Follow us on social

Mainer going viral for passionate speech against Ukraine resolution

Mainer going viral for passionate speech against Ukraine resolution

The measure passed the state legislature by huge margins but Eric Brakey believes his words have resonance outside the Beltway.

Analysis | Europe

A Maine state senator's statehouse remarks on Friday about the Ukraine war have made a big noise outside the Pine Tree State, particularly on Twitter. Eric Brakey, a self-described libertarian Republican, took advantage of a vote on a joint resolution, "Expressing Support for the People of Ukraine on the One-Year Anniversary of Russia's Invasion of Ukraine," to criticize the current Biden policy in Washington as eschewing diplomacy to prolong the war, which he said is ultimately the worst thing to happen for the people of Ukraine, and the world.

So it is not for the sake of any despot that I oppose this resolution, but for love of our country and the wisdom of early leaders, like George Washington and John Quincy Adams, who warned our country against entangling alliances, being drawn into European power struggles, and going abroad in search of monsters to destroy.

And for the love of all people caught up in this war — for the conscripted and enslaved men of Ukraine and Russia pitted against each other to the death for the benefit of oligarchs; for the many dead and displaced civilians; for those starving across the world from the consequences of war in the Ukrainian breadbasket; for those in Europe, America, and Maine freezing this winter due to natural gas shortages; and for everyone alive today and generations yet unborn who face the very real threat of nuclear annihilation — we must demand immediate diplomacy to end to this war.

Yet we see no diplomacy from Washington. In the rattling of their sabers for war with Russia, the uniparty claims it is love of democracy and hatred of tyrants that drives them.

The measure was fairly boilerplate as far as these declarations of support have gone in local and national legislative arenas since the start of the war a year ago. So despite Brakey's best efforts, the joint resolution passed both the House and Senate by huge margins. However, while Brakey was only one of four lawmakers in the senate to vote against it, there was a "testy debate" for one hour on the House side, with double digit Republicans voting against it and speaking passionately on the floor.

“In spirit, I support the people, but I cannot support continued, unchecked and unbalanced money just going out not accounted for,” said Rep. Jeffrey Adams (R-Lebanon).

“I got a son in the Army, got a son in the Navy, they’re the ones that are going to do the fighting.” 

Brakey's insistence that the Russian invasion wasn't "unprovoked" — as the resolution suggested — but instead brought on in part by NATO-expansionist policy since the fall of the Iron Curtain, is sure to rankle, as it is out of step with the status quo messaging of the mainstream. And despite slippage in the polls, Americans are still strongly in favor of supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes. However, for the first time since the war began, less than 50 percent of Americans said they are in favor of sending more weapons to Kyiv.

"I have actually gotten a lot less pushback than I thought it would," he told Responsible Statecraft, referring to the video of his remarks. He acknowledged that the Twitter wave has been generated largely from supporters of his position outside of Maine. He hopes that will change and Mainers will get more and more receptive to alternative views.

"There are a few people who have insisted on name calling and pushing the party line on this issue and that's expected," he said. "But the bulk of this response has been positive."


Maine State Sen. Eric Brakey, R-Androscoggin, during an earlier floor speech in the Senate Chamber at the State House in Augusta, Maine. (photo courtesy of Maine Senate Republican Office/Mike Fern)|
Analysis | Europe
Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare
Top photo credit: Seth Harp book jacket (Viking press) US special operators/deviant art/creative commons

Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare

Media

In 2020 and 2021, 109 U.S. soldiers died at Fort Bragg, the largest military base in the country and the central location for the key Special Operations Units in the American military.

Only four of them were on overseas deployments. The others died stateside, mostly of drug overdoses, violence, or suicide. The situation has hardly improved. It was recently revealed that another 51 soldiers died at Fort Bragg in 2023. According to U.S. government data, these represent more military fatalities than have occurred at the hands of enemy forces in any year since 2013.

keep readingShow less
Trump Netanyahu
Top image credit: President Donald Trump hosts a bilateral dinner for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Monday, July 7, 2025, in the Blue Room. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

The case for US Middle East retrenchment has never been clearer

Middle East

Is Israel becoming the new hegemon of the Middle East? The answer to this question is an important one.

Preventing the rise of a rival regional hegemon — a state with a preponderance of military and economic power — in Eurasia has long been a core goal of U.S. foreign policy. During the Cold War, Washington feared Soviet dominion over Europe. Today, U.S. policymakers worry that China’s increasingly capable military will crowd the United States out of Asia’s lucrative economic markets. The United States has also acted repeatedly to prevent close allies in Europe and Asia from becoming military competitors, using promises of U.S. military protection to keep them weak and dependent.

keep readingShow less
United Nations
Top image credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

Do we need a treaty on neutrality?

Global Crises

In an era of widespread use of economic sanctions, dual-use technology exports, and hybrid warfare, the boundary between peacetime and wartime has become increasingly blurry. Yet understandings of neutrality remain stuck in the time of trench warfare. An updated conception of neutrality, codified through an international treaty, is necessary for global security.

Neutrality in the 21st century is often whatever a country wants it to be. For some, such as the European neutrals like Switzerland and Ireland, it is compatible with non-U.N. sanctions (such as by the European Union) while for others it is not. Countries in the Global South are also more likely to take a case-by-case approach, such as choosing to not take a stance on a specific conflict and instead call for a peaceful resolution while others believe a moral position does not undermine neutrality.

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.