history via the 1619 Project and the removal of many Confederate statues across the south.Paisley comments: “I drove by these statues my whole life since I was 20 here in Tennessee and never really thought about them at all. Obviously I’m the wrong one to ask on whether they come down. It’s not important what I think. To me it’s about the people that feel something so deeply and feel so much hurt. Let’s talk about that.”The musician has long used his platform to advocate for causes, opening a free grocery store in Nashville with his wife, Kimberly Williams-Paisley, and donating 1m meals during the coronavirus pandemic. He visited US troops in Afghanistan and has talked with Zelenskiy about performing in Ukraine. But he rejects that idea that Same Here is a case of mixing music with politics.“To me in no way, shape or form is it a political statement. I guess I have a world leader on and it’s interesting to say something is avoiding politics when you do that. But truthfully, for me, when you boil it down, here’s what we care about: crying at weddings, having a beer together in a remote place, families and soldiers and flags and freedom and all these things.“To me, if you want to call it political, call it whatever you want to call it. But let’s talk about this. These are key things in life that make us human.” More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      John Bolton chose not to brief Trump on Russia Havana syndrome suspicion

      by

      John Bolton chose not to brief Trump on Russia Havana syndrome suspicionFormer national security adviser tells podcast ‘we didn’t feel we would get support’ from president during Russia investigationDonald Trump’s third national security adviser, John Bolton, did not brief the president on suspicions Russia might be behind mysterious “Havana syndrome” attacks on US diplomats because he did not think Trump would support him.‘Havana syndrome’ not caused by foreign adversary, US intelligence saysRead more“Since our concern was that one of the perpetrators – maybe the perpetrator – was Russia,” Bolton said, “we didn’t feel we would get support from President Trump if we said, ‘We think the Russians are coming after American personnel.’”Bolton makes the startling admission in an interview for an episode of a podcast, The Sound: Mystery of Havana Syndrome, hosted by the former Guardian journalist Nicky Woolf and released on Monday.Bolton was national security adviser from April 2018 to September 2019, a period of intense scrutiny on Trump’s relations with Russia, primarily via special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russian election interference and links between Trump and Moscow.Mueller issued his report in April 2019. He did not prove collusion between Trump and Moscow in his 2016 election victory over Hillary Clinton but the former FBI director did secure indictments of figures close to Trump and lay out extensive evidence of possible obstruction of justice.Trump angrily rejected allegations of wrongdoing and claimed to be the victim of a witch-hunt. But he also closely courted Vladimir Putin, even seeming, in Helsinki in July 2018, to side with the Russian president against his own intelligence agencies.“Havana syndrome” refers to the investigation of more than 1,000 “anomalous health incidents” involving diplomats, spies and other US government employees around the world. The first cases emerged in 2016.Symptoms have included brain injuries, hearing loss, vertigo and unusual auditory sensations. Speculation about directed energy weapons has persisted, though earlier this month an official report said “available intelligence consistently points against the involvement of US adversaries in causing the reported incidents”.Havana syndrome got its name because, as Bolton told The Sound, “the first reports came from Cuba [so] it would not be unreasonable to say the Cubans were doing it”.But, he said, “it becomes counterintuitive pretty quickly. If they wanted to keep the American embassy open, you wouldn’t attack it. That tended to show that it was some other government. And a government with more capabilities than we thought the Cubans had.”The Trump administration cracked down on Cuba anyway, returning it to the “state sponsor of terror” list, ending a diplomatic thaw begun by Barack Obama. Bolton, a famous rightwing foreign policy hawk, told The Sound he favoured taking that step anyway, regardless of the origin of the Havana syndrome attacks.He also said he and other national security staffers “felt that because it was possible – not certain, but possible – this emanated from a hostile foreign power and we had our ideas who that might be … we thought more needed to be done to consider that possibility and either find evidence to rule it in or rule it out”.If the attack theory was real, Bolton said, there was “no shortage of evidence that would point to Russia as … at least the top suspect”.Nonetheless, he said, he decided not to take that suspicion to Trump.“Who knows what he would’ve said,” Bolton said of his decision not to brief Trump on his suspicions about Russia and Havana syndrome.“He might’ve said, ‘Do nothing at all.’ I didn’t want to chance that, because I did feel it was serious.”Trump fired Bolton in September 2019. The following year, Bolton released a book, The Room Where It Happened, in which he was highly critical of his former boss. Trump sought to prevent publication. Bolton has said he could run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024 if it is a way to stop Trump, who he has called “poison” to the Republican party.Speaking to The Sound, Bolton suggested the decision not to brief Trump about suspicions about Russia damaged attempts to investigate the Havana syndrome mystery.“When you don’t have the ability to bring the hammer down and say, ‘Find the answer out,’ … it’s much easier for the bureaucracy to resist.”TopicsDonald TrumpJohn BoltonTrump administrationTrump-Russia investigationUS politicsUS national securityUS foreign policynewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Rightwing Republicans rail against US aid for Ukraine: ‘We’ve done enough’

      by

      Rightwing Republicans rail against US aid for Ukraine: ‘We’ve done enough’War emerges as a wedge issue in the forthcoming Republican primary election as far right at CPAC call for US to end supportMarjorie Taylor Greene, an influential far-right Republican in Congress, has called for the US to stop aid to Ukraine, giving added voice to a grassroots revolt in the party that threatens bipartisan support for the war against Russia’s Vladimir Putin.The Georgia congresswoman is a notorious provocateur who has made racist, antisemitic and Islamophobic statements and promoted bizarre conspiracy theories.Marjorie Taylor Greene keeps rising in Republican ranks despite ‘loony lies’Read moreYet she has emerged as a prominent voice in the House of Representatives after forging a bond with the speaker, Kevin McCarthy, who vowed that Republicans will not write a “blank cheque” for Ukraine.Greene told the Guardian that Joe Biden is “putting the entire world at risk of world war three”, a view widely held at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), America’s biggest annual gathering of conservatives.“I think the US should be pushing for peace in Ukraine instead of funding and continuing a war that seems to be escalating and putting the entire world at risk of world war three,” Greene said during CPAC at the National Harbor in Maryland on Friday.Greene called for US funding to cease immediately, insisting that, while she voted for a resolution to support the Ukrainian people and condemning Russia’s invasion, “we are actually accelerating a war there”.She added: “We should be promoting peace. Europe should have peace and the United States should do their part. Ukraine is not a Nato member nation and Joe Biden said in the beginning he would not defend Ukraine because they’re not a Nato member nation. It doesn’t make sense and the American people do not support it.”A year after Russia’s unprovoked invasion, the US has provided four rounds of aid to Ukraine, totaling about $113bn, with some of the money going toward replenishment of US military equipment that was sent to the frontlines.The two leading contenders for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, former president Donald Trump and the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, have both expressed scepticism about the Ukraine cause. Opinion polls also show an erosion of public support.The conflict was mostly absent from speeches on the main stage at CPAC, once the home of cold warrior Ronald Reagan but now a stronghold for the isolationist “America first” wing of the Republican party. Nikki Haley, a former ambassador to the UN who is running for president, and Mike Pompeo, an ex-secretary of state weighing his own run, gave the subject a wide berth in their addresses.But outside the cavernous ballroom with its glitzy red, white and blue stage, neat rows of seats and banks of TV cameras, there was less circumspection and more crowd congestion. The rightwing podcaster and former White House strategist Steve Bannon repeatedly railed against the war in Ukraine before a noisy gathering of fans.On Friday he was joined by Matt Gaetz, a Florida congressman who recently put forward a “Ukraine Fatigue” resolution in the House. Gaetz warned of the dangers of Russia’s nuclear arsenal and the threat of a third world war and said: “Zelinskiy’s new zeal for anti-corruption efforts and oversight seems to directly align with Republicans taking over the House of Representatives.”Bannon rejoined: “Every Republican who supports this murderous war in Ukraine should be turfed out.”Interviews with more than a dozen CPAC attendees elicited similar views and, in some cases, sympathy for Putin. Theresa McManus, wearing a cowboy hat and jacket, and a riding skirt patterned with words from the US constitution, said forcefully: “I like Putin. I think he’s got balls and he’s taking care of his country.”What to expect from this year’s CPAC: Biden bashing, 2024 Republican primary chatter and lawsuit gossipRead moreRepeating a Kremlin talking point that people in the Donbas region want to be liberated from Ukraine, the 67-year-old horse trainer from rural Virginia continued: “No, we shouldn’t give them any more money. No, we should not be involved with them. They should not be part of Nato.”Paul Brintley, 50, ambassador for the North Carolina Faith & Freedom Coalition, described Putin as “not so much a dictator” and said of Ukraine: “I don’t think we should be the police of the world. I don’t think we should bankroll them. We’ve done enough.”Some at CPAC hew to conspiracy theories about the war. Jason Jisa, 41, from Dallas, Texas, said: “Show me where you’re sending the money. Show me war footage. Go look at all the previous wars: Afghanistan, Iraq, we’re flooded. We’re shown video of it every single day. You don’t see hardly any video come from Ukraine. Why? Where are the camera crews?”Jisa, owner of the “USA Trump Store”, added: “Where’s the money going? Why are we on the hook for them? Why, while we have veterans in the street, we have homeless people all over the place, we have inflation going crazy, are we going to send billions and billions and billions of dollars?”Ukraine is emerging as a wedge issue in the looming Republican primary election. Trump, who launched his campaign last November, has repeatedly called for an end to hostilities and claimed that, if he were to return to the Oval Office, he could end the war “within 24 hours”.DeSantis, another potential contender, was viewed as a foreign policy hawk who embraced tough rhetoric against Putin while he served in Congress. But he has increasingly adopted a similar tone as he courts Trump’s populist base, though he did not attend CPAC.But former vice-president Mike Pence, widely expected to launch a bid for the White House in the coming months, has called for Washington to intensify support for Ukraine and insisted that “there can be no room in the leadership of the Republican Party for apologists for Putin”. This stance is shared by the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, and others in the party establishment.Neither Pence nor McConnell came to CPAC, which some critics argue is losing relevance as it fails to shake off Trump. Hylton Phillips-Page, 67, a retired investment manager from Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, described Putin as a “thug” but admitted “mixed feelings” over continued aid for Ukraine.“I don’t think our support can forever be at the expense of our own country. I would be quite OK with our Congress saying: until you finish the wall and protect our own border, you shouldn’t be protecting somebody else’s border. I’m not opposed to supporting them but I would like us to do some stuff at home.”Antwon Williams, 40, from Columbia, South Carolina, who was selling Trump merchandise, said: “America needs to worry about the troops that we have, our veterans that need our help here in America, instead of writing an unlimited cheque to these people out here,” he said.“No offence to them [Ukrainians]. It’s horrible what they’re going through. No one wants to see anyone hurting and dying out there. But we have our own veterans that fought for America and our freedom that is hurting, that is homeless, that is needing help, who have mental issues and who are starving right here in America.”TopicsCPACUS politicsUkraineRepublicansUS foreign policyfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Time is not on our side’: Congress panel says tackling China defines next century

      by

      ‘Time is not on our side’: Congress panel says tackling China defines next century‘We do not want a war within the PRC, a clash of civilizations,’ says ranking Democrat as new committee holds first hearingThe US Congress must act urgently to counter the economic and national security threats posed by the Chinese government, a bipartisan chorus of lawmakers on a newly created special House committee has warned during an inaugural, primetime hearing.The two superpowers were locked in an “existential struggle over what life will look like in the 21st century”, the committee’s Republican chairman, Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin, said as the rivalry between the US and China deepens.With democracy advocates and protesters in attendance, the panel – formally the House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party – began its work at a precarious moment for US-China relations. It comes weeks after a suspected Chinese spy balloon traversed the continental US and amid intelligence that Beijing is considering providing lethal weapons to aid Russia in its war against Ukraine.Some politicians seem comfortable with the prospect of a new cold war. They shouldn’t be | Christopher S ChivvisRead moreMeanwhile, China’s militarization and aggression toward Taiwan, a self-ruled island that Beijing claims as its own, as well as its response to the coronavirus pandemic, have further escalated tensions.Underscoring the broad range of challenges the panel hopes to address, lawmakers peppered the witnesses with questions on human rights abuses, trade policies, the influence of TikTok, aggression in Taiwan, the origins of Covid-19 and international espionage.Gallagher hopes the committee will help shape China policy and legislation that can win support from both parties. But with the 2024 presidential campaign looming, and Republicans eager to paint Joe Biden as “weak on China”, the possibility of bipartisan action is likely to become increasingly narrow.“Time is not on our side,” he said, imploring a bitterly divided Congress to come together to confront China. “Our policy over the next 10 years will set the stage for the next hundred.”Illinois congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi, the ranking Democrat on the panel, echoed Gallagher’s sense of urgency. He said Democrats and Republicans had for years “underestimated” the Chinese government, believing that economic integration would “inevitably lead to democracy”. But it did not and now the US needed to move quickly to pursue economic and trade policies that would “up our game” as Americans to compete with China.“We do not want a war within the PRC,” he said, referring to the People’s Republic of China, “not a cold war, not a hot war. We don’t want a clash of civilizations.”The hours-long proceeding ​offered a rare display of cross-party unity in a​n​ otherwise bitterly divided Congress​. It featured two former advisers to Donald Trump: former national security adviser HR McMaster and former deputy national security adviser Matt Pottinger, a China expert who resigned after the January 6 attack on the Capitol.Offering a sweeping overview of China’s rise, Pottinger said the success of the Chinese Communist party (CCP) at presenting itself as “responsible” and “normal” was “one of the great magic tricks of the modern era”.“You could say the CCP is the Harry Houdini of Marxist-Leninist regimes; the David Copperfield of Communism; the Criss Angel of autocracy,” he said “But the magic is fading.”McMaster said the US and western leaders were guilty of decades of “wishful thinking and self-delusion” in its efforts to integrate China into the international system. But he expressed optimism that the panel’s work could help lay the groundwork in Washington to “rebuild America’s and the free world’s competitive advantage”.Pentagon releases selfie of US pilot flying above Chinese spy balloonRead moreThe panel met in the same chandeliered room where the House select committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol held its hearings. In the audience were Hong Kong pro-democracy activists as well as anti-war protesters who interrupted the proceedings, with one yelling “this committee is about saber-rattling, it’s not about peace” as he was removed from the hearing room.Several members remarked on the interference, noting that the right to protest was a hallmark of American democracy and a freedom not afforded to those in China.Highlighting human rights concerns will be a major focus of the panel. On Tuesday, the panel heard compelling testimony from Tong Yi, a human rights activist who was the former secretary to one of China’s leading dissidents, Wei Jingsheng. Yi told how she was arrested and detained by the CCP in the 1990s. After spending nine months in a detention center she was charged with “disturbing social order” and sentenced to two-and-a-half years in a labor camp.“In the US, we need to face the fact that we have helped feed the baby dragon of the CCP until it has grown into what it now is,” she said.The committee also heard from Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing, who argued that the US dependency on China has had a crushing impact on American workers and wages. “While conflict with China isn’t inevitable, fierce economic competition is,” he said.On Capitol Hill, a bipartisan consensus has emerged around measures banning TikTok, the Chinese-owned social media app, bills barring Chinese citizens and companies from purchasing land near sensitive military sites, and efforts to limit US exports and technology trade to China. But there are also sharp divisions.Republicans continue to assail Biden over his response to the suspected Chinese surveillance balloon, which was downed by the US military after it sailed across North America.​Asked during the hearing what message China hoped to send with the balloon, McMaster said he believed it was likely a “metaphor for the massive effort at espionage” Beijing is carrying out around the world. China has denied the airship was used for spying, ​​claiming that it was a civilian aircraft blown off course​.Meanwhile, revelations that the US energy department concluded with “low confidence” that the Covid-19 pandemic was the result of a lab leak in China has inflamed anew a partisan debate over the virus’s origins. Officials in Washington have said that US agencies are not in agreement over the virus’s origins.Critics of the panel have raised concerns that heated rhetoric casting China as the US’s enemy would amplify anti-Asian sentiment amid a surge in hate incidents. Addressing those fears directly, Krishnamoorthi would avoid “anti-Chinese or Asian stereotyping at all costs”.“We must recognize that the CCP wants us to be fractious, partisan and prejudiced – in fact, the CCP hopes for it,” he said.Earlier on Tuesday, the House foreign affairs committee held a hearing focused on countering the rising national security threats posed by China. Testifying before the panel, Daniel Kritenbrink, US assistant secretary of state for east Asian and Pacific affairs, said China represented “our most consequential geopolitical challenge”.Joan E Greve contributed to this reportTopicsUS foreign policyChinaUS politicsAsia PacificCoronavirusnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Capitol Hill finds rare bipartisan cause in China – but it could pose problems

      by

      Capitol Hill finds rare bipartisan cause in China – but it could pose problemsExperts fear this moment of agreement in Washington could escalate tensions with Beijing and increase the risk of conflictIn the weeks since the US military shot down a suspected Chinese surveillance balloon, Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill have spoken passionately about the need to more effectively compete with Beijing. A resolution condemning China for the balloon incident passed the House in an unanimous vote of 419 to 0.Joe Biden has similarly expressed hope that efforts to strengthen America’s global competitiveness in response to a rising China can unite Democrats and Republicans in an era defined by bitter partisanship.“Today, we’re in the strongest position in decades to compete with China or anyone else in the world,” Biden said in his State of the Union address earlier this month. “Let’s be clear: winning the competition with China should unite all of us.”The new House select committee on China will hold its first primetime public hearing on Tuesday, and the panel’s supporters are optimistic its work will provide a rare opportunity for bipartisan cooperation in the divided Congress.But while there’s widespread agreement among policymakers and lawmakers in Washington over the need to better compete with China, there is no prevailing consensus on how to do so. Some experts also fear this kumbaya moment in Washington could escalate tensions with Beijing and increase the risk of conflict.“There is a bipartisan consensus on the fact that China poses a broad challenge to the United States across multiple domains,” said Patricia Kim, an expert on US-China relations at the Washington-based Brookings Institution. “I don’t believe we have a clear consensus on the precise mix of policies that are necessary to address this challenge.”A committee walks the ‘fine line’Competitor or adversary? West struggles to define relationship with BeijingRead moreOne of Republican Kevin McCarthy’s first major victories after securing the House speakership (on the 15th ballot) was to create a new select committee examining competition between the US and China. The motion to form the committee was overwhelmingly approved in a 365 to 65 vote, with 146 Democrats joining all Republicans.“I’ve heard my colleagues on both sides say that the threat posed by Communist China is serious. I fully agree. This is an issue that transcends our political parties,” McCarthy said.The panel, officially named the House select committee on strategic competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist party, is broadly charged with examining a host of economic, security and human rights issues involving China.The panel will be led by congressman Mike Gallagher, a Republican of Wisconsin and prominent “China hawk”, who emphasized that it would work in a bipartisan fashion to expose the threats the CCP poses to US national security and economic interests. Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi, a Democrat of Illinois, will serve as the committee’s ranking member. The leaders have stressed that the target of their scrutiny is China’s ruling party, not its people, and hope their work yields policy and legislative recommendations that win support from lawmakers of both parties.Of course, partisan divisions will arise. Republicans increasingly depict China as an outright “adversary” intent on reshaping the international order while the the Biden administration and many Democrats ​have treaded more delicately, describing it as “our most consequential strategic competitor”.Republicans have repeatedly attacked Biden over his approach to Beijing, though members of both parties criticized the president’s handling of the balloon incident with some lawmakers accusing the White House of concealing information. And there have also been partisan disagreements about how the US should engage China over shared challenges such as the climate crisis.At the same time, some of the rhetoric from Gallagher and his Republican colleagues has alarmed Democratic members of the committee. Congressman Andy Kim, a Democrat of New Jersey, voiced concern after McCarthy and Gallagher co-signed a Fox News op-ed outlining a strategy to “win the new cold war” against China.“If Chair Gallagher keeps talking about this as a ‘new cold war’, that is not helpful,” Kim told NBC News. “There’s a fine line between deterrence and provocation, and you are crossing over that in a way that is only going to inflame and create greater escalatory challenges.”And there is fear that language casting China as America’s enemy will encourage anti-Asian sentiment amid a surge in hate incidents.“I have a lot of respect for Mike Gallagher in terms of how he’ll conduct the committee in a serious way, but it’s important to see how the conversations unfold,” committee member Ro Khanna, a Democrat of California, told the Guardian.“For those of us who are concerned about not devolving into a cold war or anti-Asian American sentiment, we have to be particularly vocal.”A transition is under wayOver the last decade, as the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, consolidated power at home, hope in Washington of improving US-China relations dimmed. Under Xi’s rule, the US has accused China of committing genocide against the Uyghurs and other Turkic and Islamic minority people in the country’s Xinjiang province.Xi has meanwhile overseen an expansive military buildup. This month, the Pentagon informed Congress that China now had more missile silos than the US, though the US has a much larger nuclear force than China.Amid rising fears of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, a self-governed island that Beijing claims as its own, the US military has expanded its presence in Asia. Just this month, the US gained expanded access to four military bases in the Philippines.Meanwhile, US lawmakers, including former House speaker Nancy Pelosi, have enraged Beijing with visits to Taiwan in a show of support for the island’s democracy. Gallagher and Khanna made official trips to the capital city of Taipei this month for meetings with top political, national security and business leaders.The discovery of the suspected Chinese spy balloon sparked a diplomatic crisis that resulted in the cancellation of a long-planned trip to Beijing by the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken. Just weeks prior, a top US military commander warned officers in a memo that his “gut” told him the US and China would be at war by 2025.Now US officials say China is considering supplying lethal weapons to Russia for its war in Ukraine. China denies the claim, though that didn’t stop US national security adviser Jake Sullivan from telling CNN on Sunday that it would be “a bad mistake” for Chinese officials to do that. “China should want no part of it,” Sullivan said.In a sign of lawmakers’ hardening views on China, measures to confront Beijing on multiple fronts now routinely attract bipartisan support.Last year, Congress overwhelmingly approved sweeping legislation aimed at growing the nation’s domestic manufacturing and technology sectors to try to boost US competitiveness with China. Shortly thereafter, Biden introduced export restrictions on semiconductors in an effort to strangle China’s microchip sector.Congress also gave the Biden administration new authority to send Taiwan weapons​, though lawmakers say a spending dispute is slowing efforts to help the self-governing island fortify its defenses against China.Meanwhile, there is growing support for legislation that would ban the Chinese-owned video sharing platform TikTok that lawmakers say poses a security risk, as well as for efforts to hold China accountable over the country’s alleged abuses of Muslim minorities in its Xinjiang province.The US is turning from a strategy of integration with China to one of confrontation and competition, said Scott Kennedy, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. ​The sharp erosion in relations between the world’s largest economies​​, underscored by calls for an economic “decoupling”, has left multinational ​companies ​scrambling to adapt to the new geopolitical reality.“It’s a very fraught environment for companies to operate in,” Kennedy said. “They’ve become careful to a fault.”Spy balloon, UFO or Dragon Ball? Japan baffled by iron ball washed up on beachRead moreYet despite the rising tensions, he noted that the countries’ economies remain highly interdependent. Last year, trade between the US and China reached a record high of nearly $700bn.Bipartisanship without consensusAs US policymakers intensify their efforts to reorient the relationship between China and the US, critical questions remain about what that strategy will look like in practice.There is broad agreement that the US must decrease its reliance on Chinese-made goods and technologies, said Kim, the Brookings expert, but “there certainly isn’t a consensus on how much de-risking and decoupling is necessary to strike the right balance between national security concerns and upholding American values and principles that have long held dear the free flow of information, people, trade and open markets”.The House panel begins its work at a time of rising ​public ​hostility toward China. ​According to a survey by the Pew Research Center​, ​82% of Americans ​hold an unfavorable view of the country, ​more than twice the figure in 2012, when Xi came to power. In general, Republicans, more so than Democrats, tend to harbor more negative views of China and are more likely to support the US taking a more hardline approach to the country, it found.The committee’s hearings, meanwhile, will play out against the backdrop of a presidential campaign cycle, ​with Republicans already aiming to cast Biden as “weak” on China.Amid this heated political environment, some experts have emphasized the importance of avoiding a drumbeat to war with China. Matt Duss, a former foreign policy adviser to progressive Senator Bernie Sanders, complimented Biden’s overall handling of the balloon incident, but he admonished the administration’s “overreaction” in canceling Blinken’s trip.“The American people are going to take cues from their leaders on these issues,” said Duss, who is now a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “That makes it even more important for the administration and for others not to signal hysteria.”The US will soon mark 20 years since the invasion of Iraq, Duss noted; that vastly consequential and widely criticised decision was supported by members of both parties at the time.“Bipartisanship is good,” Duss said. “But bipartisanship behind bad policy is very bad.”TopicsUS CongressUS politicsEspionageChinaJoe BidenUS foreign policyfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      First lady signals Joe Biden will seek second presidential term – as it happened

      by

      First lady Jill Biden has given one of the clearest indications yet that Joe Biden will run for a second term, telling The Associated Press in an exclusive interview today that there’s “pretty much” nothing left to do but figure out the time and place for the announcement.Although Biden has long said that it’s his intention to seek reelection, he has yet to make it official, and he’s struggled to dispel questions about whether he’s too old to continue serving as president. Biden would be 86 at the end of a second term.“He says he’s not done,” the first lady said in Nairobi, the second and final stop of her five-day trip to Africa. “He’s not finished what he’s started. And that’s what’s important.”She added: “How many times does he have to say it for you to believe it?”Biden aides have said an announcement is likely to come in April, after the first fundraising quarter ends, which is around the time that Barack Obama officially launched his reelection campaign.First lady Jill Biden made clear she thinks her husband, Joe Biden, will stand for a second term – though we are still waiting for an announcement from the man himself. Otherwise, top American officials spent most of the day restating their support for Ukraine on the one-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion. Speaking before the UN security council, secretary of state Antony Blinken warned that anything less than Russia’s full withdrawal from the territory it seized will weaken the global body’s charter, while Biden highlighted the bipartisan nature of Washington’s support for Kyiv. Many Republicans do indeed support Ukraine’s cause – but others in the party argue it is a distraction from more pressing issues. This divide could prove crucial to the course of the war in the months to come.Here’s what else happened today:
      Blinken warned China against getting involved in the conflict by providing Russia with weapons.
      Kamala Harris condemned conservative efforts to block access to medication abortion nationwide.
      The American public is divided over how long to support Kyiv, with more Republicans preferring limits on US aid, and more Democrats in favor of helping them fight against Russia until the job is done.
      The Treasury announced new sanctions against Russian individuals and companies involved in the war effort, but such measures haven’t proven as successful as Washington has hoped.
      It turns out that Democrats in Congress have access to the 40,000 hours of footage Republican House speaker Kevin McCarthy gave Tucker Carlson earlier this week.
      The White House has released a photo from earlier today, when Joe Biden marked the one-year anniversary of the invasion of Ukraine with its president Volodymyr Zelenskiy and the leaders of the G7, as America’s top allies are known.The group includes Canada, Germany, the European Union, Japan, Britain, France and Italy:Today, President Biden met with G7 Leaders and President Zelenskyy to continue coordinating our efforts to support Ukraine and hold Russia accountable for its war. pic.twitter.com/JDs4Z3geY4— The White House (@WhiteHouse) February 24, 2023
      As Biden inches closer to announcing what is widely expected (most importantly, by his wife) to be his re-election campaign, a poll released earlier this week brought good news for his standing among Democrats.The NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll shows an even half of Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents believe the party has a better chance with Biden as the nominee, against 45% who think they’d be better off backing someone else. That’s an improvement for the president from November of last year, when it was roughly flipped: then, 54% wanted someone else, while a mere 38% backed Biden.The survey also had bad news for Donald Trump in his quest to be renominated for the presidency by the GOP. Among Republicans and independents who lean towards the party, 54% believe the GOP is best off with someone other than Trump as the nominee, while 42% thought the ex-president remained the best man for the job.Joe Biden will meet with congressional Democrats next week, Punchbowl News reports.His allies hold the majority in the Senate but lost control of the House following last November’s midterm elections, though only by a handful of seats. Punchbowl reports he will first meet with House Democrats during their annual retreat in Baltimore:Biden will speak to House Dems on Wednesday in Baltimore, @PeteAguilar announces https://t.co/qKpRM94FZe— John Bresnahan (@bresreports) February 24, 2023
      Then with senators:Schumer’s office says Biden will speak at a special Senate Dem caucus lunch next Thursday— Andrew Desiderio (@AndrewDesiderio) February 24, 2023
      Earlier this week, Democrats erupted in fury when they found out that Republican House speaker Kevin McCarthy handed over to Tucker Carlson 40,000 hours of video footage surveillance and other cameras in the Capitol picked up on January 6.The concern was not only that it could reveal details of the building’s security, but also that Carlson, a conservative firebrand who has repeatedly downplayed the severity of the insurrection before his audience of millions, would use the footage to distort what happened that day.As it turns out, Democratic leaders in Congress have access to that footage as well. Washington Post opinion columnist Greg Sargent confirmed as much from the Capitol police. In his column today, he argues that Democrats should fight fire with fire, and release the footage to news organizations in an attempt to counter whatever Carlson has planned for what he’s been given.Let’s take a quick dip into Trumpworld, where the Guardian’s Hugo Lowell has an exclusive on the ongoing mess that is Donald Trump’s possession of classified materials:Donald Trump’s lawyers found a box of White House schedules, including some that were marked classified, at his Mar-a-Lago resort in December because a junior aide to the former president had transported it from another office in Florida after the FBI completed its search of the property.The former president does not appear to have played a direct role in the mishandling of the box, though he remains under investigation for the possible improper retention of national security documents and obstruction of justice. This previously unreported account of the retrieval was revealed by two sources familiar with the matter.Known internally as ROTUS, short for Receptionist of the United States, the junior aide initially kept the box at a converted guest bungalow at Mar-a-Lago called the “tennis cottage” after Trump left office, and she soon took it with her to a government-leased office in the Palm Beach area.The box remained at the government-leased office from where the junior aide worked through most of 2022, explaining why neither Trump’s lawyer who searched Mar-a-Lago in June for any classified-marked papers nor the FBI agents who searched the property in August found the documents.Around the time that Trump returned to Mar-a-Lago from his Bedminster golf club in New Jersey at the end of the summer, the junior aide was told that she was being relocated to a desk in the anteroom of Trump’s own office at Mar-a-Lago that was previously assigned to top aide Molly Michael.The junior aide retrieved her work belongings – including the box – from the government-leased office and took them to her new Mar-a-Lago workspace around September. At that time, the justice department’s criminal investigation into Trump’s retention of national security documents was intensifying.Several weeks after the junior aide moved into her new workspace, federal prosecutors told Trump’s lawyers in October that they suspected the former president was still in possession of additional documents with classified markings despite the FBI’s search of Mar-a-Lago on 8 August.Vice president Kamala Harris condemned the “partisan and political attacks” on reproductive rights that have put the fate of medication abortion in the hands of a single, conservative judge in Texas.Convening a White House meeting with reproductive rights advocates and providers on Friday, Harris addressed the pending lawsuit, brought by abortion opponents, that threatens the access to the abortion drug mifepristone.“This is not just an attack on women’s fundamental freedoms. It is an attack on the very foundation of our public health system,” Harris said.Medication abortion now accounts for the majority of abortions in the US. It is also used as a miscarriage treatment. Abortion rights advocates have warned that a decision to reverse a decades-old approval of the drug by the Federal Drug Administration would have “devastating” consequences for women’s reproductive health.Harris said the legal challenge, as well as legislative efforts in Republican-led states that would restrict access to medication abortion, amounted to an attempt by political activists to undermine the FDA’s authority, accusing them of trying to “question the legitimacy of a group of scientists and doctors who have studied the significance of this drug.”The vice president said supporters of the lawsuit should “look in their own medicine cabinets” and question whether they would be willing to do away with any FDA-approved medication that they use to alleviate pain and improve their quality of life. “Mifepristone is no exception to that process,” Harris said.The FDA approved mifepristone, in combination with a second drug, in 2000, deeming it a safe and effective way to terminate a pregnancy up to 10-weeks.During the pandemic, the FDA expanded access to the pills by allowing patients to obtain them by mail through telehealth rather than requiring in-person hospital or clinic visits. The agency further broadened the availability of the medication when it announced in January it would allow certified retail pharmacies to dispense mifepristone, known under the brand name Mifeprex.US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk has not indicated when he will rule, but advocates are preparing for a possible decision as soon as today.Since the supreme court decision to end the Constitutional right to abortion, Harris has led the administration’s public response.During Friday’s roundtable, she said the participants would discuss ways to ensure Americans are aware of the lawsuit and its possible ramifications as well as what policymakers and providers could to ensure patients “have access to the medication that they need.”Last weekend, Joe Biden clandestinely traveled to Ukraine via a mode of travel he personally prefers, but which is unusual for a modern American president: a passenger train. The Guardian’s Peter Beaumont spoke to the man who made it happen:Alexander Kamyshin, the head of Ukraine’s railway company Ukrzaliznytsia, doesn’t get much sleep at the best of times. On Sunday night, as Joe Biden was being ferried into Ukraine in a 10-hour night journey from Poland – in a carriage now known as “Rail Force One”, he got almost none.Along with others involved in the secret operation to bring the US president to his meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskiy, Kamyshin watched the progress of the train in a command centre.A handsome bearded man sporting a hipster-ish braid of hair that falls over the shaved sides of his head, Kamyshin is deliberately vague about many of the details.But in the past year, his dedicated team has brought in world leaders, VIPs and diplomatic missions on an almost daily basis as part of a programme called “Iron Diplomacy”.Security is everything, he told the Guardian in an interview at Kyiv’s main railway station. “We have not had one leak. There have been no photographs from train attendants. We respect the confidence of the delegations.“It’s not a challenge. It’s our job that we do every day. Imagine,” he says with smile, “the president of the United States coming to a war-torn country by train.‘Rail Force One’: how Ukraine railways got Joe Biden safely to KyivRead moreHere’s a video that’s worth watching of Jill Biden describing her husband’s willingness to continue serving as president for a second term:— Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) February 24, 2023
      First lady Jill Biden has long been described as a key figure in US president Joe Biden’s orbit as he plans his future – after today revealing to the Associated Press that he’s close to confirming he’ll seek a second term in the White House..css-cumn2r{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Because I’m his wife,” she laughed, AP writes.But she brushed off the question about whether she has the deciding vote on whether the president runs for reelection..css-cumn2r{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Of course he’ll listen to me, because we’re a married couple,” she said. But, she added later, “he makes up his own mind, believe me.”Biden did the interview in Kenya, during the second leg of her trip to Africa this week. Earlier she was in Namibia.First lady Jill Biden has given one of the clearest indications yet that Joe Biden will run for a second term, telling The Associated Press in an exclusive interview today that there’s “pretty much” nothing left to do but figure out the time and place for the announcement.Although Biden has long said that it’s his intention to seek reelection, he has yet to make it official, and he’s struggled to dispel questions about whether he’s too old to continue serving as president. Biden would be 86 at the end of a second term.“He says he’s not done,” the first lady said in Nairobi, the second and final stop of her five-day trip to Africa. “He’s not finished what he’s started. And that’s what’s important.”She added: “How many times does he have to say it for you to believe it?”Biden aides have said an announcement is likely to come in April, after the first fundraising quarter ends, which is around the time that Barack Obama officially launched his reelection campaign.Top US officials have restated their support for Ukraine on the one-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion. Speaking before the UN security council, secretary of state Antony Blinken warned that anything less than Russia’s full withdrawal from territory it seized will weaken the global body’s charter, while Joe Biden highlighted the bipartisan nature of Washington’s support for Kyiv. And indeed, many Republicans support Ukraine’s cause – but others in the party argue it is a distraction from more pressing issues. This divide could prove crucial to the outcome of the war in the months to come.Here’s what else has happened today so far:
      Blinken warned China against getting involved in the conflict by providing Russia with weapons.
      The American public is divided over how long to support Kyiv, with more Republicans preferring limits on US aid, and more Democrats in favor of helping them fight against Russia until the job is done.
      The Treasury announced new sanctions against Russian individuals and companies involved in the war effort, but such measures haven’t proven as successful as Washington has hoped.
      But the bipartisan comity over Ukraine has its limits. There’s been a definite increase over the past year in the number of lawmakers who have questioned Washington’s support to Ukraine, particularly among Republicans.Their argument is that Joe Biden cares more about Ukraine than various issues at home, especially those they’ve turned into cudgels against the administration such as border security, or the recent derailment of a train carrying toxic chemicals in East Palestine, Ohio.This tweet from GOP senator Josh Hawley captures the dynamic well:The Republican Party can be the party of Ukraine and globalists or the party of East Palestine and working Americans. Not both— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) February 24, 2023
      But it’s in the House where some of Ukraine’s biggest congressional foes can be found. “We can’t care more about Ukraine than we do our own country. President Biden has failed to lead on the train derailment, the border, inflation, crime, and so much more,” House Republican Jake LaTurner said in a statement released today.“The White House continues to prioritize Ukraine while leaving American communities behind. It’s unacceptable.”And while the Senate’s top Republican Mitch McConnell issued a statement of strong support for Ukraine today, his counterpart in the House, speaker Kevin McCarthy, has made no public statement that this blog is aware of.Back in Washington, Mitt Romney was one of several Republican lawmakers who tweeted strong statements of support for Ukraine on the war’s one-year anniversary – which caught the eye of Democratic president Joe Biden.Biden has been eager to play up the bipartisan nature of US support for Ukraine. Here’s what Romney, who represents Utah in the Senate and was the GOP’s nominee for president in 2012, had to say:It is in America’s interest to support Ukraine. If Russia can invade, subjugate, and pillage Ukraine with impunity, it will do the same again to others, and a world at war diminishes the security of Americans.— Mitt Romney (@MittRomney) February 23, 2023
      And here is Biden’s response:I think Senator Romney would be the first to tell you that we don’t always agree.But he knows what I know: that standing with Ukraine — and standing up for freedom — advances our national security. https://t.co/X67SkDIL6W— President Biden (@POTUS) February 24, 2023 More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Why are Republicans using Biden’s Kyiv trip against him? Politics Weekly America – podcast

      by

      More ways to listen

      Apple Podcasts

      Google Podcasts

      Spotify

      RSS Feed

      Download

      Share on Facebook

      Share on Twitter

      Share via Email

      This week marks one year since Russian troops invaded Ukraine, and for the first time since the war began, Joe Biden landed in Kyiv to meet with Ukrainian president, Volodymr Zelenskiy, in what some are calling one of the most important trips by a US president since the end of the cold war.
      This week, Joan E Greve speaks to Susan Glasser of the New Yorker about the significance of Biden’s trip to Europe and why Republicans at home are criticising him for it

      How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know

      Archive: CBS, Fox, CNN, ITV Watch the new Guardian documentary The year that never ended, about an unlikely and enduring friendship in Lukashivka Listen to Today in Focus and Politics Weekly UK’s coverage of the anniversary of Russia invading Ukraine Send your questions and feedback to podcasts@theguardian.com. Help support the Guardian by going to theguardian.com/supportpodcasts. More