US foreign policy

Subterms

    More stories

    • 225 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on supplying cluster bombs: not just a ‘difficult’ decision, but the wrong one | Editorial

      by

      Twenty-thousand Laotians, almost half of them children, have been killed or injured by unexploded ordnance since the Vietnam war ended. It is half a century since the US stopped bombing Laos, having dropped more than 2m tons of cluster munitions; decades on, people then unborn are still paying the price. On one estimate, it will take another 100 years to fully clear the country.This is the true cost of cluster munitions. They are not only indiscriminate in showering dozens or hundreds of bomblets over a large area, but also have a lethal legacy because so many fail to explode, only to later be trodden on or picked up – often by curious children. For these reasons, more than 120 countries have signed the convention prohibiting their use, production, transfer and stockpiling.The US, Russia and Ukraine, however, have never been signatories. Russia has used them extensively in Ukraine, including in populated areas where no military personnel or infrastructure were evident. Kyiv has also employed them, more sparingly, but reportedly at the cost of civilian lives in Izium (though it denies they were used there). Now the US will supply more as part of a $800m (£625m) military aid package, at Kyiv’s request. Thankfully, the UK, which has signed the convention but still holds some of the munitions, has ruled out following suit. Joe Biden has said he made a “difficult decision”. No doubt. But the president has made the wrong one.Ukraine’s counteroffensive has failed to gain the traction it needs, and supplies of artillery shells are running low. The argument is that, however significant the risks and long-term costs of using cluster bombs, civilians will pay a far higher price where Russian forces prevail. Cluster munitions are effective in combating dug-in ground troops, like the Russian forces along the vast frontline. But the same, of course, could be said for chemical weapons, and the US rightly finished destroying its remaining stockpile of those on Friday. Efficacy is why bans on such arms are needed in the first place. Russia’s use of them is not a reason to further drag down international norms.Ukraine’s defence minister, Oleksii Reznikov, says it has given written guarantees that it will not use the US-supplied weapons in Russia, nor in urban areas where civilians might be killed or wounded. It will also record their use, to expedite demining when the conflict is over. The US claims its munitions are far safer than those used by Moscow, with dud rates “not higher than 2.5%” versus Russian devices that reportedly fail 30-40% of the time. Experts say test results don’t reflect real world conditions and that, in any case, the sheer number of submunitions still means a deadly aftermath.Invasion has forced Ukraine to make tough decisions about how to defend itself. The US was nonetheless wrong to meet its request. The decisions of the world’s most powerful country and military are key to determining global norms. Before Donald Trump took office, it had made some recent steps towards controlling cluster munitions. But it should never have deployed them, including in Afghanistan and Iraq in the early 2000s. It should not have rejected the convention banning them. And it should not be supplying them to Ukraine. Their use will have terrible long-term consequences for civilians there – and perhaps, through the example it sets, for civilians elsewhere too. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Cluster bombs to Ukraine will damage US moral leadership, Democrat says

      by

      The decision to provide cluster munitions to Ukraine risks costing the US its “moral leadership” in world affairs, the influential California Democratic congresswoman Barbara Lee said.“We know what takes place in terms of cluster bombs being very dangerous to civilians,” Lee said. “They don’t always immediately explode. Children can step on them. That’s a line we should not cross.”In 2001, Lee was the only member of Congress to vote against the war in Afghanistan. She is running to replace the retiring Dianne Feinstein in the Senate next year.Speaking to CNN’s State of the Union, she added: “I think [Joe Biden] has been doing a good job managing … [Russian president Vladimir] Putin’s aggressive war against Ukraine, but I think that this should not happen. [Biden] had to ask for a waiver under the Foreign Assistance Act just to do it because we have been preventing the use of cluster bombs since I believe 2010.”Biden also spoke to CNN, an interview released as he traveled to the UK, then to the Nato summit in Lithuania.His host, Fareed Zakaria, said: “These are weapons that a hundred nations ban, including some of our closest Nato allies. When there was news that the Russians might be using it, admittedly against civilians, your then press secretary said this might … constitute war crimes. What made you change your mind?”Biden said: “Two things … and it was a very difficult decision on my part. And I discussed this with our allies, discussed this with our friends up on [Capitol] Hill. And we’re in a situation where Ukraine continues to be brutally attacked across the board by … these cluster munitions that have dud rates that are … very high, that are a danger to civilians, number one.”“Dud rates” refers to cluster munition “bomblets” that do not explode when fired or dropped but can do so later.Biden continued: “Number two, the Ukrainians are running out of ammunition … And so what I finally did, [I] took the recommendation of the defense department to … provide them with something that has a very low dud rate. … I think it’s one in 50, which is the least likely to be blowing [up] and it’s not used in civilian areas. They’re trying to … stop those tanks from rolling.”Biden said: “It took me a while to be convinced to do it. But the main thing is, they either have the weapons to stop the Russians now from … stopping the Ukrainian offensive … or they don’t. And I think they needed them.”Lee was asked if the US was at risk in “engaging in war crimes”.“What I think is that we would risk losing our moral leadership,” she said. “Because when you look at the fact that over 120 countries have signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions, saying they should never be used, they should never be used.“And in fact, many of us have urged the administration to sign on to this convention. And so I’m hoping that the administration would reconsider this because these are very dangerous bombs … and this is a line that I don’t believe we should cross.”Another influential Democrat, Tim Kaine, from Virginia and a member of the Senate armed services committee, also questioned Biden’s decision.“It could give a green light to other nations to do something different as well,” Kaine told Fox News Sunday, adding that he “appreciates the Biden administration has grappled with the risks”.A House Republican, Michael McCaul of Texas, chair of the foreign affairs committee, said he did not “see anything wrong” with supplying cluster bombs.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSpeaking to CNN, McCaul said: “Russia is dropping, with impunity, cluster bombs in Ukraine … all the Ukrainians and [President Volodymyr] Zelenskiy are asking for is to give them the same weapons the Russians have to use in their own country, against Russians who are in their own country … they do not want these to be used in Russia.”McCaul criticized Biden, saying: “As you look at the counter-offensive, it’s been slowed tremendously because this administration has been so slow to get the weapons.”John Kirby, the national security council spokesperson, told ABC’s This Week: “We are very mindful of the concerns about … unexploded ordnance being picked up by civilians or children and being hurt … and we’re going to focus on Ukraine with de-mining efforts. In fact, we’re doing it right now and we will when war conditions permit.”Ukraine’s push for membership of Nato is another divisive issue.“I don’t think it’s ready for membership in Nato,” Biden said. “I don’t think there is unanimity in Nato about whether or not to bring Ukraine into the family now, in the middle of a war … we’re determined to [defend] every inch of territory that is Nato territory. It’s a commitment we’ve all made, no matter what.“If the war is going on, then we’re all … at war with Russia, if that were the case. So, I think we have to lay out a rational path for … Ukraine to be able to qualify to get into Nato.”Kirby said Ukraine needed to make reforms “necessary for any Nato ally to become a member … political reforms, economic reforms, good governance. Those kinds of things.”Zelenskiy also spoke to ABC. If there was no unity on an invitation for Ukraine to join Nato, he said, “Ukraine should get clear security guarantees while it is not in Nato and that is a very important point.”Adding that Ukraine “would like to have all the decisions to be made during this summit”, he said: “It’s obvious that I’ll be there and I’ll be doing whatever I can in order to, so to speak, expedite that solution. … I don’t want to go to Vilnius for fun if the decision has been made beforehand.” More

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      US says it killed Islamic State leader Usamah al-Muhajir in Syria

      by

      The US military said on Sunday it conducted a strike that killed Usamah al-Muhajir, an Islamic State leader in eastern Syria.“The strike on Friday was conducted by the same MQ-9s that had, earlier in the day, been harassed by Russian aircraft in an encounter that had lasted almost two hours,” a statement from US Central Command said.It was not immediately clear how the US military confirmed that the person killed was Muhajir. Central Command did not give any more details about him.The statement said there were no indications any civilians were killed in the strike. The military was assessing reports that a civilian may have been injured.“We have made it clear that we remain committed to the defeat of Isis throughout the region,” Gen Erik Kurilla, commander of US Central Command, said in the statement.Washington has stepped up raids and operations against suspected Islamic State operatives in Syria, killing and arresting leaders who had taken shelter in areas under Turkey-backed rebel control after the group lost its last territory in Syria in 2019.The US-led campaign which killed former IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who declared himself the “caliph of all Muslims”, has since targeted surviving leaders, many of whom are thought to have planned attacks abroad.US military commanders say the IS remains a significant threat within the region, though its capabilities have been degraded and its ability to re-establish its network weakened.At its peak in 2014, the IS controlled one-third of Iraq and Syria. Though it was beaten back in both countries, its militants continue to mount insurgent attacks.The US air force earlier released video footage it said showed an encounter between the drones and Russian fighter jets on Wednesday, which forced the MQ-9 Reapers to take evasive action.US Air Forces Central said in a statement: “These events represent a new level of unprofessional and unsafe action by Russian air forces operating in Syria.”Lt Gen Alex Grynkewich, commander of Ninth Air Force in the Middle East, said one of the Russian pilots moved their aircraft in front of a drone and engaged the SU-35’s afterburner, reducing the drone operator’s ability to safely operate the aircraft.R Adm Oleg Gurinov, head of the Russian Reconciliation Center for Syria, said the Russian and Syrian militaries had started a six-day joint training that was set to end on Monday.In comments carried by Syrian state media, Gurinov said Moscow was concerned about flights of drones by the US-led coalition over northern Syria, calling them “systematic violations of protocols” designed to avoid clashes between the two militaries. More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      No Trade Is Free review: Trump’s man plots an unusually civil course

      by

      Robert Lighthizer, a veteran trade negotiator and sometime free-trade skeptic, became Donald Trump’s most senior trade official. Unlike the former president and his director of trade and manufacturing policy, Peter Navarro, Lighthizer is not now fending off prosecution. He did not pique the interest of the January 6 committee.But Trump and Lighthizer are still members of a mutual admiration society. No Free Trade, Lighthizer’s first book, comes with Trump’s endorsement. It is “a masterpiece that describes how my administration stood up to China and fought back against the globalists and communists that have been ripping off American workers for decades”, the former president gushed on Truth Social.Lighthizer, Trump added, was “the greatest United States trade representative in American history”.On the page, Lighthizer returns the favor. “Trump was a great boss,” he writes. In return, he recalls Trump saying: “Bob Lighthizer is great; I’ve heard it for years.”In 2016 and 2020, Lighthizer donated an aggregate of $3,950 to Trump’s campaigns. Talk about a return on investment.No Free Trade is replete with intellectual gymnastics. Lighthizer repeatedly delivers hosannas to the “liberal democratic” order and criticizes Vladimir Putin – but keeps mum about January 6 and Trump’s indictments. Nor does he have anything to say about the 45th president’s relationship with the Russian dictator or his tropism toward despots in general.As is to be expected, not everyone on Trump’s team was enamored with Lighthizer. In his own book, Taking Back Trump’s America, Navarro scolded him for refusing to appear on TV in the run-up to the 2020 election. The “Greta Garbo of the West Wing”, to quote Navarro, Lighthizer possessed savvy and presence – and refused to engage when the election hung in the balance.Back in the day, as a member of the Reagan administration, Lighthizer helped negotiate “voluntary restraints” on imports of Japanese cars and steel. The experience provided valuable knowledge of the trade playbook. After his stint in the executive branch, Lighthizer returned to Bob Dole’s orbit as treasurer to the Kansas Republican’s 1996 presidential campaign. The pair had backed the North America Free Trade Agreement (Nafta), enacted in 1994, when Bill Clinton sat in the White House.Over time, however, Lighthizer became a Nafta critic. He now writes that Ross Perot got it right when he warned of a middle-class job exodus if the agreement became law, of a “great sucking sound”, indeed. Along with the Iraq war and the opioid crisis, the downside of the free trade deal with Canada and Mexico helped drive lunch-bucket voters into Trump’s arms and transform the Democrats into an upstairs-downstairs coalition.Nafta “is no longer an acronym – it’s a noun and a profanity”, Salena Zito and Brad Todd caught an interviewee saying in The Great Revolt, their 2018 book about the forces that helped empower Trump.As a lawyer in private practice, Lighthizer represented the US steel industry. As Trump’s trade representative, he negotiated the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement, aka the USMCA, to replace Nafta. He also clashed and negotiated with China.He now castigates the Biden administration for being insufficiently tough with Beijing, but observes that Trump’s tariffs against China have been maintained. Lighthizer calls Katherine Tai, his successor as US trade representative, “estimable”, lauding her efforts to protect American industry. He also has kind words for Nancy Pelosi and Richard Neal, Democrats now former House speaker and former chair of the tax and trade committee. Lighthizer was once chief of staff to the Senate finance committee. He maintains respect for Capitol Hill.He testified there recently, about the danger posed by China.“I believe that China is the most dangerous threat that we face as a nation,” he told a House select committee. “Indeed, it may be the most perilous adversary we’ve ever had.”Whatever the danger posed by China, Lighthizer has indirectly invested there himself. His 2019 and 2020 executive branch personnel public financial disclosures show ownership of between $2m and $10m in the Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund. Tencent, the Chinese technology and entertainment conglomerate, is one of the fund’s largest holdings.Irony abounds. In August 2020, Trump issued an executive order to “address the threat posed by WeChat”, seeking for it to be banned. WeChat is “a messaging, social media and electronic payment application” owned by … Tencent.Predictably, Lighthizer trashes “globalists”, the Koch-funded Cato Institute and other ideological free-traders. He takes aim at Larry Summers, a veteran of the Clinton and Obama administrations and former president of Harvard. Summers called for tariff cuts to reduce the sting of inflation. Lighthizer calls him “China’s favorite former treasury secretary”.Lighthizer neglects to examine how free trade became a Republican orthodoxy – until it wasn’t. In 1962, Milton Friedman, of the University of Chicago, wrote in Capitalism and Freedom, his best-known work, that the US should scrap tariffs.“It would be far better for us to move to free trade unilaterally, as Britain did in the 19th century when it repealed the Corn Laws,” Friedman urged. “We are a great nation, and it ill behooves us to require reciprocal benefits from China, Mexico or Europe before we reduce a tariff on products from those countries.”In August 1980, Friedman repeated that call. A decade later, George HW Bush did the heavy lifting on Nafta. More Republicans than Democrats backed that agreement.In Lighthizer’s eyes, Friedman fairs better than Summers. Lighthizer takes issue with the Nobel-winner’s take on floating exchange rates but ignores his legacy on trade. Likewise, he goes easy on Bush.Beyond all that, No Trade Is Free is an accessible and readable chronicle of US trade history and policy over the past half-century.
      No Trade Is Free: Changing Course, Taking on China, and Helping America’s Workers is published in the US by HarperCollins More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Boris Johnson claims he ‘reminded’ Trump about key role in Ukraine aid

      by

      On his recent visit to the US, Boris Johnson “reminded” Donald Trump he “actually played an important role” in supporting and arming Ukraine against its Russian invaders, the former British prime minister said, adding that British aid to Kyiv was “enabled” by Trump’s example.Johnson made the claim about the notoriously pro-Russian former president – and brushed off mention of Trump’s impeachment for blocking military aid to Ukraine – in an interview on One Decision, a podcast hosted by Sir Richard Dearlove, a former chief of the British intelligence service MI6, and the journalist Julia Macfarlane. The episode was released on Thursday.Johnson resigned as Conservative leader and prime minister in July last year, amid scandals including Partygate, over lockdown breaches in Downing Street during the Covid pandemic. Last month, found to have misled parliament, he resigned as an MP. He has since become a columnist for the Daily Mail, a move found to have breached parliamentary rules.Trump lost the 2020 presidential election to Joe Biden, a defeat he refuses to accept, advancing the lie that it was the result of electoral fraud.Having survived a second impeachment, for inciting the deadly January 6 assault on Congress, and despite facing 71 criminal charges and the prospect of more, Trump is the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination next year.The two oft-disgraced ex-leaders met at an undisclosed US location in May. Johnson’s attempt to persuade Trump to back Ukraine was widely reported then.Speaking to One Decision, Johnson said: “One of my reasons for going to the United States [was] because clearly, American politics is getting into that pre-election period of ferment and I’m very concerned just to get over the message that whatever you people may be hearing, what other people may be thinking, the war in Ukraine is immensely important, and Ukrainian victory is essential, and it’s the only way out.”Republican presidential hopefuls including Trump’s nearest challenger, Ron DeSantis, have stoked controversy by appearing to question US support for Ukraine.During his own time in power, Trump was widely held to be too close to the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Since leaving the White House, Trump has refused to commit to continuing US support for Kyiv in its efforts to expel Russian invaders, should he return to office.At a CNN town hall in May, Trump said: “Russians and Ukrainians, I want them to stop dying. And I’ll have that done in 24 hours.”On One Decision, Johnson said: “I just think it’s very important if you have a chance to talk to people like Donald Trump, just to get … over [that] I know in my heart that Ukrainians are going to win. I know they deserve to win.“And I know that America has played a crucial role in making sure that is the right outcome. I think it’s important to remind somebody like Donald Trump, you know, he actually played an important role.”Asked by Dearlove if Trump was a threat to Ukrainian chances of winning the war, Johnson said: “Don’t forget who sent the first Javelins [missiles] out. It was Donald Trump.”The US approved the sale of Javelin anti-tank missiles to Kyiv in 2018. It was later revealed that Trump blocked further military aid as part of a scheme to seek dirt on his enemies, including Biden, that resulted in his first impeachment.Macfarlane said: “It was also Donald Trump who withheld military aid to Ukraine.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionJohnson said Trump’s military aid “actually enabl[ed] us in the UK in a way” to send arms to Kyiv.His recent meeting with Trump, Johnson said, produced “a very free-flowing energetic conversation, as you’d expect. And what I find, actually, with the Republican party in in the United States, is that, of course, they’re anxious about the expense, and that’s the role of Congress. [But] they strongly support the Ukrainians.”Saying his hosts should question Trump themselves, Johnson added: “My view is that whatever happens in the race for the White House I think America will be steadfast. And I think that the big geopolitical reasons for continued American support for Ukraine will be overwhelming for whoever’s there.”Asked about DeSantis’s controversial characterisation of the war in Ukraine as a “territorial dispute”, a statement the Florida governor was forced to swiftly walk back, Johnson said there was an “isolationist” element in Republican ranks but it was “ever thus”.As prime minister and after leaving office, Johnson has enjoyed warm welcomes in Ukraine. On the One Decision podcast, he was also asked about his claim that Putin threatened an attack on the UK.Putin was “creepily playful”, Johnson said, adding that the Russian president was really trying to “reframe what he’s done, which was a barbaric invasion of an innocent neighbor, as a confrontation between a nuclear-armed Nato and Russia”.Calling Biden’s stewardship of aid to Kyiv “outstanding” and “amazing”, the former prime minister also said allies of Ukraine “all need to speed up” nonetheless. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US set to rejoin Unesco after leaving during Trump presidency

      by

      The US is set to rejoin Unesco this month after a four-year absence from the global cultural and educational body that the country abandoned during the Donald Trump presidency over what his administration called “anti-Israeli bias”.The United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s reunion with the US came after a two-day special session held at the body’s headquarters in Paris.Of Unesco’s 193 member states, 142 participated in Friday’s vote. Ten states voted against the US rejoining, including Russia, Belarus, Iran, North Korea and Nicaragua. China, which had become the organisation’s biggest financial backer in the absence of the US, also voted against readmittance.US efforts to rejoin Unesco have been building since last year when the Joe Biden White House said within a $1.7tn spending bill that the administration would seek to rejoin the organisation in order to “counter Chinese influence”.“I am encouraged and grateful that Unesco members have accepted the US proposal that will allow us to continue steps toward rejoining the organisation,” the American secretary of state Antony Blinken said in a statement.The US ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, described the decision as “very good news”.“If we are not engaged in international institutions, then we leave a void and lose an opportunity to advance American values and interests on the global stage,” she added.Meanwhile, the UN’s director for the International Crisis Group, Richard Gowan, told CBS News on Tuesday: “The Biden administration has always made it clear that it is suspicious of China’s rising influence in the UN.“Biden’s team believes that Trump ceded a lot of ground to China with its anti-UN attitude. The decision to rejoin Unesco is just the latest example of the US deciding it can do more to counter China by actively engaging in UN institutions than sitting on the sidelines.”As a condition of readmission, the US will repay around $619m in unpaid dues, meet 22% of Unesco’s annual budget, and make contributions to programs supporting education access initiatives in Africa, Holocaust remembrance and journalists’ safety.Beyond stepping up actions for Africa, Unesco said it would be able to increase its efforts toward gender equality, a strategic priority.“With this return, Unesco will be in an even stronger position to carry out its mandate,” said Audrey Azoulay, Unesco’s director general.“Unesco’s mandate – education, science, culture, freedom of information – is absolutely central to meeting the challenges of the 21st century. It is this centrality, as well as the easing of political tensions within the organisation and the initiatives launched in recent years, that have led the United States to initiate this return.”Last month, the US acknowledged in a letter to Unesco that it noted the organisation’s “efforts to implement key management and administrative reforms, as well as its focus on decreasing politicized debate, especially on Middle East issues”.The organisation in 2011 had voted to admit Palestine, which is not formally recognized by the US or Israel as a UN member state. The Barack Obama White House cut Unesco contributions, sending the US into owing millions in arrears to the organization.Five years later, in 2016, the Unesco World Heritage Committee adopted a decision ruling that Israeli actions related to archaeology, tourism and freedom of movement in the Old City of Jerusalem contravened cultural heritage laws and practices.US and Israeli officials complained that not including the full Jewish history in any decision about Jerusalem was equivalent to a denial of Jewish history.In 2017, a year into the Trump presidency, the US cited “mounting arrears at Unesco, the need for fundamental reform in the organisation, and continuing anti-Israel bias at Unesco” as reasons for the decision.The decision by Unesco to readmit the US, which has 24 properties inscribed on the world heritage list, is the second time it has left and rejoined since the organisation was founded in 1945.In 1983, Ronald Reagan’s administration pulled the US out over what it saw as anti-Western bias. Unesco, it complained, “has extraneously politicized virtually every subject it deals with”.“It has exhibited hostility toward a free society, especially a free market and a free press, and it has demonstrated unrestrained budgetary expansion,” the Reagan White House added.But beneath that expressed rationale was frustration that Unesco, with an increasing number of members, no longer acted in consort with US foreign policy objectives.“The countries which have the votes don’t pay the bill, and those who pay the bill don’t have the votes,” the US ambassador to the UN Jeane Kirkpatrick said at the time.But in 2002, George W Bush’s administration negotiated readmittance as part of an effort to foster international goodwill to counter deep misgivings over the US “war on terror” in the Middle East.Reuters contributed reporting. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      US targets Wagner by sanctioning gold companies suspected of funding group

      by

      The United States has taken fresh aim at Russia’s Wagner group, imposing sanctions on companies it accuses of engaging in illicit gold dealings to fund the mercenary force.In a statement on Tuesday, the US treasury department said it slapped sanctions on four companies in the United Arab Emirates, Central African Republic and Russia it accused of being connected to the Wagner Group and its leader, Yevgeny Prigozhin.The companies engaged in illicit gold dealings to fund the militia to sustain and expand its armed forces, including in Ukraine and some countries in Africa, the treasury said.“The Wagner group funds its brutal operations in part by exploiting natural resources in countries like the Central African Republic and Mali,” the treasury’s under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, Brian Nelson, said in a statement.“The United States will continue to target the Wagner Group’s revenue streams to degrade its expansion and violence in Africa, Ukraine, and anywhere else.”The Wagner Group did not immediately respond to the US allegations.The measures against the Wagner group had been previously planned but were briefly put on hold as US officials sought to avoid appearing to favor a side in a power struggle between the mercenaries’ chief Yevgeny Prigozhin and Russian president Vladimir Putin.Wagner, whose men in Ukraine include thousands of ex-prisoners recruited from Russian jails, has grown into a sprawling international business with mining interests and fighters in Africa and the Middle East.Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, said this week “private military contractors” would remain in Central African Republic (CAR) and Mali, the two countries in sub-Saharan Africa where Wagner has the biggest presence. The group has been accused of widespread atrocities in both countries.The State department spokesman, Matthew Miller, previewing the sanctions earlier Tuesday, renewed his criticism of the Wagner mercenaries, who have been accused of wide abuses in Africa.“We believe that everywhere that Wagner goes, they bring death and destruction in their wake. They hurt local populations, they extract minerals and extract money from the communities where they operate,” Miller told reporters.“And so we would continue to urge governments in Africa and elsewhere to cease any cooperation with Wagner,” he said.The United States has previously imposed sanctions on Wagner and Prigozhin.The companies hit with sanctions on Tuesday included Central African Republic-based Midas Ressources SARLU and Diamville SAU, Dubai-based Industrial Resources General Trading and Russia-based Limited Liability Company DM.The United States also issued an advisory highlighting risks raised by gold trade in sub-Saharan Africa due to what it said was increasingly concerning reporting related to the role of illicit actors, including the Wagner Group. More

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Wagner rebellion reveals ‘cracks’ in Putin government, says Blinken

      by

      A day after renegade Wagner mercenaries almost sparked a civil war in Russia, the top US diplomat has said the uprising showed “real cracks” in Vladimir Putin’s government and may offer Ukraine a crucial advantage as it conducts a counteroffensive that could influence the outcome of the war.Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, said the upheaval triggered by the aborted advance on Moscow by Yevgeny Prigozhin’s Wagner mercenaries on Saturday was far from over. Neither Prigozhin nor Putin have been heard from since coming to a last-minute agreement on Saturday to avert clashes near Moscow between mercenaries and regular Russian troops.“This is an unfolding story and I think we’re in the midst of a moving picture,” Blinken told the CBS News programme Face the Nation. “We haven’t seen the last act.”The rebellion, fuelled by anger at the Kremlin’s leadership of the invasion and occupation of Ukraine, represented the most direct threat to Putin’s grip on power since he first became president 23 years ago.With no word from Putin or Prigozhin throughout the day, it was unclear whether Russia’s immediate crisis had passed, let alone what implications it had for the vast country’s longer-term stability. Wagner troops abandoned the positions they had held in the city of Rostov-on-Don and near Moscow, while Russian officials claimed to have dropped criminal charges against Prigozhin and reopened Wagner recruiting centres.Russian military insiders eagerly discussed rumours of an impending shake-up at the ministry of defence, one of the main demands issued by Prigozhin during his uprising.However, the Kremlin appeared keen to slow down developments, saying that Putin had no more plans to address the country and that the invasion of Ukraine would continue as planned.Other top Russian officials and propagandists also remained quiet, leaving an information vacuum that has been filled with rumours about the deal hammered out with Prigozhin, and whether the Kremlin will seek revenge once the immediate threat to Putin’s power recedes.Blinken described the weekend’s events as “a direct challenge to Putin’s authority”.“So this raises profound questions,” he said. “It shows real cracks. We can’t speculate or know exactly where that’s going to go. We do know that Putin has a lot more to answer for in the weeks and months ahead.”He said there was no sign so far of senior Kremlin figures being dismissed as part of any deal between Prigozhin and Moscow. Prigozhin had demanded the removal of the defence minister, Sergei Shoigu, and the chief of general staff, Valery Gerasimov.Russian military bloggers focused attention on Aleksey Dyumin, the Tula region governor and former Putin bodyguard who is said to have a close relationship with Prigozhin and to have taken part in Saturday’s negotiations. He said he had not participated in the discussions.In the wake of the uprising, an uneasy calm descended across Russia, with regional authorities cancelling emergency measures, fixing roads that had been barricaded against the Wagner convoy, and reopening public spaces such as museums and parks.According to the New York Times, US intelligence agencies briefed senior Biden officials on Wednesday that Prigozhin was preparing to take military action against the defence leadership in Moscow.Nothing was made public about the intelligence at the time, the officials said, for fear of Putin accusing Washington of orchestrating a coup, and there was no incentive for the US to help Putin avoid a big dent in his authority.Under the few reported terms of the agreement, Wagner troops turned around on the road to Moscow and returned to their camps in eastern Ukraine. Prigozhin is to move to Belarus with immunity from reprisals, but it is not clear who, if anyone, is allowed to accompany him. Wagner fighters who took part in the uprising are to be pardoned, and those who took no part are to be absorbed by the regular army.With Wagner forces returning to Ukraine, where they have spearheaded some key offensives, it was also far from certain what impact the rebellion would have on the conflict in the midst of a slow-moving and gruelling Ukrainian counteroffensive.Blinken said: “To the extent that it presents a real distraction for Putin, and for Russian authorities, that they have to mind their rear … I think that creates even greater openings for the Ukrainians to do well on the ground.”The secretary of state said US officials had been in touch with their Russian counterparts throughout the crisis to remind them of their legal obligations to protect US citizens on their territory.“A number of people have engaged to make sure that the Russians got that message,” he said.As for concerns that any of Russia’s substantial nuclear arsenal could become the focus of internal power struggles, Blinken said: “We haven’t seen any change in Russia’s nuclear posture. There hasn’t been any change in ours, but it’s something we’re going to watch very, very carefully.”As of Sunday evening, the whereabouts of Prigozhin, a media addict who issues a steady stream of commentary in voice messages on his Telegram page, were unknown. The Wagner leader had gone silent for almost 24 hours. His last post came at 6.30pm on Saturday, when he said that his troops were standing down after holding a “march of justice” and having “not spilt one drop of blood”. Reports in Russia said Wagner fighters had shot down seven helicopters, resulting in the deaths of 20 Russian soldiers.“Now is the moment when blood can be shed,” he said. “Therefore, realising the full responsibility for the fact that Russian blood will be shed … we will turn our columns and go in the opposite direction to our field camps.”Prigozhin was then photographed leaving Rostov-on-Don alongside his men, and given the kind of rapturous reception that would resemble the departure of a rockstar after headlining a concert. Local men grasped his hand through the window of an SUV and posed for selfies. They berated the police who took up the positions previously held by Wagner, chanting “disgrace” and clapping their hands.Then, Prigozhin went silent, apparently on his way to a Belarusian exile that observers said seemed unlikely for the ambitious Kremlin hanger-on.Putin was also silent on Sunday, a day after he appeared on Russian television and said Prigozhin’s uprising would be put down “brutally”, calling it an “internal treason”.The Russian president did not directly comment on the deal that Lukashenko said he had negotiated with Prigozhin. Lukashenko’s press office said the Belarusian president spoke with Putin on Sunday morning, but did not confirm that they had discussed the uprising.Late on Saturday evening, Dmitry Peskov, Putin’s press secretary, said Prigozhin would be allowed safe passage to Belarus, as confirmed by the Russian president.“If you ask what the exact guarantee of the fact that Prigozhin will be able to leave for Belarus is, it is the Russian president’s word,” Peskov told journalists.Additional reporting by Adam Gabbatt More