Follow us on social

google cta
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
google cta
google cta

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
google cta
Europe
United Nations
Monitors at the United Nations General Assembly hall display the results of a vote on a resolution condemning the annexation of parts of Ukraine by Russia, amid Russia's invasion of Ukraine, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City, New York, U.S., October 12, 2022. REUTERS/David 'Dee' Delgado||

We're burying the rules based order. But what's next?

Global Crises

In a Davos speech widely praised for its intellectual rigor and willingness to confront established truths, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney finally laid the fiction of the “rules-based international order” to rest.

The “rules-based order” — or RBIO — was never a neutral description of the post-World War II system of international law and multilateral institutions. Rather, it was a discourse born out of insecurity over the West’s decline and unwillingness to share power. Aimed at preserving the power structures of the past by shaping the norms and standards of the future, the RBIO was invariably something that needed to be “defended” against those who were accused of opposing it, rather than an inclusive system that governed relations between all states.

keep readingShow less
china trump
President Donald Trump announces the creation of a critical minerals reserve during an event in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, DC on Monday, February 2, 2026. Trump announced the creation of “Project Vault,” a rare earth stockpile to lower reliance on China for rare earths and other resources. Photo by Bonnie Cash/Pool/Sipa USA

Trump vs. his China hawks

Asia-Pacific

In the year since President Donald Trump returned to the White House, China hawks have started to panic. Leading lights on U.S. policy toward Beijing now warn that Trump is “barreling toward a bad bargain” with the Chinese Communist Party. Matthew Pottinger, a key architect of Trump’s China policy in his first term, argues that the president has put Beijing in a “sweet spot” through his “baffling” policy decisions.

Even some congressional Republicans have criticized Trump’s approach, particularly following his decision in December to allow the sale of powerful Nvidia AI chips to China. “The CCP will use these highly advanced chips to strengthen its military capabilities and totalitarian surveillance,” argued Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), who chairs the influential Select Committee on Competition with China.

keep readingShow less
Is America still considered part of the 'Americas'?
Top image credit: bluestork/shutterstock.com

Is America still considered part of the 'Americas'?

Latin America

On January 7, the White House announced its plans to withdraw from 66 international bodies whose work it had deemed inconsistent with U.S. national interests.

While many of these organizations were international in nature, three of them were specific to the Americas — the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research, the Pan American Institute of Geography and History, and the U.N.’s Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. The decision came on the heels of the Dominican Republic postponing the X Summit of the Americas last year following disagreements over who would be invited and ensuing boycotts.

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.