The much-anticipated meeting between U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov has been canceled by the Americans, according to reports.
"Now that we see the invasion is beginning and Russia has made clear its wholesale rejection of diplomacy, it does not make sense to go forward with that meeting at this time," Blinken announced Tuesday afternoon. "I consulted with our allies and partners — all agree."
According to CNN, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian announced his Friday meeting with Lavrov has been canceled, too.
The Blinken-Lavrov meeting, which had been set before Putin’s fiery speech Sunday declaring independence for the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhasnk in Eastern Ukraine, was supposed to serve as a sort of diplomatic release valve for the tensions between the two countries, which had risen to a fever pitch in recent days and weeks.
Up until now, the White House had been hesitant to call Putin’s recent moves a full-on invasion of Ukraine — which would trigger more expansive economic sanctions and possibly additional military assistance to President Zelensky. But on Tuesday, it joined the EU in announcing a first round of financial sanctions against Russia, promising more if Putin continues to escalate. Germany also announced that it was putting a pause on the approval process for the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.
Blinken said talks would only commence if “Russia is prepared to take demonstrable steps to provide the international community with any degree of confidence it's serious about deescalating and finding a diplomatic solution." No response from Russia on the canceled meeting, yet.
Kelley Beaucar Vlahos is Editorial Director of Responsible Statecraft and Senior Advisor at the Quincy Institute.
Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken gives opening remarks at NATO in Brussels, Belgium on March 23, 2021. [State Department photo by Ron Przysucha/ Public Domain]
Palesitinians leave Khan Yunis towards safer areas in Rafah following the directives of the Israeli army, instructing residents of the Hamad area to vacate their homes and proceed towards Rafah, near the border with Egypt, 03/04/2024 via Reuters
Israel has begun launching airstrikes in Rafah ahead of a likely invasion of the city, where more than 1.5 million Gazans have taken shelter in camps near the border with Egypt.
The airstrikes came just hours after the Israeli government told Palestinians to flee the city, a demand that aid groups fear will worsen the already dire humanitarian situation in Gaza, where famine has begun to take hold. The European Union’s foreign policy chief called the evacuation order “unacceptable.”
The apparent decision to invade Rafah comes as ceasefire talks broke down over the weekend. Israel says the logjam came after an alleged Hamas attack on Israeli soldiers at the Kerem Shalom crossing, while Hamas blamed the breakdown on Israel’s decision to start evacuations of Rafah.
The possibility of an Israeli assault in Rafah puts President Joe Biden in a precarious position. The White House has already found itself at odds with many Democrats due to Biden’s refusal to break with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his deadly campaign in Gaza. A bloody escalation of the war would further divide his party and ratchet up pressure to do something to stop Israel’s campaign.
Biden may have already internalized that message. On Friday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that, absent a credible plan to protect civilians, “we can’t support a major military operation going into Rafah because the damage it would do is beyond what’s acceptable.”
But the Biden administration has consistently balked at opportunities to hold Israel accountable for alleged war crimes and human rights abuses. Just last week, the White House walked back a threat to restrict weapons transfers to certain Israeli units due to “gross violations of human rights.”
A new chance to restrict arms sales could come Wednesday of this week, when the Biden administration will issue a mandatory report to Congress evaluating Israel’s assurances that it won’t use American weapons in ways that violate U.S. and international laws.
An independent analysis from legal experts and former State Department officials found numerous attacks that should have already triggered a cutoff in U.S. support. And nearly 90 House Democrats signed a letter last week calling on the administration to suspend certain weapons transfers to Israel.
A key question is whether a Rafah invasion will further restrict the delivery of U.S. humanitarian aid. Experts say Israel has already violated U.S. law stipulating that Washington will not give weapons to countries that block American aid transfers, and a Rafah invasion would likely lead to further violations.
There is also significant doubt surrounding Israeli assurances that its operation will minimize harm to civilians. Those who are now fleeing Rafah will reportedly have to evacuate to nearby Khan Younis and al-Mawasi, neither of which has the capacity to receive incoming displaced people or provide them with much-needed aid.
It’s unclear how many Gazans will be able to escape before the full-scale assault begins. Israel’s previous actions suggest that its tolerance for killing civilians is higher than that of that of the Biden administration.
Biden will have a chance to impart that message later today, when he will reportedly speak with Netanyahu and presumably urge the Israeli leader to change course. But the question remains: Is the Biden administration finally ready to publicly break with Israel?
keep readingShow less
Diplomacy Watch: A peace summit without Russia
Diplomacy Watch: Ukraine risks losing the war — and the peace
And while Ukraine waits for the latest tranche of American assistance to arrive, the situation on the battlefield is becoming increasingly grim. Over last weekend, Ukrainian forces retreated from three villages in the east of the country as it struggles to push back against Moscow’s latest offensive.
In an interview with Foreign Policy on Wednesday, Ukrainian foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba did not present a particularly optimistic picture of what the new aid may accomplish. While he expressed gratitude for the aid, Kuleba lamented the slow process and urged Kyiv’s Western allies to do more.
“There is a time gap between the announcement of the package and the moment when a Ukrainian artilleryman has more shells to fire back at the Russian invaders,” Kuleba told FP’s editor-in-chief Ravi Agrawal during the Q&A. “And that moment has not come yet, because everything that was announced—we are grateful and we appreciate it—is still on its way. And therefore, in this time gap, bad things may happen, such as the advance of Russian forces on the ground.”
“Unfortunately, I have to admit that Ukraine’s allies are behind schedule, despite their efforts. Some of them are making a great effort. But when I look at what Russia achieved in restoring the production of its defenders’ industrial base and what the entire West has achieved so far, we have to face the truth and recognize that Russia is more effective in its war effort,” he continued. “And this raises a more fundamental question to the West. If it cannot be efficient enough in this particular war effort, then how efficient can it be if other wars and crises of the same scale break out?”
But Ukraine is also confronting a significant manpower problem. The Washington Post reported last week that some in the country believe that President Zelensky’s announcement that 31,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed since 2022 is a significant underestimate.
Nonetheless, Kuleba pushed back against the argument — notably made by Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), among others — that Kyiv faced a “math” problem.
“If the war was only about math, you and I wouldn’t be talking today because the position of the minister of foreign affairs of Ukraine would not exist anymore; we would have lost the war already,” the foreign minister said.
Foreign Policy also asked about the prospect of diplomacy with Russia, wondering why Ukraine had so far neglected to invite one of the two warring parties to a series of “peace summits,” including one forthcoming meeting in Switzerland.
“Your point is valid if you address the war that Russia launched against Ukraine with textbook diplomacy, because all textbooks that we learned from tell us that you need two parties to sit down and negotiate,” Kuleba said. “Our approach comes from reality, and from the experience that we gained between 2014 and 2022, because the aggression against Ukraine started in 2014. Between 2014 and 2022, we had almost 200 rounds of talks with Russia in different formats, with mediators and bilaterally. But nothing worked. It ended up in the large-scale invasion [of 2022]. So we know that it doesn’t make sense to have Russia at the table if you cannot ensure that they act in good faith.”
He elaborated that the only ways to get Russia to negotiate in “good faith” are either to win on the battlefield or to build a global coalition of countries that can agree on shared principles and force Russia to agree.
“After that, communication with Russia may take place and Russia can be part of the talks,” Kuleba acknowledged. “Because you are right: In the end, you cannot put the war to an end without both parties.”
Moscow, for its part, has said that the peace conference in Switzerland is not a serious proposal. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday that it is “completely impossible” that a summit without Russia will yield any meaningful results.
In other diplomatic news:
— Chinese President Xi Jinping will travel to Europe next week for the first time in five years. The trip is seemingly part of an ongoing effort from Beijing to present itself as a global peacemaker. Xi wants to play a “larger role in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine that has upended global political and economic security,” according toThe Associated Press. Earlier reporting said that one of Xi’s goals during his visit will be to convince European leaders to invite Russia to participate in future peace talks.
— Zelensky says that Kyiv and Washington are working toward a long-term bilateral security agreement.
“Also, our teams, Ukraine and the United States, are currently working on a bilateral security agreement, and we are already working on a specific text,” he said during an address this week. “Our goal is to make this agreement the strongest of all. We are discussing the specific foundations of our security and cooperation. We are also working on fixing specific levels of support for this year and for the next ten years, including armed support, financial, political, and joint arms production.”
— The Ukrainian president also said that he expects his country to join NATO only after the end of the war with Russia. "In my personal opinion, we will only join NATO after we have won,” he said during a joint press conference with NATO secretary general Jens Stoltenberg. “For Ukraine to be accepted into the alliance politically, it needs victory.”
— The U.S. State Department formally accused Russia of using chemical weapons during its war in Ukraine on Wednesday. “The US conclusion tallies with testimony from Ukrainian troops who say they have faced increased encounters with gas and other irritant chemicals on parts of their frontline with Russia’s forces in recent months,” according to CNN. The Kremlin quickly denied the accusation, saying that they were “absolutely groundless, not supported by anything.”
U.S. State Department News:
In a Tuesday press briefing, State Department spokesman Vedant Patel denied reports that the U.S. was easing sanctions on certain Russian banks.
“I’m not sure what reports you’re referring to, Alex. What I can just say broadly, though, is that when it comes to our efforts to hold the Russian Federation accountable for its infringement on the territorial integrity and sovereignty of our Ukrainian partners, we have not taken our foot off the gas, going back to February of 2022 since this invasion occurred,” Patel said. “And we will continue to take steps both to continue to support our Ukrainian partners, but also through sanctions, export controls, and other measures hold the Russian Federation accountable.”
keep readingShow less
Palantir adviser Jacob Helberg (L) moderates a conversation with Palantir CEO Alex Karp (R) during a forum in the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday. (Screengrab via thehillandvalleyforum.com)
It’s only been six years since thousands of Google employees forced their employer to pull out of an AI contract with the U.S. military. At the time, it seemed like a watershed moment: Despite long historical links to the Pentagon, Silicon Valley appeared poised to shake off its ties with the world’s most powerful military.
But a lot can change in half a decade, as Palantir CEO Alex Karp gleefully reminded his audience in the U.S. Capitol Wednesday. “I historically would have been one that would rage against Silicon Valley venture [capitalists],” Karp said, joking that he used to have “all sorts of fantasies of using drone-enabled technology to exact revenge.”
Now, patriotic investors and officials are “coming together around some obvious truths,” he argued. In Karp’s telling, these principles include a realization that Western values must be protected against burgeoning threats from America’s adversaries in China and Russia as well as the dangerous “pagan” forces behind pro-Palestinian protests.
Karp’s free-wheeling presentation was the most entertaining of Wednesday’s Hill and Valley Forum, a four-hour-long event featuring a who’s-who of the growing defense tech ecosystem. But, rhetorical flourishes aside, the series of talks gave a unique window into the increasingly porous border between Silicon Valley’s most hawkish entrepreneurs and their ideological allies in Washington.
Above all, the two groups came together around their shared hatred for the Chinese Communist Party and its various nefarious doings. Panelists called for everything from slashing regulation of the weapons industry to fielding fully autonomous weapons, lest our enemies get a chance to do it first.
“Technology is moving extremely quickly, and you have your adversaries that are moving super quickly as well,” remarked Alex Wang of Scale AI. “We’re in a moment where we have to act really quickly.”
The conduit for this growing collaboration is Jacob Helberg, the event’s baby-faced organizer. In recent years, Helberg has shed his more conventional think tank background to become Silicon Valley’s man in Washington. He’s convened countless meetings between policymakers and tech leaders where attendees pitch policies to stick it to China.
Helberg now works both as an adviser to Palantir and a member of a congressional commission on U.S.-China relations. Some say this dual-hatting amounts to a conflict of interests given that he now “stands to benefit from ever-frostier relations between the two countries,” a claim that Helberg strenuously denies.
Some of Helberg’s efforts, like the campaign to ban TikTok, have already paid off. But he has his sights set on something bigger, according to the Washington Post, which reported Wednesday that the young hotshot has already started drafting an executive order for a potential future Trump administration that would strip away President Joe Biden’s AI regulations (limited as they may be).
Helberg’s convening powers were on full display Wednesday: Some of Washington’s most powerful politicians graced the stage, including Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), as well as Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), who holds an important position on the House Appropriations Committee.
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) — who, you may remember, is currently fighting for his political life — took time out of his schedule to warn the crowd about the threat China poses to our very way of life. “We must make clear that if America and American companies lose, that means China wins,” Johnson said.
Even Donald Trump made an appearance, if only in the form of a brief, pre-recorded statement filmed on what appeared to be the ex-president’s private jet. “Our country’s going through a lot of problems right now, but we’re going to make it bigger, better, and even stronger than before,” Trump said, noting that he’d had a “very productive” meeting about AI with Helberg.
The day’s panels had an odd quality to them, possibly because none of the journalists in attendance were invited to moderate. Instead, the audience was treated to a series of largely unstructured conversations between politicians and the kind of people who can buy an island.
Graham warned the audience that Chinese cars could be little more than “roving spy labs” meant to gather information on American patriots. Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) argued that Americans will have to come around to the idea of AI drones that make “life and death decisions” because our enemies will surely do the same.
The growing bonds between Silicon Valley and Washington are “recreating a culture that says it is great to be American,” remarked Josh Wolfe, a VC at Lux Capital, adding that “we do have adversaries with malicious aims” that can only be countered with good old-fashioned American capitalism.
The funhouse mirror aspects of the event, plentiful as they were, are a distraction from the fundamental problem: A growing part of Silicon Valley is ready to unshackle AI from most if not all oversight, and Congress is more than happy to help them.
There is perhaps no greater evidence of this fact than the effusive praise Sen. Booker lavished on his fellow panelists, all of whom lead various AI firms. “Often unsung heroes are those that are the innovators and the scientists and those who are creating systems and opportunities that we now in our generation take for granted,” the lawmaker said. “You three are frontline players in ways that have me humbled and in awe.”