Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_354714626-e1640109757352

Ted Cruz's temper tantrum pays off. But for whom?

The GOP senator has swapped his hold on Biden's ambassadors for a vote on more sanctions for Russia over Nord Stream 2.

Analysis | Europe
google cta
google cta

Both Senator Ted Cruz’s bill to sanction the Russia-Germany Nord Stream 2 pipeline and the process by which it has been introduced are poster-children for the dysfunctionality of America’s present system of government when it comes to the formulation of foreign policy.

Senator Cruz’s bill, which is to be introduced to the Senate in early January and is considered likely to pass with bipartisan support, would place sanctions on Russia and on companies involved in the construction and management of the pipeline, which is designed to carry gas under the North Sea from Russia to Germany and Western Europe. 

This pipeline would partly replace existing pipelines from Russia to Germany and the European Union across Ukraine. In the past, Russian attempts to pressure Ukraine either to pay its unpaid gas debts or to ally with Russia by cutting off Ukrainian gas led to Ukraine taking gas bound for the EU for itself, thereby disrupting supplies to Western Europe. 

The Nord Stream pipeline would end this possibility, thereby securing German and West European supplies but also reducing Ukraine’s leverage over Russia. Hence this bill, which Senator Cruz and his supporters say is necessary to deter a possible Russian attack on Ukraine. Senator Cruz has also made a ridiculous charge that President Biden’s suspension of sanctions on Nord Stream last summer was an act of “weakness” that “enabled” new Russian pressure on Ukraine, and this charge has been taken up by a long row of Republican commentators. 

Let us be charitable to Senator Cruz however and assume that his move reflects personal ignorance rather than cynical, unpatriotic, partisan opportunism, since the new German government has already temporarily suspended its approval of Nord Stream 2. Officially, this is because of problems with its technical certification. Unofficially, Germany has made clear that this is a deterrent to a Russian invasion of Ukraine, and that if Russia does invade, Nord Stream will be over.

In other words, by imposing sanctions now that would try permanently to block Nord Stream whatever Russia does, Senator Cruz is undermining the very deterrent that he claims to want to strengthen. Moreover, the new German government is very much on America’s side against Russia, and President Biden’s suspension of sanctions on Nord Stream last summer was intended to gain stronger German support for U.S. strategy against China. By gratuitously bullying Germany and attacking leading German companies involved in Nord Stream, Senator Cruz’s bill would spoil the U.S.-German relationship and risk reawakening the hostility to America that is never far below the surface of German public opinion.

But why, a German or Russian unacquainted with the U.S. Constitution might ask, is this bill possible at all? How can just one opposition senator play a critical role in the conduct of a critical and very dangerous area of foreign policy? And why does the governing party, that holds a majority in the Senate, allow this? 

The Democrats have been forced to allow the introduction of the bill because Senator Cruz — just one Senator, remember — has been holding up the Senate’s confirmation of the Biden administration’s entire list of ambassadorships.

But why, your German might ask, are new ambassadors nominated by every new administration? Surely America, the global superpower, must do what every other democracy does and promote its ambassadors from the ranks of America’s professional diplomatic service? Surely no serious country would allow this to be a matter of political pork flavored with ideological fanaticism, leading to embarrassments like Richard Grenell (Trump’s ambassador to Germany) or Mike McFaul (Obama’s ambassador to Russia)? 

Maybe the Founders assumed that both ambassadors and senators would be drawn from individuals of high education, with a strong sense of duty, patriotism and personal responsibility; and thank Heaven, the United States still does indeed produce some public servants and elected officials of this caliber. Anyone who thinks however that this is a general rule that can be relied on should take a good look at some recent ambassadorial appointments, and at Senator Ted Cruz.


Senator Ted Cruz (Texas)(Shutterstock/Crush Rush)
google cta
Analysis | Europe
nuclear weapons testing
A mushroom cloud expands over the Bikini Atoll during a U.S. nuclear weapons test in 1946. (Shutterstock/ Everett Collection)

Nuke treaty loss a 'colossal' failure that could lead to nuclear arms race

Global Crises

On February 13th, 2025, President Trump said something few expected to hear. He said, “There's no reason for us to be building brand-new nuclear weapons. We already have so many. . . You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over. And here we are building new nuclear weapons . . . We’re all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully, much more productive.”

I could not agree more with that statement. But with today’s expiration of the New START Treaty, we face the very real possibility of a new nuclear arms race — something that, to my knowledge, neither the President, Vice President, nor any other senior U.S. official has meaningfully discussed.

keep readingShow less
Witkoff Kushner Trump
Top image credit: U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff looks on during a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, at Trump's Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, U.S., December 29, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

As US-Iran talks resume, will Israel play spoiler (again)?

Middle East

This Friday, the latest chapter in the long, fraught history of U.S.-Iran negotiations will take place in Oman. Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi and President Trump’s Special Envoy Steve Witkoff will meet in an effort to stave off a war between the U.S. and Iran.

The negotiations were originally planned as a multilateral forum in Istanbul, with an array of regional Arab and Muslim countries present, apart from the U.S. and Iran — Turkey, Qatar, Oman, and Saudi Arabia.

keep readingShow less
Trump Putin
Top image credit: Miss.Cabal/shutterstock.com

Last treaty curbing US, Russia nuclear weapons has collapsed

Global Crises

The end of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), the last treaty between the U.S. and Russia placing limits on their respective nuclear arsenals, may not make an arms race inevitable. There is still potential for pragmatic diplomacy.

Both sides can adhere to the basic limits even as they modernize their arsenals. They can bring back some of the risk-reduction measures that stabilized their relationship for years. And they can reengage diplomatically with each other to craft new agreements. The alternative — unconstrained nuclear competition — is dangerous, expensive, and deeply unpopular with most Americans.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.