Follow us on social

2019-12-13t153312z_1581931361_rc2fud9gvrn6_rtrmadp_3_usa-impeachment-trump-scaled

Progressives in Congress call for talks with Russia to reach a cease-fire in Ukraine

In a new letter, 30 House Democrats argued that military support alone is not enough to end the brutal conflict.

Europe

Today 30 members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, led by Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), called on the Biden Administration to pair support for Ukraine’s self-defense with a diplomatic effort to pursue a negotiated cease-fire in the war in Ukraine.

This represents the first concerted effort by members of Congress to call for prioritizing a peaceful, diplomatic resolution to the conflict.

The letter praises the Biden Administration’s policy of supporting Ukraine’s self-defense while simultaneously avoiding direct U.S. military engagement with Russia. The signers say that this policy should be combined with  “vigorous diplomatic efforts in support of a negotiated settlement and ceasefire” through “direct talks with Russia,” and that the conditions for such a cease-fire should include security guarantees to protect a “free and independent” Ukraine.

The letter comes against a backdrop of increasing warnings of potentially disastrous escalation resulting from a prolonged conflict. President Biden has stated that the world is closer to nuclear catastrophe than at any point since the Cuban Missile Crisis 60 years ago. Retired Admiral Mike Mullen, the former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently called for negotiations and remarked that Russian President Vladimir Putin is a “cornered animal” and that the U.S. should “do everything we possibly can to try to get to the table to resolve this thing.”

While Ukraine appears to have enjoyed recent successes on the battlefield, Russia has committed to mobilizing three hundred thousand additional troops, more than doubling the combat power committed to the conflict. It has also escalated its attacks on Ukrainian civilian and energy infrastructure. This increase in the intensity of the war, and the availability of resources for further escalation, make any near-term prospects for a decisive military victory by either side very doubtful.

Indeed, administration officials have recently indicated to reporters that neither Russia nor Ukraine is capable of winning the war outright. This implies that the only alternative to diplomacy is an indefinite war of attrition.

The letter also arrives at a charged time in the domestic political debate on Ukraine. House minority leader Kevin McCarthy and Republican Senator Marco Rubio have recently stated that Ukraine should not continue to receive a “blank check” from Congress if Republicans take power in the upcoming midterm elections. This has led some current members of Congress to advocate for a massive $50 billion package during the lame duck session, before any new members of Congress take office. Opening a diplomatic track to pursue a cease-fire could offer an alternative to the “blank check” opposed by some in Washington while still seeking terms that protect Ukrainian independence and security.  

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently said that Russia is open to negotiations but has received no serious offers. However, the U.S. rejected this statement as “posturing,” and there is no question that the two sides would begin negotiations with a great distance to bridge.

Acknowledging this reality, the CPC letter states that signers are “under no illusions regarding the difficulties involved in engaging Russia given its outrageous and illegal invasion of Ukraine,” but that negotiations in pursuit of an acceptable framework for peace are nevertheless preferable to continued war and devastation.


Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) holds up a copy of the U.S. Constitution as she votes yes to the second article of impeachment during a House Judiciary Committee markup of the articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, December 13, 2019, on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S. Patrick Semansky/Pool via REUTERS
Europe
Could Trump's Congo-Rwanda mineral deals actually save lives?
Top photo credit: Foreign Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner, left, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, center, and Foreign Minister of Rwanda Olivier Nduhungirehe, right, during ceremony to sign a Declaration of Principles between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda, at the State Department, in Washington, D.C., on Friday, April 25, 2025. (Graeme Sloan/Sipa USA)

Could Trump's Congo-Rwanda mineral deals actually save lives?

Africa

There may be a light at the end of the tunnel as representatives from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda are hoping to end the violence between them by signing a peace deal in a joint signing ceremony in Washington today.

This comes after the United States and Qatar have been working for months to mediate an end to the conflict roiling the eastern DRC for years.

keep readingShow less
Trump steve Bannon
Top photo credit: President Donald Trump (White House/Flickr) and Steve Bannon (Gage Skidmore/Flickr)

Don't read the funeral rites for MAGA restraint yet

Washington Politics

On the same night President Donald Trump ordered U.S. airstrikes against Iran, POLITICO reported, “MAGA largely falls in line on Trump’s Iran strikes.”

The report cited “Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist and critic of GOP war hawks,” who posted on X, “Iran gave President Trump no choice.” It noted that former Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, a longtime Trump supporter, “said on X that the president’s strike didn’t necessarily portend a larger conflict.” Gaetz said. “Trump the Peacemaker!”

keep readingShow less
Antonio Guterres and Ursula von der Leyen
Top image credit: Alexandros Michailidis / Shutterstock.com

UN Charter turns 80: Why do Europeans mock it so?

Europe

Eighty years ago, on June 26, 1945, the United Nations Charter was signed in San Francisco. But you wouldn’t know it if you listened to European governments today.

After two devastating global military conflicts, the Charter explicitly aimed to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.” And it did so by famously outlawing the use of force in Article 2(4). The only exceptions were to be actions taken in self-defense against an actual or imminent attack and missions authorized by the U.N. Security Council to restore collective security.

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.