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
Hezbollah Member of Parliament Ali Fayyad
Top image credit: Hezbollah Member of Parliament Ali Fayyad stands in Burj al-Muluk, near the southern Lebanese village of Kfar Kila, where Israeli forces remained on the ground after a deadline for their withdrawal passed as residents sought to return to homes in the border area, Lebanon January 26, 2025. REUTERS/Karamallah Daher

How Hezbollah is navigating a new era

Middle East

The Lebanese Hezbollah movement is facing unprecedentedly challenging times, having lost much of its senior leadership in its latest war with Israel.

Events in neighboring Syria have further compounded the organizations losses. Not only did Hezbollah lose its main transit route for weapons deliveries with the fall of the Assad dynasty, but it now has to live with the reality of a new leadership in Damascus affiliated with the very same Sunni-extremist groups Hezbollah had fought against in support of the former leadership.

keep readingShow less
Zelensky, Starmer, Macron
Trop photo credit: Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer and France's President Emmanuel Macron embrace after holding a meeting during a summit at Lancaster House in central London, Britain March 2, 2025. JUSTIN TALLIS/Pool via REUTERS
The flimsy UK, France, Ukraine 'peace plan' discussed Sunday

The flimsy UK, France, Ukraine 'peace plan' discussed Sunday

Europe

Full details are yet to emerge of the “peace plan” that the UK, EU and Ukrainian leaders worked out in London on Sunday, and are to present to the Trump administration. But from what they have said so far, while one part is necessary and even essential, another is obstructive and potentially disastrous.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said after the summit that the following four points were agreed: To keep providing military aid to Ukraine; that Ukraine must participate in all peace talks; that European states will aim to deter any future Russian invasion of Ukraine; and that they will form a "coalition of the willing" to defend Ukraine and guarantee peace there in future.

keep readingShow less
Trump Vance Zelensky
Top image credit: U.S. President Donald Trump meets with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy as U.S. Vice President JD Vance reacts at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., February 28, 2025. REUTERS/Brian Snyder

Hard truths about the Trump-Zelensky-Vance Oval Office blow-up

Europe

The sort of clash that occurred between President Trump and Vice President Vance and President Zelensky is common enough between leaders in private. As a public spectacle however it is almost unprecedented, and certainly in the surroundings of the White House. There was fault on both sides for the way things got out of hand; but Zelensky was the more foolish participant, because (as Trump pointed out) he is the one in the weak position.

There were multiple reasons for this diplomatic debacle, but the most important was a fundamental divergence of views on how the war began and how to end it. President Zelensky, like many people in the U.S. and European establishments, puts all the blame for the war on Russia, believes that the Russian government is not only still pursuing not only maximalist aims in Ukraine, but intends to attack the Baltic States and NATO.

keep readingShow less

Trump transition

Latest

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.