Follow us on social

Pdx2shutterstock_1785711818-scaled

What one late GOP senator from Oregon would have thought about Trump sending federal troops to Portland

Only one Republican senator has criticized Trump for sending federal agents to American cities.

Analysis | Washington Politics

The deployment of armed federal security forces to Portland, Oregon, against the wishes of the city and state elected officials, ostensibly to protect the federal courthouse in the downtown area has been criticized as unnecessary and probably illegal by many Democrats but publicly by only one Republican, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.). 

However, another Republican, who if he were still alive, would no doubt join Senator Paul and the Democrats in condemning the deployment and the conduct of the federal forces. That would be the late Oregon Senator Mark Hatfield, for whom the courthouse is named. Based upon my interactions with him and my analysis of his career, I have no doubt he is turning over in his grave as a result of the Trump administration using a building named after him to justify this disastrous policy. Moreover, he would be appalled that the Republican Party, which supposedly is opposed to federal interference in state and local areas, would not have more members publicly condemning the Portland invasion.

Senator Hatfield, who died in 2011, served in the U.S. Senate for 30 years, from 1966 until 1996. Prior to that, he served two terms as governor of Oregon, Secretary of State, and a member of the upper and lower houses of the state legislature. Moreover, as a freshman in college when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor he immediately joined the Navy Reserves and after being commissioned he fought in the invasions of Iwo Jima and Okinawa. He visited Hiroshima a month after the atomic bomb attack and also went to Haiphong, Vietnam to aid the French forces fighting the Vietnamese.

As governor, while he opposed cuts in services to the poor and elderly, he also spoke out for individual responsibility and against undue interference by the national government in state and local matters. He publicly criticized the anti-communist crusade of Wisconsin Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy and President Nixon’s Southern strategy which he viewed as racist. Moreover, during the annual conference of governors in 1965 and again in 1966, he voted against a motion in support of the war in Vietnam. In 1965 he was one of just two who voted against it. (The other was Michigan governor, George Romney, Mitt’s father.)  A year later he cast the lone negative vote.

During his time in the Senate, he became an early and outspoken critic of the war in Vietnam and consistently opposed massive increases in defense spending, nuclear weapons programs, U.S. military involvement abroad, arms sales to non-democratic countries, and underground nuclear testing. While he approved President Reagan’s nuclear treaties with the Soviet Union, he opposed his Strategic Defense Initiative (the missile defense system known as “Star Wars”) — correctly concluding it could not work. In 1991 he was one of two Republicans who voted against the Gulf War and in 1995 was the only Republican to vote against the balanced budget amendment, which fell one vote short for passage.

Being responsible for 70 percent of the defense budget during my time in Reagan’s Pentagon, I personally dealt with Senator Hatfield, then the Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, on several occasions. I always found him well-informed and insightful. One issue we disagreed on was whether to continue draft registration. In the 1980 campaign, he convinced candidate Reagan to promise to end draft registration, which President Carter had reinstituted after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. I helped convince the president not to end it because I thought ending it would send the wrong signal to the Soviets while we were embarking on a defense buildup. My reward for getting the president to change his mind was to have to explain the decision to Senator Hatfield.  When I went to his office I was overwhelmed by his gentility and could see why he was called the gentleman of the Senate.

I have no doubt that if Senator Hatfield were alive today, he would stand up to President Trump on this issue. Unfortunately, there are no longer many Hatfield’s in the Republican-controlled Senate to prevent Trump from doing this again, even if he withdraws from Portland. 

Portland, Oregon, USA, 20 July 2020, Protest stickers on post downtown. (Photo: PikaPower / Shutterstock.com)
Analysis | Washington Politics
Poll: Europeans increasingly pessimistic about Ukraine war

Demonstrators protest against the war in front of the European Parliament after a special plenary session on the Russian invasion of Ukraine in Brussels

Alexandros Michailidis/shutterstock

Poll: Europeans increasingly pessimistic about Ukraine war

QiOSK

Europeans have become increasingly pessimistic about the chances that Ukraine can recover territories that it has lost since the Russian invasion two years ago, according to a new poll of 12 EU member states.

And an aggregate average of 41 percent of respondents in the 12 countries said they would prefer that Europe “push Ukraine towards negotiating a peace with Russia” compared to 31 percent who said Europe “should support Ukraine in taking back the territories occupied by Russia.”

keep readingShow less
Shutterstock_600703640-scaled
Image: esfera via shutterstock.com
Image: esfera via shutterstock.com

The Ukraine lobby two years into war

Washington Politics

Prior to the war in Ukraine, Russian and Ukrainian interests had already been deadlocked in a heated battle.

But this clash wasn’t being waged on the streets of Kyiv, it was being fought on K Street in Washington D.C. The combatants donned suits, not camouflage. Their targets weren’t hardened military units, they were U.S. policymakers in Congress and the executive branch. Their goal wasn’t total victory, it was to win hearts, minds, and, above all, votes for their cause. This was the lobbying battle before the Ukraine war.

keep readingShow less
The Ukraine War at two years: By the numbers


KYIV, UKRAINE - July 12, 2023: Destroyed and burned Russian military tanks and parts of equipment are exhibited at the Mykhailivska square in Kyiv city centre. (Oleksandr Popenko/Shutterstock)

The Ukraine War at two years: By the numbers

Europe

Two years ago on Feb. 24, 2022, the world watched as Russian tanks rolled into the outskirts of Kyiv and missiles struck the capital city.

Contrary to initial predictions, Kyiv never fell, but the country today remains embroiled in conflict. The front line holds in the southeastern region of the country, with contested areas largely focused on the Russian-speaking Donbas and port cities around the Black Sea.

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest