Follow us on social

Mullen-abc-scaled

Former Joint Chiefs chair calls for talks to end Ukraine war

Retired Admiral Mike Mullen said we have to ‘do everything we possibly can to try to get to the table to resolve this thing.’

Reporting | Europe

A former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman said on Sunday that the United States needs to work toward ending the war in Ukraine as soon as possible, amid reports of escalating violence and talk of increased threats of nuclear weapons use. 

Retired Admiral Mike Mullen — the nation’s top military officer during parts of the Bush and Obama administrations — assessed on ABC’s This Week that Russian President Vladimir Putin is a “cornered animal,” a situation that he said “speaks to the need to get to the table” and negotiate. 

Referring to President Biden’s recent warning of a nuclear conflict, Mullen added, “I think we need to back off that a little bit and do everything we possibly can to try to get to the table to resolve this thing.”

Mullen also urged Secretary of State Antony Blinken and other top diplomats to figure out a way to get Putin and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky to talk. “[A]s is typical in any war, it has got to end and usually there are negotiations associated with that,” he said. “The sooner the better as far as I'm concerned.”

The former Joint Chiefs chair also said the possibility of Putin using nuclear weapons is very real. “He has got some very small ones, which theoretically while devastating would localize the damage,” Mullen said. “He could pick a symbolic target. He could pick Zelensky's hometown, for instance, as a target as opposed to having a big impact on the battlefield that would badly hurt the Ukrainian Army, which has fought so well.”

Mullen’s comments came just hours before Russia’s retaliatory strikes after a bridge connecting Crimea with Russia was blown up on Sunday.

Quincy Institute director of grand strategy George Beebe said the series of recent strikes from both sides makes a resolution to the conflict more pressing. “It is time for the United States to supplement its military support for Ukraine with a diplomatic track to manage this crisis before it spirals out of control,” he said


Screen grab via abcnews.go.com
Reporting | Europe
US Navy Taiwan Strait
TAIWAN STRAIT (August 23, 2019) – US Naval Officers scan the horizon from the bridge while standing watch, part of Commander, Amphibious Squadron 11, operating in the Indo-Pacific region to enhance interoperability with partners and serve as a ready-response force for any type of contingency. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Markus Castaneda)

Despite setbacks, trends still point to US foreign policy restraint

Military Industrial Complex

It’s been only a few days since Israel first struck Iranian nuclear and regime targets, but Washington’s remaining neoconservatives and long-time Iran hawks are already celebrating.

After more than a decade of calling for military action against Iran, they finally got their wish — sort of. The United States did not immediately join Israel’s campaign, but President Donald Trump acquiesced to Israel’s decision to use military force and has not meaningfully restrained Israel’s actions. For those hoping Trump would bring radical change to U.S. foreign policy, his failure to halt Israel’s preventative war is a disappointment and a betrayal of past promises.

keep readingShow less
iraqi protests iran israel
Top photo credit: Iraqi Shi'ite Muslims hold a cutout of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as they attend a protest against Israeli strikes on Iran, in Baghdad, Iraq, June 16, 2025. REUTERS/Ahmed Saad

Iraq on razor's edge between Iran and US interests in new war

Middle East

As Israeli jets and Iranian rockets streak across the Middle Eastern skies, Iraq finds itself caught squarely in the crossfire.

With regional titans clashing above its head, Iraq’s fragile and hard-won stability, painstakingly rebuilt over decades of conflict, now hangs precariously in the balance. Washington’s own tacit acknowledgement of Iraq’s vulnerable position was laid bare by its decision to partially evacuate embassy personnel in Iraq and allow military dependents to leave the region.

This withdrawal, prompted by intelligence indicating Israeli preparations for long-range strikes, highlighted that Iraq’s airspace would be an unwitting corridor for Israeli and Iranian operations.

Prime Minister Mohammed Shia’ al-Sudani is now caught in a complicated bind, attempting to uphold Iraq’s security partnership with the United States while simultaneously facing intense domestic pressure from powerful, Iran-aligned Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) factions. These groups, emboldened by the Israel-Iran clash, have intensified their calls for American troop withdrawal and threaten renewed attacks against U.S. personnel, viewing them as legitimate targets and enablers of Israeli aggression.

keep readingShow less
George Bush mission accomplished
This file photo shows Bush delivering a speech to crew aboard the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, as the carrier steamed toward San Diego, California on May 1, 2003. via REUTERS

Déjà coup: Iran war activates regime change dead-enders

Washington Politics

By now you’ve likely seen the viral video of an Iranian television reporter fleeing off-screen as Israel bombed the TV station where she was recording live. As the Quincy Institute’s Adam Weinstein quickly pointed out, Israel's attack on the broadcasting facility is directly out of the regime change playbook, “meant to shake public confidence in the Iranian government's ability to protect itself” and by implication, Iran’s citizenry.

Indeed, in the United States there is a steady drumbeat of media figures and legislators who have been loudly championing Israel’s apparent desire to overthrow the regime of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

keep readingShow less

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.