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
Recep Tayyip Erdogan Benjamin Netanyahu
Top photo credit: President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan (Shutterstock/ Mustafa Kirazli) and Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Salty View/Shutterstock)
Is Turkey's big break with Israel for real?

Why Israel is now turning its sights on Turkey

Middle East

As the distribution of power shifts in the region, with Iran losing relative power and Israel and Turkey emerging on top, an intensified rivalry between Tel Aviv and Ankara is not a question of if, but how. It is not a question of whether they choose the rivalry, but how they choose to react to it: through confrontation or peaceful management.

As I describe in Treacherous Alliance, a similar situation emerged after the end of the Cold War: The collapse of the Soviet Union dramatically changed the global distribution of power, and the defeat of Saddam's Iraq in the Persian Gulf War reshuffled the regional geopolitical deck. A nascent bipolar regional structure took shape with Iran and Israel emerging as the two main powers with no effective buffer between them (since Iraq had been defeated). The Israelis acted on this first, inverting the strategy that had guided them for the previous decades: The Doctrine of the Periphery. According to this doctrine, Israel would build alliances with the non-Arab states in its periphery (Iran, Turkey, and Ethiopia) to balance the Arab powers in its vicinity (Iraq, Syria, and Egypt, respectively).

keep readingShow less
Havana, Cuba
Top Image Credit: Havana, Cuba, 2019. (CLWphoto/Shutterstock)

Trump lifted sanctions on Syria. Now do Cuba.

North America

President Trump’s new National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM) on Cuba, announced on June 30, reaffirms the policy of sanctions and hostility he articulated at the start of his first term in office. In fact, the new NSPM is almost identical to the old one.

The policy’s stated purpose is to “improve human rights, encourage the rule of law, foster free markets and free enterprise, and promote democracy” by restricting financial flows to the Cuban government. It reaffirms Trump’s support for the 1996 Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, which explicitly requires regime change — that Cuba become a multiparty democracy with a free market economy (among other conditions) before the U.S. embargo will be lifted.

keep readingShow less
SPD Germany Ukraine
Top Photo: Lars Klingbeil (l-r, SPD), Federal Minister of Finance, Vice-Chancellor and SPD Federal Chairman, and Bärbel Bas (SPD), Federal Minister of Labor and Social Affairs and SPD Party Chairwoman, bid farewell to the members of the previous Federal Cabinet Olaf Scholz (SPD), former Federal Chancellor, Nancy Faeser, Saskia Esken, SPD Federal Chairwoman, Karl Lauterbach, Svenja Schulze and Hubertus Heil at the SPD Federal Party Conference. At the party conference, the SPD intends to elect a new executive committee and initiate a program process. Kay Nietfeld/dpa via Reuters Connect

Does Germany’s ruling coalition have a peace problem?

Europe

Surfacing a long-dormant intra-party conflict, the Friedenskreise (peace circles) within the Social Democratic Party of Germany has published a “Manifesto on Securing Peace in Europe” in a stark challenge to the rearmament line taken by the SPD leaders governing in coalition with the conservative CDU-CSU under Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

Although the Manifesto clearly does not have broad support in the SPD, the party’s leader, Deputy Chancellor and Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil, won only 64% support from the June 28-29 party conference for his performance so far, a much weaker endorsement than anticipated. The views of the party’s peace camp may be part of the explanation.

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.