World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares162 Views

      in US Politics

      Tulsi Gabbard repeats false Hillary Clinton ‘grooming’ claim in new book

      by

      Tulsi Gabbard, the former Democratic congresswoman, has repeated a discredited claim about Hillary Clinton that previously saw Gabbard lodge then drop a $50m defamation suit in a new book published as she seeks to be named Donald Trump’s running mate for US president.Accusing Democrats of making up “a conspiracy theory that [Trump] was ‘colluding’ with the Russians to win the election” in 2016, Gabbard claims: “Hillary Clinton used a similar tactic against me when I ran for president in 2020, accusing me of being ‘groomed by the Russians’.”Gabbard ran for the Democratic nomination. Clinton did not accuse her of being “groomed by the Russians”.What Clinton said, in October 2019 and on a podcast hosted by the former Barack Obama adviser David Plouffe, was that she thought Republicans would encourage a third-party bid in 2020, aiming to syphon votes from the Democratic candidate in key states as Jill Stein, the Green candidate, and the Libertarian, Gary Johnson, did four years before.“They are also going to do third-party again,” Clinton said, “and I’m not making any predictions but I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate.”Gabbard was then in the Democratic primary, though she never made any impact.Clinton continued: “She is a favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far. And, that’s assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not because she’s also a Russian asset. Yeah, she’s a Russian asset. Totally. And so they know they can’t win without a third-party candidate. I don’t know who it’s going to be, but I will guarantee they’ll have a vigorous third-party challenge in the key states that they most need it.”Amid uproar, a spokesperson for Clinton said she had been referring to Gabbard and the Russians – saying “If the nesting doll fits”, thereby stoking media coverage in which Clinton’s remarks about “grooming” and “assets” were conflated.Clinton’s meaning was soon cleared up, but Gabbard seized on the “grooming” remark. She penned an op ed in the Wall Street Journal under a headline, I Can Defeat Trump and the Clinton Doctrine, that might now prove an awkward fit with her political ambitions.Later, after dropping out of the Democratic primary and endorsing Joe Biden, who she said had “a good heart” and would “help heal” a badly divided country, Gabbard sued Clinton for $50m over the “Russian asset” comment, rather than the remark about “grooming”. That lawsuit was dropped in May 2020.Four years on, Gabbard has completed a remarkable journey across the political aisle, from being seen as a rising Democratic star in the US House to hosting on Fox News and speaking at events including CPAC, a hard-right annual conference. Her book – For Love of Country: Why I Left the Democratic Party – will be published next week. The Guardian obtained a copy.On the page, Gabbard presents a mix of memoir – from growing up in Hawaii to service in Iraq, from entering Congress to her failed presidential run – and pro-Trump screed. Light on detail and heavy on invective, the book includes excoriations of US support for Ukraine in its war with Russia. It will hit shops, however, in the aftermath of the passage in Congress of billions of dollars in new Ukraine aid.Gabbard is widely reported to be a contender for Trump’s running mate in his rematch with Biden. In her book, she defends the 88-times criminally charged former president on many legal fronts.Her complaint about Clinton’s remarks about Russia seems designed to stir up familiar Trump campaign furies over Clinton and the investigation of Russian election interference in 2016, which US intelligence agreed was carried out in his support but which prompts Gabbard to write: “None of it was true.”She also accuses Democrats of planting evidence and stories with a compliant press, aided by a “deep state” consisting of “active and retired officials from within the justice department and other national security agencies”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe deep state conspiracy theory, which holds that a permanent government of operatives and bureaucrats exists to thwart populist leaders, is popular with Trump and followers notably including Liz Truss, a former UK prime minister. However, one of its chief creators and propagators, the Trump aide and ally Steve Bannon, has said it is “for nut cases”.Gabbard does not only repeat conspiracy theories in her book, but also makes elementary mistakes. In rehashing her inaccurate complaint about Clinton saying she was being “groomed” by Russia, she writes that Clinton was speaking to David Axelrod, also a former Obama advisor but the host of a separate podcast to Plouffe’s.Gabbard also claims that “the propaganda media repeated Clinton’s lies over and over, without ever asking for evidence or fact-checking her themselves”.In fact, Gabbard’s claims against Clinton were widely fact-checked or made the subject of article corrections.In October 2019 – months before Gabbard filed suit – the Washington Post, a leading exponent of the fact-checking form, said: “The initial news reports got it wrong, perhaps fueled by the ‘nesting doll’ comment, with many saying Clinton said the Russians were grooming Gabbard for a third-party bid.”Clinton, the paper added, “certainly said Gabbard was backed by Russian bots and even suggested she was a Russian asset”. But “within a 24-hour news cycle, Clinton’s staff made it clear she was talking about the GOP, not the Russians, eyeing Gabbard as a possible third-party candidate. A simple listen to the podcast confirmed that.“In other words, this was all cleared up 12 days before Gabbard published her [Wall Street Journal] article, making the inaccurate version of [the] ‘grooming’ statement the very first sentence. So there’s little excuse for getting this wrong.”The paper therefore awarded Gabbard three Pinocchios – denoting “significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions” – out of a possible four. More

    • 138 Shares125 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump fangirl Liz Truss channels Maga menace at US conservative thinktank

      by

      Was that Donald Truss? Or Liz Trump? A former British prime minister turned up in Washington on Monday channeling the Maga menace who once lorded it in the Oval Office and now spends his days in a dingy courtroom.Liz Truss was at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative thinktank in Washington, within sight of the US Capitol dome, to promote her grandly titled book Ten Years to Save the West. Why does she keep coming back to America? It was not hard to figure out.Far from the London literary critics sharpening their knives, Heritage offers Truss a happy place, full of gushing sycophancy with an audience hanging on her every word. In this regard the 48-year-old has gone all Trumpy: the ex-president loves to surround himself with oleaginous flatterers who dare not cross him.How divine that the politicians who whine about “groupthink” and “safe spaces” are the ones who cling to groupthink and safe spaces.To illustrate the point, Truss’s war on “the global left” establishment evidently includes the Guardian. Last Friday, this reporter received an email from Heritage about the Truss event that said: “Due to space limitations, we unfortunately must rescind your in-person invite.”Curiously, come Monday morning, Truss posted a tweet encouraging members of the public to register the event and enclosing a link. So much for space limitations. But those who did attend were informed they couldn’t get a signed copy of the book due to “supply chain issues”.Others were still able to watch a live stream on YouTube where, three hours after it ended, the event had just over 700 views. (Heritage’s biggest hit on the site is a Tucker Carlson speech that attracted a million views.)Heritage is the thinktank behind Project 2025, a sprawling plan for a second Trump presidency. Wearing a dark blue jacket and trousers, white blouse and shiny black shoes, Truss noted that when she was first invited to Heritage as environment secretary in 2015, she was warned against not to go by then British ambassador Kim Darroch.“He says to me, ‘You’ve got to be wary of this organisation. They’ve spoken out against President Obama. They’ve even been critical of Prime Minister Cameron. Are you really sure, minister, that you want to go and see them?’” Truss recalled, speaking from a wooden lectern against a backdrop of the Stars and Stripes and a blue wall dotted with Heritage Foundation logos.“And I said, yes, I’m sure because I’m a conservative and they’re a conservative thinktank in the United States of America, our closest ally. So eventually, I prevail because I am a determined person but the car from the embassy dropped me off two blocks away from the Heritage Foundation so that the British flag wouldn’t be sitting outside the building.”Making a lot of sub-Trump hand gestures with open palms, Truss proceeded to deliver her standard speech railing against left-dominated institutions, an anti-growth coalition, the IMF and Conservatives in name only. Naturally there was a swipe at wokery as “another bad neo-Marxist idea developed from Foucault and all those crazy postmodernists in the 1960s, the idea that biological sex is not a reality”.She blamed these forces for making her the shortest serving British prime minister in history (49 days that sparked mayhem on the financial markets). She reeled off a list of foes, foreign and domestic, who joined the “pile on”. Among them was Joe Biden, who had the temerity to criticise her radical mini-budget’s tax plans “from an ice cream parlour in Oregon”. There was some laughter in the auditorium. So vanilla!The Trump fangirl had some advice to impart: “I come today with a warning to the United States of America. I fear the same forces will be coming for President Donald Trump if he wins the election this November.”Truss repeated her plea from the recent Conservative Political Action Conference in Maryland for the right to grab a “a bigger bazooka” to combat the activist left with their money and “friends in high places”. She called for a “bonfire of the quangos” and, echoing Trump ally Steve Bannon, declared: “We need to dismantle the administrative state.”In her book, Truss writes that she was an early fan of the reality TV show The Apprentice and “enjoyed the Donald’s catchphrases and sassy business advice”. She also pays little heed to the convention that senior British politicians stay out of US elections.She told the audience on Monday: “I worked in cabinet whilst Donald Trump was president and while President Biden was president and I can assure you the world felt safer when Donald Trump was in office… Getting a conservative back in the White House is critical to taking on the global left.”Praise for Truss was laid on think by Nile Gardiner, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom and a former foreign policy researcher for Thatcher herself. He has been named one of the 50 most influential Britons in the US by the Daily Telegraph.In God we Truss; no lettuce jokes here. The baby-faced, bespectacled Gardiner proclaimed her book “an absolutely tremendous read”, “very robust”, “very gutsy”, “very courageous”, “a wonderful read”, “very powerful”, “a thrilling read”, “a tremendous book” and “a wonderful message”. He speculated that the current prime minister, Rishi Sunak, might be writing memoirs in the near future but “yours are far more conservative and interesting”.Truss and Gardiner sat on plush white armchairs with glasses of water on a table between them. Truss warned that another Biden term would mean “the promotion of leftwing ideology”, girls unable to use bathrooms in privacy and no policy to deal with immigration and the southern border. “Four more years of this would be a disaster for the US internally. I think Bidenomics has been a failure.”Gardiner wondered what a second Trump term would mean for Britain. Truss said free the world needs conservative leadership. “It’s only Britain that has a conservative government. We’ve got Biden in the US, we have Trudeau in Canada, we have Macron in France, we have Scholz in Germany and it’s not working. The west is not winning.”Trump has said he would encourage Russia to do “whatever the hell they want” to any Nato country that doesn’t meet spending guidelines on defence. But Truss echoed Trump’s call for Europe to spend more. “There are too many countries free riding at the moment who are in serious threat. If Putin succeeds in Ukraine, he won’t stop there… Donald Trump is right to say to Europe: you need to pay up.”Elise Stefanik? Kristi Noem? Marjorie Taylor Greene? Forget it. Trump-Truss 2024 would have been unstoppable. If only she had been born in Kansas. More

    • 125 Shares144 Views

      in US Politics

      The pro-Israel groups planning to spend millions in US elections

      by

      A handful of pro-Israel groups fund political campaigns in support of individual candidates in US elections, led by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac), a powerful force in American politics. Before the 2024 election, Aipac plans to spend tens of millions of dollars against congressional candidates, primarily Democrats, whom it deems insufficiently supportive of Israel.Aipac and other pro-Israel lobby groups have recruited and supported challengers to a number of lawmakers and candidates – most notably members of the Squad, the group of progressive representatives who are particularly vocal in their criticism of Israel’s offensive in Gaza.The 2024 election will be bellwether of the enduring impact of these groups on US politics amid shifting US public opinion on Israel.What is Aipac?Aipac has its roots in the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs, which was founded by a lobbyist for the Israeli government in an attempt to manage the political fallout the Israeli army’s 1953 massacre of dozens of Palestinians, most of them children and women, in the West Bank village of Qibya.The organisation was renamed Aipac in 1959. It was not until financial support surged after the 1973 Yom Kippur war that it began to grow into the powerful Washington lobbyist group it is today.For many years, Aipac’s influence went largely unchallenged on Capitol Hill. The pressure group claimed to voice bipartisan support for Israel in Congress and worked to marginalise the relatively small number of critics there.Aipac’s annual conference typically involved a long rollcall of members of Congress who support the group. It has regularly galvanised almost every member of the US Senate to sign letters in support of Israeli policies, including several wars in Gaza.But the group’s once unchallenged influence in Washington has been diminished by its unwavering backing for the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, over the past 15 years. It sided with him against President Barack Obama’s opposition to settlement construction in the occupied Palestinian territories and his nuclear deal with Iran.The liberal Tel Aviv newspaper Haaretz has described Aipac as “the pro-Netanyahu, anti-Israel lobby”.“Effectively, the organization has become an operational wing of Netanyahu’s far-right government, one that peddles a false image of a liberal Israel in the United States and sells illusions to members of Congress,” it said.What has changed?Aipac traditionally endorsed candidates sympathetic to Israel as a signal for others to fund their campaigns. But in December 2021, the group for the first time in its 70-year history moved into direct financial support for individual political campaigns by launching a super political action committee, the United Democracy Project (UDP). A Super Pac is permitted to spend without restriction for or against candidates but cannot make direct donations to their campaigns.The move was prompted by alarm at the erosion of longstanding bipartisan support for Israel in the US. Opinion polls show younger Democrats have grown more critical of the deepening oppression of the Palestinians, including Jewish Americans, a trend that has only strengthened with the present war in Gaza.Aipac has grown increasingly concerned that the election of candidates critical of Israel could open the door to the conditioning of the US’s considerable military aid, erosion of Washington’s diplomatic protection on the international stage, and political pressure to establish a Palestinian state.So the UDP is working to block Democratic candidates critical of Israel at the first hurdle – the primaries – in an effort to shore up the claim that there is unswerving support for the Jewish state across Congress. It is also targeting progressive Democratic members of Congress who have pressed for a ceasefire in Gaza.What about other lobby groups?A number of smaller groups are working to the same end, principally the Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI). It was founded five years ago by Mark Mellman, a Democratic political consultant. The DMFI’s board of directors includes Archie Gottesman, who also co-founded JewBelong, a group that has posted pink billboards in US cities in support of Israel including one that declared: ‘Trust Me. If Israel Wanted to Commit Genocide in Gaza, It Could’.Notably, the UDP has so far not waded into the campaign against Summer Lee in this year’s primary, despite spending more than $3m to defeat her in 2022. Instead the Republican mega-donor Jeffrey Yass has stepped up as the largest funder of a Pac called Moderate Pac to support Lee’s primary opponent, Bhavini Patel. It is running ads saying that Lee’s criticisms of Biden amount to support for Donald Trump even though Yass himself is a Trump supporter.A more moderate pro-Israel group, J Street, was founded in 2007 to counter Aipac’s unflinching support for rightwing governments. J Street established a Pac to support candidates who back a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. But it has raised only about $4m so far this election cycle.Who are they targeting and how?Aipac plans to spend $100m this year against congressional candidates, primarily Democrats, and members of Congress critical of Israel. So far the UDP has raised more than $49m, according to its most recent Federal Election Commission filings.The bulk of that money has yet to be spent but the UDP has already thrown millions of dollars into political advertising targeted against candidates critical of Israel, but which focuses on other issues and fails to make clear that it is funded by a pro-Israel group. Critics have accused Aipac of attempting to intimidate candidates into avoiding criticism of Israel by implicitly threatening to fund campaigns against them.Among those expected to be targeted by pro-Israel groups are members of the the Squad, including Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush, who are thought to be vulnerable to political attacks over issues unrelated to their criticisms of the war in Gaza.Who is funding these campaigns?The leading donors to the UDP are Republicans seeking to influence Democratic primaries.The single largest donor is the conservative Ukrainian American billionaire co-founder of WhatsApp, Jan Koum, who gave $5m. Koum also donated to the Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley’s Super Pac.Other donors include the financier, Jonathan Jacobson, who gave $2.5m to the UDP toward the end of last year although for many years his political donations were directed to the Republican National Committee and the party’s US Senate campaigns. The Israeli-born entrepreneur David Zalik gave the UDP $2m. He has also donated to Republican campaigns in Georgia.The Home Depot founder Bernie Marcus, who was one of the largest donors to Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and who continues to back him financially, gave $1m to the UDP, as did the hedge fund manager Paul Singer, who has given millions of dollars to Republican political causes over the years.Donations to the UDP are separate from tens of millions of dollars in pledges made directly to Aipac in the wake of the 7 October attacks by Hamas as the public relations battle intensified over Israel’s subsequent assault on Gaza and a surging number of Palestinian civilian deaths.Top donors to the DMFI include Deborah Simon, the daughter of the billionaire businessman and movie producer Mel Simon, who gave $1m. She regularly donates to Democratic causes and Jewish organisations such as the Anti-Defamation League.Sam Bankman-Fried, the former cryptocurrency billionaire who is serving 25 years for fraud, gave $250,000 to DMFI during the 2022 midterm elections. The group has been forced to return the money.Other major DMFI donors are closely tied to Aipac such as Stacy Schusterman, who has given more than $1m, and the venture capitalist Gary Lauder.How has the present war in Gaza changed the equation?The conflict has strengthened the hand of Israel’s critics within the Democratic party as polls show rising sympathy for the Palestinians. That in turn has made Aipac’s financial backing a potential liability for some Israel-supporting Democratic candidates.Aipac was already on the defensive after endorsing the 2022 campaigns of dozens of Republican members of Congress who tried to block President Biden’s presidential victory.Aipac defended the move by claiming that backing for the Jewish state overrides other issues and that it was “no moment for the pro-Israel movement to become selective about its friends”.“When we launched our political action committee last year, we decided that we would base decisions about political contributions on only one thing: whether a political candidate supports the US-Israel relationship,” it said. More

    • 150 Shares166 Views

      in US Politics

      Marjorie Taylor Greene renews attacks on speaker as House passes Ukraine aid

      by

      Republican infighting over the US House finally approving $61bn in military aid for Ukraine continued to roil the party on Sunday as the far-right representative Marjorie Taylor Greene renewed attacks on the Republican speaker, Mike Johnson.Johnson had betrayed his party and was working for the Democrats, and his speakership was “over”, the Georgia representative said, although it was not clear if and when Greene would file a motion to try to remove him, which she has threatened to do in recent weeks.The fresh criticism from Greene came after Johnson ended months of stalling on the aid package for Ukraine’s desperate defence against Russia – as well as billions for allies including Israel and Taiwan – and finally forced a vote on it in the House of Representatives on Saturday, defying the far right of his party.In a bipartisan vote, 210 Democrats and 101 Republicans joined to support Ukraine, with 112 Republicans – a majority of the GOP members – voting against.“He is absolutely working for the Democrats. He’s passing the Biden administration’s agenda,” Greene said of Johnson on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures With Maria Bartiromo. “Mike Johnson’s speakership is over. He needs to do the right thing to resign and allow us to move forward in a controlled process.“If he doesn’t do so, he will be vacated.”Johnson escalated the most recent turmoil among his GOP colleagues last week after agreeing to the floor vote on the $95bn foreign aid package. The package, green-lighted by the Senate in February, includes $61bn for Ukraine, $14bn for Israel, and lesser sums for Taiwan and other allies in the Pacific.The Senate is expected to start weighing this House bill on Tuesday and it is expected to pass this coming week, which would enable Joe Biden to sign it into law.The speaker’s decision heightened the split in his party, with the right insisting any support for foreign aid had to include concessions to their domestic priorities, including border security. The same ultra-conservatives had orchestrated Johnson’s ascent to speaker in October by ousting his predecessor, the Republican Kevin McCarthy.View image in fullscreenThis group of Republicans have increasingly expressed public antipathy toward helping Ukraine, in keeping with their political leader, Donald Trump, who has long shown admiration toward the Russian president, Vladimir Putin.Johnson on Saturday stood by his decision, saying that the provision of military aid was “critically important”, as well as “the right thing”, even in the face of political risks from his party’s far right.“I really believe the intel and the briefings that we’ve gotten,” Johnson stated. “I believe that Xi and Vladimir Putin and Iran really are an axis of evil. I think they are in coordination on this. I think that Vladimir Putin would continue to march through Europe.“I am going to allow an opportunity for every single member of the House to vote their conscience and their will,” Johnson also said. “I’m willing to take a personal risk for that, because we have to do the right thing. And history will judge us.”In order to even get the floor vote, Johnson had to work with Democrats, whom he earlier needed to advance other legislation, such as a significant government funding bill.The fissure in the party widened in March, when Greene revealed a motion to oust Johnson from the role of speaker. She has not yet tried to force a vote on that issue, but the House Republicans Thomas Massie, of Kentucky, and Paul Gosar, of Arizona, are now co-sponsors.Greene has not filed that motion, however, and any next steps seem vague. Immediately after the House vote on Saturday, Greene said that she wouldn’t take any formal steps to boot Johnson from speaker but, like her colleagues, wanted to hear from constituents first, the Washington Post reported. “I’m looking forward to them hearing from the folks back at home,” Greene said, “but this is a sellout of America today.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOn Sunday, Fox News’s Bartiromo pushed Greene on the seeming vagaries, saying on the talkshow: “Well, with respect, you didn’t give me a plan for the speaker’s role and again, does this mean you are going to file that motion at some point?”“It’s coming, regardless of what Mike Johnson decides to do,” Greene said. “We have three more Republicans joining us for a special election coming up very soon, so people need to know this can happen.”Not all Republicans are worried about Johnson’s future as House speaker, however.“He will survive,” Tony Gonzales, a Texas Republican representative, said on Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union. “Look, the House is a rough and rowdy place, but Mike Johnson is going to be just fine.”For Gonzales, Johnson’s ushering of this aid package is positive for Congress overall.“I think Mike Johnson is going to avoid the cannibals in his own party here. He stood up to them this weekend and the adults, we took control of the US Congress,” he said. “I think people got sick and tired – he’s one of them – of Marjorie Taylor Greene being in charge of their life and they just finally said ‘no’.”The GOP division on Ukraine is also playing out in the Senate, with pro-aid Republican senator Linsdey Graham slamming Ohio senator JD Vance’s seeming belief that the country can’t win.In a New York Times op-ed last week, Vance wrote: “Ukraine’s challenge is not the GOP; it’s math. Ukraine needs more soldiers than it can field. And it needs more materiel than the United States can provide.”“That is garbage,” Graham said on Fox News Sunday, in response to Vance’s claim about manpower, per the Hill.“Go … I just got back, I was there two weeks ago. They changed their conscription laws. They have all the manpower they need. They need the weapons,” Graham said. “It’s one thing to talk about Ukraine over here; it’s another thing to go.” More

    • 175 Shares126 Views

      in US Politics

      Approval of $61bn aid from US shows Ukraine will not be abandoned, says Zelenskiy

      by

      Ukraine’s president has said the vote by the US House of Representatives to pass a long-delayed $61bn (£49bn) military aid package demonstrated that his country would not be abandoned by the west in its effort to fight the Russian invasion.Volodymyr Zelenskiy said in an interview with US television that Saturday’s vote showed Ukraine would not be “a second Afghanistan”, whose pro-western government collapsed during an US-led pullout in the summer of 2021.The Ukrainian president urged the US Senate to ratify the aid package rapidly and warned that his country was preparing its defences, fearing there could be a large Russian offensive before the fresh supplies reach the frontline.“We really need to get this to the final point. We need to get it approved by the Senate … so that we get some tangible assistance for the soldiers on the frontline as soon as possible, not in another six months,” he said.The Senate is expected to come out of recess on Tuesday to hold its first vote on the package – similar to one it had already voted for in February – with the Joe Biden promising to sign it into law swiftly after it passes Congress.That would end months of wrangling in which House Republicans aligned with Donald Trump had refused to allow Ukraine aid, which was part of a larger package with money for Israel and Taiwan, to be debated in the lower chamber.The US has only been able to commit to $300m of military aid to Ukraine this year, after the budget previously authorised by Congress was spent. This has coincided with a deterioration of the frontline position and the loss of Avdiivka in the eastern Donbas, with a shortage of artillery and other munitions blamed.However, the opposition of Republicans faded after Iran’s drone and missile attack on Israel more than a week ago that used similar tactics to Russian attacks on Ukraine. It also underlined – among some rightwing politicians – the need to provide Israel and Ukraine with further support.US officials have signalled that some weapons were in European warehouses, ready to be moved into Ukraine at short notice once Biden decides exactly what to supply in the first round after the overall funding has been approved.Zelenskiy said his immediate priorities were air-defence systems such as the US-made Patriots and long-range missiles such as Atacms, which can travel up to 186 miles (300km) and which the House has called on the Pentagon to provide promptly.“We need long-range weapons to not lose people on the frontline because we have – we have casualties because we cannot reach that far. Our weapons are not that long-range. We need [that] and air defence. Those are our priorities right now,” Zelenskiy said in an interview with NBC News.Ukraine is thought to have only two Patriot anti-missile systems, one of which it uses to defend Kyiv, while the other has been deployed closer to the frontline, in effect leaving large parts of the country exposed.Russia has knocked out several power stations by targeting them with numerous missiles, causing electricity shortages in some parts of Ukraine, including the second city of Kharkiv, home to 1.3 million people. A power station south of Kyiv was destroyed in one night a little more than a week ago in a similar assault.On Sunday, Moscow accused the US of sacrificing Ukrainian lives by forcing the country into a long war that would end in a defeat for both countries.Maria Zakharova, a spokesperson for the foreign ministry, said the US wanted Ukraine “to fight to the last Ukrainian” as well as making direct attacks into Russian territory. “Washington’s deeper and deeper immersion in the hybrid war against Russia will turn into a loud and humiliating fiasco for United States such as Vietnam and Afghanistan,” she added.Bohdan Krotevych, the chief of staff to Ukraine’s Azov brigade, said he was pleasantly surprised by the result of the House vote and praised the efforts of Zelenskiy in lobbying the US and other countries for military support. But Krotevych warned of a possible response from Moscow in the war. “This doesn’t mean that Russia will not start countermeasures as a reaction,” he said.One expert said he believed the immediate significance of the vote was political, not military. Ben Hodges, a former commanding general of the US army in Europe, said: “The strategic effect will be felt immediately in the Kremlin, where they now realise their plan to wait for us to quit has failed.”Russia might have hoped that Ukraine could be forced to sue for peace, with no US aid forthcoming before November’s presidential election at least. Now the aid should allow Ukraine to “stabilise the front, buy time to grow and rebuild their army and build up their own defence industrial capacity”, Hodges said.Ukrainians out and about on a rainy spring day in Kyiv said they were delighted at the outcome. Pavlo, 44, an IT specialist, said he was very grateful. He said: “The politicians have made the right choice and this shows that the US takes the lead role in world scene; I hope that the aid is already somewhere waiting at the border, ready to be on its way.”Chess-playing Serhii Ivanovich, a retired army colonel, 72, said Ukraine was a peaceful country forced into fighting a war against its larger neighbour. “We have been waiting for this for a very long time. We don’t have enough, we need help. We have the courage, we have the strength but we don’t have the equipment.” More

    • 163 Shares157 Views

      in US Politics

      US House to vote on long-delayed foreign aid bills – including Ukraine support

      by

      The US House of Representatives will finally vote on Saturday on a series of foreign aid bills, bringing an end to a months-long standoff in Congress led mostly by Republicans who refuse to support funding Ukraine’s ongoing military defense against Russia’s invasion.House members will hold separate votes on four bills that represent $95bn in funding altogether – including roughly $26bn in aid for Israel, $61bn for Ukraine, $8bn for US allies in the Indo-Pacific region and $9bn in humanitarian assistance for civilians in war zones, such as Gaza.The package largely mirrors the foreign aid proposal passed by the Senate in February, although the House legislation designates $10bn of the Ukraine funding as a repayable loan to appease some Republican members who are hesitant to approve additional aid.If passed, the legislation will provide a crucial financial lifetime for Ukraine at a time when the country’s military appears at its most vulnerable since the start of the war, due to dwindling supplies of ammunition and air defense missiles.The bills are expected to pass the House, after they easily cleared a key procedural hurdle on Friday before the final vote. Those that pass will be combined into a single package in order to simplify the voting process for the Senate, which will need to reapprove the proposal before it can go to Joe Biden’s desk for his signature.The procedural vote on the House package was 316 to 94, with 165 Democrats and 151 Republicans supporting the motion. The House speaker, Republican Mike Johnson, needed to rely on Democratic votes to pass the procedural motion, and he will almost certainly need to do so again to get the Ukraine aid bill across the finish line.“It’s long past time that we support our democratic allies in Israel, Ukraine and the Indo-Pacific and provide humanitarian assistance to civilians who are in harm’s way in theaters of conflict like Gaza, Haiti and the Sudan,” Hakeem Jeffries, the House Democratic leader, said on Friday. “House Democrats have once again cleared the way for legislation that is important to the American people.”Much of the House Republican conference remains opposed to sending more money to Kyiv, and Donald Trump once again voiced frustration with approving additional Ukraine aid in a social media post on Thursday. Fifty-five Republicans and 39 Democrats opposed the procedural motion on Friday.Johnson’s reliance on Democratic votes to pass key pieces of legislation, including a major government funding bill that cleared the House last month, has outraged some hard-right Republicans.“What else did Johnson give away while he’s begging Democrats for votes and protection?” Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican representative from Georgia, said on Friday on X. “We do not have a Republican majority anymore, our Republican Speaker is literally controlled by the Democrats and giving them everything they want.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionLast month, Greene unveiled a motion to remove Johnson as speaker, although she has not yet moved to force a vote on the matter. In the past week, two more House Republicans – Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Paul Gosar of Arizona – have signed on as co-sponsors to Greene’s motion, citing their mounting frustration with Johnson’s leadership.“We need a speaker who puts America first rather than bending to the reckless demands of the warmongers, neocons and the military-industrial complex making billions from a costly and endless war half a world away,” Gosar said in a statement on Friday.If Greene moves forward with the motion to vacate, Johnson will once again need to rely on Democratic votes to save him, as Republicans will have just a one-seat majority after Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin resigns in the coming days. Several House Democrats have indicated that they would come to Johnson’s assistance if the motion to vacate is brought up for a vote, and the speaker has appeared undaunted by the threats to his job, which he has held for just six months.“I’m going to do my job, and I’m going to stay dug in,” Johnson told radio host Mark Levin on Thursday. “I’m not changing who I am or what I believe, and I’m going to try to guide this institution.” More

    • 125 Shares167 Views

      in US Politics

      Chinese students in US tell of ‘chilling’ interrogations and deportations

      by

      Stopped at the border, interrogated on national security grounds, laptops and mobile phones checked, held for several hours, plans for future research shattered.Many western scholars are nervous about travelling to China in the current political climate. But lately it is Chinese researchers working at US universities who are increasingly reporting interrogations – and in several cases deportations – at US airports, despite holding valid work or study visas for scientific research.Earlier this month the Chinese embassy in Washington said more than 70 students “with legal and valid materials” had been deported from the US since July 2021, with more than 10 cases since November 2023. The embassy said it had complained to the US authorities about each case.The exact number of incidents is difficult to verify, as the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency does not provide detailed statistics about refusals at airports. A spokesperson said that “all international travellers attempting to enter the United States, including all US citizens, are subject to examination”.But testimonies have circulated on Chinese social media, and academics are becoming increasingly outspoken about what they say is the unfair treatment of their colleagues and students.“The impact is huge,” says Qin Yan, a professor of pathology at Yale School of Medicine in Connecticut, who says that he is aware of more than a dozen Chinese students from Yale and other universities who have been rejected by the US in recent months, despite holding valid visas. Experiments have stalled, and there is a “chilling effect” for the next generation of Chinese scientists.The number of people affected is a tiny fraction of the total number of Chinese students in the US. The State Department issued nearly 300,000 visas to Chinese students in the year to September 2023. But the personal accounts speak to a broader concern that people-to-people exchanges between the world’s two biggest economies and scientific leaders are straining.The refusals appear to be linked to a 2020 US rule that barred Chinese postgraduate students with links to China’s “military-civil fusion strategy”, which aims to leverage civilian infrastructure to support military development. The Australian Strategic Policy Institute thinktank estimates that 95 civilian universities in China have links to the defence sector.Nearly 2,000 visas applications were rejected on that basis in 2021. But now people who pass the security checks necessary to be granted a visa by the State Department are being turned away at the border by CBP, a different branch of government.“It is very hard for a CBP officer to really evaluate the risk of espionage,” said Dan Berger, an immigration lawyer in Massachusetts, who represents a graduate student at Yale who, midway through her PhD, was sent back from Washington’s Dulles airport in December, and banned from re-entering the US for five years.“It is sudden,” Berger said. “She has an apartment in the US. Thankfully, she doesn’t have a cat. But there are experiments that were in progress.”Academics say that scrutiny has widened to different fields – particularly medical sciences – with the reasons for the refusals not made clear.X Edward Guo, a professor of biomedical engineering at Columbia University, said that part of the problem is that, unlike in the US, military research does sometimes take place on university campuses. “It’s not black and white … there are medical universities that also do military. But 99% of those professors are doing biomedical research and have nothing to do with the military.”But “if you want to come to the US to study AI, forget it,” Guo said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOne scientist who studies the use of artificial intelligence to model the impact of vaccines said he was rejected at Boston Logan International airport. He was arriving to take up a place at Harvard Medical School as a postdoctoral researcher. “I never thought I would be humiliated like this,” he wrote on the Xiaohongshu app, where he recounted being quizzed about his masters’ studies in China and asked if he could guarantee that his teachers in China had not passed on any of his research to the military.He did not respond to an interview request from the Observer. Harvard Medical School declined to confirm or comment on the specifics of individual cases, but said that “decisions regarding entry into the United States are under the purview of the federal government and outside of the school’s and the university’s jurisdiction.”The increased scrutiny comes as Beijing and Washington are struggling to come to an agreement about the US-China Science and Technology Agreement, a landmark treaty signed in 1979 that governs scientific cooperation between the two countries. Normally renewed every five years, since August it has been sputtering through six-month extensions.But following years of scrutiny from the Department of Justice investigation into funding links to China, and a rise in anti-Asian sentiment during the pandemic, ethnically Chinese scientists say the atmosphere is becoming increasingly hostile.“Before 2016, I felt like I’m just an American,” said Guo, who became a naturalised US citizen in the late 1990s. “This is really the first time I’ve thought, OK, you’re an American but you’re not exactly an American.”Additional research by Chi Hui Lin More

    • 100 Shares128 Views

      in US Politics

      US Senate votes to renew Fisa surveillance program

      by

      The US Senate voted late on Friday night to approve the reauthorization of the controversial Fisa surveillance program, narrowly preventing its midnight expiration.The reauthorization secures what supporters call a key element of the United States’ foreign intelligence-gathering operation.“Democrats and Republicans came together and did the right thing for our country safety,” said Chuck Schumer, the leader of the Democratic majority in the Senate.“We all know one thing: letting Fisa expire would be dangerous. It’s an important part of our national security, to stop acts of terror, drug trafficking and violent extreme extremism.”Fisa has attracted criticism from some Republican and Democratic lawmakers, who argue it violates Americans’ constitutional right to privacy. The bill was blocked three times in the past five months by Republicans in the House of Representatives bucking their party, before passing last week by a 273-147 vote when its duration was shortened from five years to two years.The White House, intelligence chiefs and top lawmakers on the House intelligence committee warned of potentially catastrophic effects of not reauthorizing the program, which was first created in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.Although the right to privacy is enshrined in the US constitution, the data of foreign nationals gathered by the program often includes communications with Americans, and can be mined by domestic law enforcement bodies such as the FBI without a warrant.That has alarmed both hardline Republicans and leftwing Democrats. Recent revelations that the FBI used this power to hunt for information about Black Lives Matter protesters, congressional campaign donors and US lawmakers raised further doubts about the program’s integrity. More