Foreign Policy Decisions

1) Paul McLeary and Erin Banco, “Ukraine presses Biden to lift ban on using US weapons to strike Russia; Kyiv watched as Russians massed on the border, but they weren’t allowed to use long-range missiles provided by Washington,” Politico, May 14, 2024 (05:03 PM EDT);

2) James Kilner, “Let us use US weapons to strike inside Russia, pleads Ukraine amid Kharkiv advance; Ukrainian soldiers ‘frustrated’ at having to stand by as Putin’s soldiers build up ranks behind frontier,” The Telegraph, May 15, 2024 (5:46pm);

3) “Antony Blinken spielt in Kiew „Rocking in the free World; Es ist der vierte Besuch von US-Außenminister Blinken in Kiew seit Beginn des russischen Angriffskriegs. Dieses Mal besuchte der 62-Jährige eine Bar und ging mit der Gitarre auf eine Bühne, um einen Klassiker von Neil Young zu spielen.,” Die Welt, den 15. Mai 2024 (10:30 Uhr)

4) “Antony Blinken plays “Rocking in the free World” in Kiev; It is the fourth visit of US Secretary of State Blinken to Kiev since the beginning of the Russian war of aggression. This time, the 62-year-old visited a bar and went on a stage with the guitar to play a classic by Neil Young,” Die Welt, May 15, 2024 (10:30 am);

5) “Ukraine soll offenbar selbst entscheiden, ob sie russisches Staatsgebiet mit US-Waffen angreift; Ukrainische Gegenangriffe mit gelieferten Waffen jenseits der eigenen Grenzen galten lange als Tabu. Nach Großbritannien rücken nun aber offenbar auch die USA davon ab. Setzt das Kanzler Scholz unter Druck?” DercSpiegel, den 15. Mai 2024 (17:36 Uhr);

4) “Ukraine should apparently decide for itself whether to attack Russian territory with US weapons; Ukrainian counterattacks with delivered weapons beyond their own borders were long considered taboo. After Great Britain, however, the USA is now apparently also moving away from it. Is Chancellor Scholz under pressure?” Der Spiegel, May 15, 2024 (5:36 p.m.);

1) Philip Bump, “Biden’s extremely big bet; The president thinks that his 2020 voters will come back home. It’s a historically big gamble,” Washington Post, May 14, 2024 (4:50 pm EDT);

Policy Incoherence

United States foreign policy is characterized by a stunning policy incoherence, as it strives to counter Russian violations of international law in Ukraine including in particular its commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity on a massive scale, while it supports Israel and its commission ofcwar crimes in Gaza on a massive scale.

To counter Russian aggression in Ukraine over the course of what is likely to beca long, drawn-out war, a war that could lst for decades, the U.S. and the West need to secure the support of the many countries misleadingly grouped together as the “Global South”.

By its support of Israel in Gaza—and tge massive war crimes evident for all to see, such as the early total blockade of the Gaza Strip cutting off food, water, electricity, and fuel, and the bombardment of civilian infrastructure leaving over 34,000 dead (the majority of which were civilians, particularly women and children, the U.S. has manifested a hypocrisy and double-standard which maybwell make it impossible to rally the countries of the Global South to join the sanctions regimes which alone might cripple the Russian economy.

Biden has lost the Global South, at least for a generation or two.

This policy incoherence is the result of the absence of a critical ingredient in U.S. foreign policy. It is more than an absent ingredient. It is more like an active disdain for international law.

This disdain is not new in U.S. foreign policy. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 in flagrant violation of Article 2 paragraph 4 of the U.N. Charter marked the most recent veering away by the United States from the course of international law.

The so-called “War on Terror” signaled increasing deviations from International Humanitarian Law as the U.S. adopted idiostncratic interpretations of IHL (the law of war) not shared by most other countries.

Recent American support for Israel and its war in Gaza has drawn the U.S. even further from support for international law and towards Israel’s utter disdain for international law.

International Law

If President Biden and the U.S. appreciated the importance and usefulness of International Law, they might have taken the position that Israel must comply with International Law in general and International Humanitarian Law in particular in proceeding against Hamas in Gaza.

They might also articulated their criticism of the Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023 in terms of International Humanitarian Law and tgecwar crimes Hamas committed on that day and continues to commit each days as it holds be hostages.

They might have supported (though indirectly, since the U.S, is not a party to the Statute of the ICC and has not accepted its jurisdiction) the issuance of internatiinal arrest warrants for the head and leaders of Hamas Such action would largely foreclose current U.S. efforts to persuade or intimidate the Chief Prosecutor of the ICC not to issue such warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu and other top Israeli leaders.

Consequently, if U.S. policy were based on compliance with International Humanitarian Law, it might have blunted criticism of the U.S, being anti-Israel or pro-Palestinian. Moreover, on student campuses such a focus might have done a lot to dampen the antisemitism that erupted basically as a reaction to Israel attacks on civilians in Gaza, It might also have had a very positive impact on thecst

Such a policy, furthermore, would be completely consistent with U.S. policy opposing Russian aggression and crimes against humanity in Ukraine. While the countries of tge Global South might well remain critical of the U.S. for its support of Israel, they would not be able to call out the hypocrisy and double-standard of the U.S. calling out Russia for its utter barbarism in committing war crimes and crimes against humanity in Ukraine, while in effect looking the other way as Israel commits war crimes in Gaza.

There are “costa” associated with a policy of appreciating international law and using international law as a sword in conducting the foreign policy of tge United States, or any country for that matter.

These will be addresses in a future article on “Tge inconvenient aspects of upholding international law.”

A recent incident symbolized Israel’s current attitudes toward the U.N., the U.N. Charter, and international law including International Humanitarian Law. The Israel Ambassador to the U.N. General Assemby ostentatiously shredded a copy of the U.N. Charter while speaking at the podium prior to the vote on a General Assembly resolution supporting the granting of further rights to Israel in the institution.

Israel’s ambassador to the U.N., Gilad Erdan, argued that those voting for the resolution were shredding the U.N. Charter. The stunt was of a puece of Israel’s unrelenting attacks on the United Nation.

See Farnaz Fassihi, “U.N. General Assembly Adopts Resolution in Support of Palestinian Statehood; The vote comes after the United States last month vetoed a Security Council measure granting full U.N. membership to a Palestinian state,“ New York Times, May 10, 2024.

1) Bret Stephens, “A Thank-You Note to the Campus Protesters,” New York Times,
May 7, 2024 (3:30 p.m. ET);

1) Simeon Tegel, “Milei sacks historians whose research led to convictions of junta officers; Decision justified by accusing the team of “McCarthyism” and persecuting military personnel,” The Telegraph,April 16, 2024 (7:24pm);

1) Tony Diver,, “US shared ‘gobsmacking’ Covid lab leak file with UK; Evidence supporting theory was presented to Dominic Raab, then the Foreign Secretary – but ‘was ignored’,” The Telegraph, May 4, 2024 (8:00pm);

Americans are distracted from the Ukraine war. That is, the war to save civilization from Russian barbarism.

American news media, even the best, are not good at picking out what is really significant in the daily torrent of news and explaining to audiences why a particular news development is really important.

Still, Europeans are closer to the war in Ukraine, and there is evidence that some of their leaders, including those in Britain and France as well as Poland and Eastern Europe are following the situation very closely and are beginning to react to Russian aggression and barbarism, which threatens not only Europe but the whole world.

British foreign minister David Cameron has announced a significant military aid package for Ukraine, and stated that he doesn’t mind if Ukraine uses British-supplied weapons to attack targets in Russia. President Emmanuel Macron of France has recently said that if the Russians break through the Ukrainian lines, France would have to consider very seriously a request from Ukraine to send French ground troops to the country.

The current situation is grave. The Russians are making significant advances on the grounds as their cities and critical infrastructure are subject to devastating attacks, all the more devastating due to inadequate sir defenses, Russian advances on the ground are largely due to the failure of the U.S. to supply urgently-needed munitions, particularly artillery shells, as a result of Republicans on the House holding up Biden’s $60 billion military aid package for six months.

Meanwhile, back in the U.S., decision-makers are distracted in the Ground-Hog-Day spectacle of debates over the livelihood of a temporary cease-fire in Gaza in exchange for a certain number of hostages, and the demonstrations on campus which at bottom are a reaction to Israel’s continuation of its war against Gaza, which has led to over 34,000 deaths since October 7, 2023.

Ground Hog Day includes, of course, the endless fascination of American withs the details of whatever Donald Trump is doing at the moment. In recent days he has been sitting through his first criminal trial. News coverage fails to remind viewers and readers, at every junction, of the specific crimes Trump is accused of and the overwhelming evidence supporting the charges.

One of the candidates for the presidency is an apparent master criminal who sought to overthrow the Constitution, but you would never know that from the news coverage. And if you are like the half of the population which has no memory–maybe it’s a much higher percentage, actually–you might think Trump is just another candidate.

Whatever happens in Gaza and the Middle East, it will be dwarfed in significance if Russia wins the war in Ukraine.

That is where leaders’ attention should be focused, as it is now in Great Britain and France.

American soldiers may pay the price in future years, as they did in World War II, but for now America’s leaders are simply whistling in the dark.

Endlessly distracted by the Ground-Hog-Day spectacle of international and national politics.

Everything repeats, day after day.

Until it doesn’t.

1) Warren Murray with Guardian writers and agencies, “Ukraine war briefing: Ukrainians ‘have the right to strike inside Russia’, says David Cameron; France’s Macron stands firm on potentially sending troops; sanctions on Russian gas leave Gazprom with record annual loss. What we know on day 800,” The Guardian, May 3, 2024 (01.06 BST);

2) Patrick Wintour, “David Cameron commits £3bn a year in aid to Ukraine ‘for as long as necessary’; The foreign secretary called the conflict ‘the challenge of our generation’ after making second trip to Kyiv to meet Zelenskiy,” The Guardian, May 2, 2024 (22.07 BST);

3) Christoph B. Schiltz, “Mit dieser Horror-Waffe erreicht Russland die nächste Stufe der Brutalität,” Die Welt, den 2. Mai 2024;

4) Christoph B. Schiltz, “With this horror weapon, Russia reaches the next level of brutality,” Die Welt, May 2, 2024.
Status: 02.05.2024 | Reading time: 6 minutes
Christoph B. Schiltz
By Christoph B. Schiltz

Analysis

Foreign Minister Cameron broke ranks with Joe Biden’s red line prohibiting attacks by Ukraine against targets in Russia with weapons supplied by NATO countries.

Patrick Wintour of the Guardian reported thefollowing:

The UK has promised £3bn a year “for as long as it is necessary” to help Ukraine, David Cameron said on Thursday as he made his second visit to Kyiv since becoming UK foreign secretary.

He also said he had no objection if weapons supplied by the UK were used to strike inside Russia.
…
Cameron said in a Reuters interview: “Ukraine has the right to strike inside Russia because Russia is striking inside Ukraine … You can understand why Ukraine feels the need to defend itself.”
…
Cameron said: “Ukraine is fiercely defending itself against Russia’s illegal invasion, making a war Putin thought would last days take years. But this war is the challenge of our generation and Ukraine cannot fight it alone.”

“We must all step up to ensure Ukraine has what it needs to win. Through our multi-year military funding, weapons provision and vital support to protect and repair Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, the UK is standing with Ukraine and we will stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.”
”

Importantly, Cameron provided clarity on goal of the war.

THIS IS SIGNIFICANT. LET US REPEAT IT.

“This war is the challenge of our generation and Ukraine cannot fight it alone.”

“We must all step up to ensure Ukraine has what it needs to win. Through our multi-year military funding, weapons provision and vital support to protect and repair Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, the UK is standing with Ukraine and we will stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.”

The mantra of NATO country leaders has been that tbeir countries will support Ukraine “as long as it takes”–leaving open tge questiin of whether the goal is victory or simply avoiding defeat.

Cameron has now explicitly endorsed tge goal of victory. Others will follow. Others will also follow Britain’s example and supply weapons to Ukraine without prohibiting their use against targets in Russia.

The strategic significance of these remarks is HUGE.

At tge same time, Warren Murray et. al. report in The Guardian the following:

Emmanuel Macron has said the question of sending western troops to Ukraine would “legitimately” arise if Russia broke through Ukrainian frontlines and Kyiv made such a request. In an interview with the Economist, the French president maintained his stance of strategic ambiguity, saying: “I’m not ruling anything out, because we are facing someone who is not ruling anything out.”

While the sclerotic decision-making characteristic of the Biden administration shows no movement, its appears that Britain and France understand the dire situation in Ukraine and have the mental agikity to respond appropriately.

We may be witnessing the passing of the mantle of leadership of the Atlantic Alliance from Washington to London and Paris.

Democratic leaders are afraid to speak out forcefully against the pro-Palestian demonstrators who are sweeing our campuses, in a way that is very similar to the way Republican leaders werecare are afraid to speak out forcefully agains Donald Trump and his supporters.

Few have the courage to stand up and offer guidance by shouting out the truth.

Leaders in bith parties are cowed by their fear of the mob.

Perhapsvwith the Me-too movement where internet mons swept everythinh befpre them, andv ruined lives and careers with mob allegations which ifnored the requirement of due process of law. Those who should have spoken out didn’t, and tge few who did often themselves became targets if the mob.

There is pnomclearer case than that of Senator Al Franken, hounded from office for what was essentially p joking around by a comedian, and Garrison Keillor who became tge target and victim of the mob forbdefending Franken in his new Washington Post opinion column, which was immediarely canceled as was his 30-year relationship with Minnessota Public Radio, whose audience he builtvwith his immensely popular weekly program Prairie Hom Companion,

No one will xall out the pro-Palestinian demonstrators, or even help them focus their rage in a way that nakes sense.

They and many others are outraged by the wupidespread commission ifcwar crimes in Gaza by the government of Benjamin Netanyahu. It is understandable perhaps how anti-Israeli feeling, given the support of the Israeli population for Netanyahu’s war against Gaza. Understandable, perhaps, in tge case of an uneducated mob. Though not forgivable. Even more unforgivable in the case of university students who should know better.

These students need leaders tonexplain to them how to focus their range and theirvactions somthatnit might produce chanhes in American policy that might haveveffects in thev real world.

Tge demonstratorsl rage should be aimed at the Israel government and tgecwar crimes it has been committing in Gaza, and against President Biden who has gone to great lengths to supportnNetanyahu and even enable his to continue his war in Gaza.

Biden has worked hard to prevent the application of U.S. laws tgat prohibit tge use of mikitary assistance except in self-defense and in compliance with the international humanitarian law (the laws of war).

Anti-semitism or anti-Jewish sentiments and actions have bo place in tge struggle to hold Israel axxountable under international humanitarian law and tomhold Joe Biden accountable for applying U.S. legal requirements foe providibg mikitarybaid to Israel.

Student protesters and others, if they focus their outrage on insisting on compliance with international humanitarian law and holding those accountable who commit war crimes, will understand that they mustbalsomholdvHamas responsible for its members’ commission of war crimes, especially on October 7, 2023. Such demands for accountability under international does not make them anti-Palestinian, just as their demand that Israel and Hoe Buden make them anti-semitic or anti-American.

We denand compliance with international law and international humanitarian law. That demand makes sense.

We beed leaders, both Democrats and Republicans, whomhave the courage to stand up against tge mon and provide guudance as to how they might proceed to makeva real difference in the world.

1) Chen Maanit and Jonathan Lis, “Israel Scrambles as Netanyahu, Gallant and IDF Chief Face ICC Arrest Warrants for War Crimes in Gaza; Warrants could be issued this week against Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and army chief Herzl Halevi. Some legal experts say the attorney general and army lawyers are partly to blame for not doing enough to prevent Israeli violations of international law,” Ha’aretz, April 28, 2024 (11:04 pm IDT);

2) Ronen Bergman and Patrick Kingsley, “Israeli Officials Believe I.C.C. Is Preparing Arrest Warrants Over War,” New York Times, April 28, 2024 (updated at 8:08 pm ET);

3) Jonathan Lis and Ben Samuels, “Netanyahu: ICC Arrest Warrants Against Israeli Leaders Would Be ‘Antisemitic Hate Crime’: After reports that the International Criminal Court was considering issuing warrants against Israeli officials, the prime minister said that nothing ‘will affect our determination to achieve all the goals of the war.’ U.S. officials have said they would try to block the move if the ICC goes through with it,” Haaretz, Apeil 30, 2024 (9:41 pm IDT);

4) UPDATE: Luis de Vega y Isabel Ferrer, “El fiscal de La Haya denuncia presiones ante las posibles medidas contra dirigentes israelíes por la guerra de Gaza: Karim Khan alerta de que las amenazas de represalia contra el tribunal pueden constituir ‘un acto punible’,” El Paîs, el 3 de mayo 2024 (13:35 EDT);

5) UPDATE: Luis de Vega and Isabel Ferrer,”The Hague prosecutor denounces pressure on possible measures against Israeli leaders due to the Gaza war;; Karim Khan warns that threats of retaliation against the court may constitute ‘a punishable act’,” El Paîs, May 3, 2024 (1:35 pm EDT);

6) UPDATE: Matt Berg, “‘You have been warned’: GOP senators caution ICC over Israeli arrest warrants; Such actions are “illegitimate and lack legal basis,” the lawmakers wrote, warning they would result in severe sanctions against the ICC.,” Politico, May 6, 2024 (9:24AM EDT);

The Haaretz reporters quote Netanyahu as follows:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tuesday that the possibility that the International Criminal Court in The Hague will issue arrest warrants for Israeli military and political officials for war crimes is a “scandal” and that such an action would be “an antisemitic hate crime.”

Really?