Month: January 2023

Not many can identify where Belarus is located on a map despite its growing importance to the outcome of Russia’s war in Ukraine. Once a satellite of the former Soviet Union, Minsk has maintained close, if at times strained, relations with Moscow. Early in Russia’s war in Ukraine, Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka offered to allow Putin to again stage nuclear missiles in their silos. It is an offer that Putin has yet to act on. The silos have been empty, but maintained, since the end of the Cold War. Grigory Ioffe is a Russian born professor at Radford University in Virginia, and a graduate from Moscow State University. He suggests the ground truth is that “If there is any leitmotif to the current developments in Belarus, it would be mostly rooted in attempts at socioeconomic survival while avoiding immediate participation in Russia’s war effort against Ukraine.” He points to lingering misapprehension of the country’s character by the exiled opposition to the Lukashenka regime. 

Over 90% of the émigré population, according to Ioffe, are indifferent to actual Belarusian national life. He argues the diaspora mirrors the country itself and that “national life” may be misconstrued to fit the taste of a minor group with an indefensible self-esteem. Domestic politics in Belarus belie a regime claiming to welcome back the opposition from overseas while at home “paving over” the country with repressive measures that have contributed to its shrinking economy. Sanctions are expected to contribute to cutting the 2022 GDP by 4% when the final numbers are published. They were imposed on Belarus due to the dictatorship’s support of Russia’s war, have impacted companies, and complicated the Russia-Belarus bilateral relationship. Yury Drakakhrust of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, however, is “convinced” that conditions inside Belarus today may end up making it a good negotiating platform for ending the war in Ukraine in 2023.

Lukashenka must do something for Belarus in the coming months to improve the domestic economic environment. The war is increasing domestic tensions, causing the country to lose IT companies and personnel which contributes to the negative growth in the economy, and narrowing Lukashenka’s options. Recently gains in the IT sector have disappeared as between 16,000 to 32,000 IT specialists have fled the country. Ioffe says that “ To keep the outflow in check, the authorities in Minsk prohibited companies of “unfriendly” countries from withdrawing their shares from those businesses registered in Belarus. Those who stayed and those who left turned out to be vulnerable to Western sanctions.” 

Last week government authorities in Minsk decided to legalize “parallel imports,” a term coined to refer to the obtaining, importing, and selling of intellectual property without the consent of copyright holders from foreign countries. Law 241-3 is an indirect result of sanctions placed on Russia. 

The publication Svaboda, on January 2, reported that recently, two opposition-minded analysts, Artyom Shraibman and Pavel Matsukevich, debated whether it is expedient for the West to open up a dialogue with Lukashenka and loosen sanctions in exchange for the release of political prisoners. Ioffe  says that what both debaters came to a consensus about is that the West has always applied a double standard to human rights, whereby “what it forgives Turkey, Azerbaijan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, it does not forgive Lukashenka’s Belarus.” They additionally emphasize, he says, that a consistent focus on principles at the expense of interests would have never resulted in Churchill and Roosevelt becoming allies with Stalin in World War II. Drakakhrust writes that he is convinced Belarus’ negotiations with the West over Russia’s war in Ukraine have never stopped. According to Ioffe, that means that the categorical stand of Belarusian democrats-in-exile—that is, no negotiations with Lukashenka—is “not exactly the standpoint of the West, which usually takes guidance from its own interests.” This is similar to 2008 and 2015 when political prisoners were in fact released by Minsk in exchange for the removal of Western sanctions. This could present a potential change in bilateral Russia-Belarus relations and an opening for negotiations to end the war if the Lukashenka regime believes it must respond to the deteriorating economy.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Illustration: Pixabay

America’s foreign policy need not be directed by opinion polls. However, it should at least be guided by the actual current needs and general philosophy of the nation.

In the face of massive and growing external threats, combined with mounting economic challenges, a nonpartisan foreign policy does not appear out of reach. The basics are clear.  Discourage armed assaults on the U.S., its allies, and interests by maintaining superior armed strength, diplomatic influence, and economic resources. Ensure that the commerce and supply required for prosperity is maintained. Secure the borders to prevent hazardous problems from infiltrating. Deal as much as possible with nations that respect freedom and human rights.

The Biden approach does not reflect this.  Instead, it appears geared towards projecting support for his internal political base, motivated not by achieving security and prosperity for the country but by appeasing the left wing of his own party. Given the financial relationship now being made clear following the confirmation of the information found on the Hunter Biden laptop, it is not inappropriate to question whether Biden family finances play a role as well.  

The problem can be seen in the current White House approach to several issues.  Many have been deeply disappointed at the very low-key response the Administration has had to the horrific human rights abuses seen daily in the headlines about China and Iran. It was observed in the reluctance it had to take steps to discourage Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. (The billions now spent by the West, and the lives lost by so many Ukrainians, might have been saved if Biden had telegraphed its determination to counter the Kremlin’s plans.)

It is also noticeable in the comparatively conciliatory attitude it has had towards Venezuela, as the Administration seeks Caracas’ help to mask the energy problems Biden has created.

Massive lockdowns of whole communities provoked widescale outbreaks of protests throughout China, despite the severe repercussions the participants face.  The situation became so intense that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been forced to at least partially back down. Despite obvious appeals to U.S. sentiment by Chinese activists, including quoting from American Revolutionary War sayings, Biden’s response has been, at most, low key. It did not prevent a planning meeting between Biden and Xi, or, apparently, become a major issue at the gathering. There is no expectation that the U.S. would directly intervene in the matter; that would hand a propaganda victory to the CCP, which habitually labels any dissent as foreign inspired.  But it would have been a welcomed and rewarding move for the White House to be more emphatic in condemning the CCP’s repression.  Think of the dramatic impact of President Ronald Reagan’s “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” speech. It is difficult to cite a legitimate reason for Biden’s reluctance

A very similar argument could be made about the unspeakable repression now occurring in Iran.

While paying less than necessary attention to the devastation of human rights in China and Iran, the Administration has been intensely enthusiastic about concentrating on LQBTQ+ issues overseas. Secretary of State Antony Blinken authorized American embassies around the world to fly the Gay Pride flag on the same flagpole as the American banner.  This plays well with the activist wing of the Democrat Party that Biden desperately curries favor with.  It’s an easy publicity stunt that looks good in leftist journals, and deflects attention away from the Administration’s lack of substantive support for freedom fighters, including oppressed gays,  in Iran.

The Biden Administration’s domestic missteps play a role that should not be ignored. The inexplicable destruction of American energy independence explains why the White House has cozied up to the criminal regime in Venezuela.  It also describes why, after harshly condemning Saudi Arabia, the President has now gone hat-in-hand to that nation’s rulers begging for oil favors. His Administration’s incompetence in that region may lead to further dire consequences. The massive Trump-era Middle East gains could now being replaced by Chinese advances, thanks to Biden’s missteps.

Most fundamental to any international policy is the control of one’s own borders. For reasons that have never been explained, the Biden Administration has rejected the practice of meaningful border control. Chinese-made, Mexican Cartel-wholesaled fentanyl devastates the U.S., a foreign policy crisis utterly ignored by Biden.

America is in the midst of a rolling descent into an era of increased popularity for socialism, both at home and in its foreign policy abroad. The Biden Administration has been more heavily influenced by socialist-leaning progressives than any other. It is a reflection of the extraordinary strength of the Progressive wing of the Democratic Party.

The expanded meddling of Washington into the once-dynamic American economy has produced the same results found in other socialist states: unnecessary shortages of basic goods, dramatic inflation, reduced personal freedom, and a lack of confidence in the future.

A 2021Axios poll notes that “Just half of younger Americans now hold a positive view of capitalism — and socialism’s appeal in the U.S. continues to grow…socialism has positive connotations for 60% of Black Americans, 45% of American women and 33% of non-white Republicans. Those numbers have grown over the past two years from 53%, 41% and 27%, respectively. Only 48% of American women view capitalism in a positive light, down from 51% two years ago. Today, 18-34 year-olds are almost evenly split between those who view capitalism positively and those who view it negatively (49% vs. 46%). Two years ago, that margin was a gaping 20 points (58% vs. 38%).”

The leftward lurch is unsupported by any record of success for the debunked philosophy.

In a Forbes interview, Kristian Niemietz, raised a salient point

“Over the past hundred years, there have been more than two dozen attempts to build a socialist society. It has been tried in the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Albania, Poland, Vietnam, Bulgaria, Romania, Czechoslovakia, North Korea, Hungary, China, East Germany, Cuba, Tanzania, Laos, South Yemen, Somalia, the Congo, Ethiopia, Cambodia, Mozambique, Angola, Nicaragua and Venezuela, among others—not counting the very short-lived ones. All of these attempts have ended in varying degrees of failure.”

Some have attempted to point to China as a socialist nation that has attained some measure of economic success. They ignore the reality that the Communist giant only prospers by selling to capitalist nations, frequently using underhanded methods such as slave labor, and downright illegal methods such as intellectual property theft and industrial espionage.

Examine a closer example. As Venezuela fell more completely under socialism’s sway, the results were dire.  “According to Gallup, 71 percent of Venezuelans say they can’t afford food, 47 percent say they can’t afford shelter, just 15 percent say they are satisfied with the availability of quality health care, and 35 percent say they are satisfied with their standard of living. Thirty-six percent of Venezuelans, 51 percent of those between 15 and 29, say they would leave the country permanently if they could,” reports Star Parker.

As socialism becomes more popular at home, Progressive politicians have pushed the White House into friendlier ties with socialist regimes abroad.

Biden administration officials met with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas earlier this Spring. They ignored Juan Guaidó, the opposition leader whom the United States recognizes as this South American nation’s rightful president, who wasn’t even informed of the meeting.

The rather humiliating reversal of U.S. policy towards this odious socialist dictatorship has long been a goal of the Progressive left. In a letter to President Biden, several progressive Democrats commended him for his diplomatic overture to the South American totalitarian regime.

There can be little doubt that Venezuela under socialism is both an economic and human rights disaster. A recent U.S. State Department analysis found that “the authoritarian regime led by Nicolas Maduro usurped control over all branches of government: executive, judicial, legislative, the offices of the prosecutor general and ombudsman, and the electoral institutions. In December 2020 the Maduro regime organized parliamentary elections that were rigged in favor of the regime, and approximately 60 countries and international bodies publicly declared the elections were neither free nor fair… There were credible reports that members of security forces committed numerous abuses, and a 2020 United Nations report concluded there were reasonable grounds to believe that Maduro regime authorities and security forces committed crimes against humanity.”

Hopefully, as Americans endure the results of this disturbing trend, the majority can reverse the trend before the political and economic results become too deep.

Illustration: Pixabay

There was a lot more to the tumultuous race for Speaker of the House than the media reported.

On the surface, and as generally discussed by political analysts, it appeared to be a contest to become the 55^th Speaker of the House of Representatives between Kevin Owen McCarthy, a moderate Republican from California’s 20^th District, and group of conservative colleagues.

It was more than that, and even more than just a clash between different wings of the same party.  Behind the scenes, deep concern about a federal budget that is out of control, irrational funding decisions, and even the national defense of the United States were underlying issues.

McCarthy was first elected to Congress in 2006, meaning that he has been in the House for 17 years. The national debt in 2006 was $10 trillion.  The current national debt is approximately $34 trillion. In 2006, the United States was the undisputed global superpower. Today, China is challenging that role.

None of those developments can be blamed on McCarthy.  Indeed, as a member of the GOP, he emphasized fiscal restraint and strong defense far more than Democrats in Congress.  However, his conservative colleagues believe he, like some others in the Republican leadership, were too quick to compromise with Democrats, leading to excessive debt and inadequate defense funding, particularly during the Obama and Biden Administrations.

There are many factors at play here.  The Great Recession, COVID, expensive wars abroad, and ten years of Democrat control of the White House occurred during that period.  But far more than those singular events is the manner in which governmental budgets have been decided, not only at the national level but also in state and city jurisdictions as well.

Frankly, there is very little opportunity for rational decision-making in setting governmental budgets. Those voting are generally presented with thousand-plus page documents at the last minute with practically no time to examine the contents.  Because of that, all that is generally done is to breeze through the document, make sure that one’s own key issues or pet projects are properly treated, and then cast a vote accordingly.

Much of this came to light most significantly not during a budget contest but in the battle to enact ObamaCare, properly known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,  a highly controversial federal statute enacted by the 111th United States Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010.

In addressing the 2010 Legislative Congress for the National Association of Counties, the then-speaker stunningly stated “Congress “[has] to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it, away from the fog of controversy.”  That was a clear admission that members of the House of Representatives could not know the details of what they were voting on, despite the massive implications the legislation had for the American population and the United States Treasury.

The lack of true participation by most members of Congress, the determination to enact programs regardless of fiscal realities, the massive growth of federal power, and the lack of priorities as set by the Constitution are the cause for a long-simmering anger on the part of many.  That erupted, fairly or not, in the contest for Speaker that was recently resolved. 

Frustration over their lack of power, an unmanageable level of debt that threatens to bring great harm to the national interest in the very near future, and the looming need to provide major financial assets to urgently needed challenges including national defense in the face of major threats, and even the potential bankruptcy of Social Security have all come to a boiling point.

Photo: Pixabay

Turkey has the fastest growing energy demand among all of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) states during the last two decades. It ranks second in the world only to China in its increase in electricity and natural gas demand. In a surprise move, Putin recently proposed to develop Turkey into an energy hub for Russia so that its gas may be transited to Europe via Turkey. The government in Ankara says that the versatile structure of its energy strategy and its energy import dependency brings international relations into prominence in this field. In 2022 Turkey had to import 74% of its energy needs. In a positive response to the Russian move, the Turkish Minister of Energy and National Resources Fatih Donmez said in a statement that the project should be seriously evaluated. Turkish President Recep Tayyip also reacted well to the unexpected overture saying that the Trakya region was being evaluated as a potential site for the energy distribution center. According to a Jamestown Foundation report “It is quite clear that the project’s realization also depends on the interests and approaches of the European states, a fact that both Russia and Turkey understand well.”

After Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the European Union (EU) vowed to reduce the supply of energy resources (including gas) from Russia and diversify its energy sources. By October, European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen announced a 40 per cent reduction in Europe’s purchase of Russian natural gas cent to 7.5 percent of its previous purchases.  Nuray alekberli, of Jamestown Foundation, says it is unrealistic to expect a positive attitude to emanate from Europe regarding new pipeline projects that involve Russia, given European opposition to the South Stream pipeline in 2014, Putin’s frequent use of energy blackmail vis-à-vis the EU and the adoption of a much tougher stance toward Russia today. The Biden Administration also supports Europe’s diversification of sources away from its dependence on Russian energy sources.

It is likely to take between three to four years to complete construction of new infrastructure between Turkey and Russia, according to Zongqiang Luo, a senior analyst with Rystad Energy. A pipeline would have to be built in the deep waters of the Black Sea with special production pipes delivered from Germany and Japan. It is uncertain if either country would be willing to supply the physical resources needed, according to the publication Indyturk. The total cost, even if Russia was able to supply the pipes remains an unknown factor given Moscow would face enormous transit and economic issues.

Aydin Sezer, former Turkish trade representative to Russia, says it would be “impossible for Turkey to become a hub with Russian energy resources alone, any extensive development of energy infrastructure in the country will need to have access to other suppliers.” An examination of sources indicates that Ankara is acquiring natural gas from multiple locations, including Azerbaijani and Iran. By 2024 Turkey expects to begin production at the offshore Sakarya gas field. The geopolitical implications extend beyond the Turkish border into the Central Asian states that appear to be supporting Turkey in both gas production and sales. Ankara knows it can’t rely solely on Moscow as an energy source and is laying the groundwork for an expanded base. In Novamber Erdogan announced he planned to discuss the creation of a natural gas hub with the leaders of Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan during his visit to Ashgabat in early December 2022. Then, on December 14, Azerbaijan, Turkey and Turkmenistan signed a memorandum of understanding to further develop energy cooperation and infrastructure among the three countries.

Although Europe is disinclined to buy natural gas directly from Russia, it appears EU countries may be willing to make purchases through a third country, such as Turkey, even if the original energy source is Russia. The long-term continuation of the conflict in Ukraine “could serve to aggravate the attitude of Western countries regarding any Russian involvement in the project,” says Alekberli. Finally, financial considerations are likely to play a key role in determining the hub’s overall viability. 

Analysts suggest it is highly likely that other gas suppliers, such as Azerbaijan and the Central Asian states, will support Turkey in this project. Alekberli argues that while political and economic difficulties remain, “the realization of such a project could bring some additional comfort to both buyers and sellers in the region, provided Russian gas does not become the focal point for the proposed hub.” Putin may be counting too heavily on his country’s participation in an energy project that the Central Asian states will likely boycott if Moscow becomes involved.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

China is not finished despite reports that President Xi Jinping is backing off his geopolitical plans to overtake the United States’ economy. Analysts from the IC favoring a softer US stance on the communist regime suggest that this means China is less of a threat now. Dan Blumenthal and Derick Scissors, both senior fellows at AEI writing in Atlantic, say they disagree. They point out that “The United States is in danger of missing a profound change in the economic component of China’s geopolitical strategy.” Although Xi has downgraded the Communist Party’s ambition to overtake the US in economic size, his priority, Blumenthal and Scissors argue, is to minimize China’s dependence on other countries and maximize its ability to coerce them economically. 

In reality it is an indication that China is backing down from its immediate plans, however, that doesn’t lessen the long-term planning coming out of Beijing. It represents a readjustment to Xi’s strategy. The United States was complacent toward the future threat over four decades ago, in 1979, when Washington agreed to open relations with China. President Clinton followed that opening in 2001, by giving China permanent Most Favored Nation (MFN) status, a trade advantage Beijing still holds today despite its lack of progress in opening its economy. Today, the West faces a very different country. It is one capable of, and has used, its economic strength as a strategic weapon to damage other states and coerce countries into supporting the interests of the communist state. The United States, Blumenthal and Scissors says, must “respond to a China bent on long-term economic coercion to secure the interests of the Communist party and the Chinese nation.” 

They suggest Washington must begin in 2023 by gaining a better understanding of Xi Jinping and his long-term goals. Internationally, they add, the US must convince its partners and allies that limiting their reliance on the communist giant is the most prudent path to curtailing China’s aggressive behavior abroad. President Xi, in one of his first speeches hinting at his new approach, said in 2020 that the “powerful gravitational field” of the state-controlled Chinese market can be used to reshape supply chains in Beijing’s favor. Xi views this as the “great struggle” between east and west, between capitalism and communism. His goal is to stop the West from limiting China’s technological advancement. China continues to steal, conduct coercive technology transfer and reverse engineer intellectual property obtained from the West. 

During the last eight years, Xi’s “Made in China 2025” industrial plan has supplied sweeping government assistance to the Chinese semiconductor industry and electric vehicles. President Xi appears in 2023 to be redoubling the communist giant’s efforts to tilt economic leverage in its favor in response to western efforts to hold China and the CCP accountable for their actions. “Xi may see the decoupling of the two countries’ economies as ultimately inevitable—and may now be actively advancing it, on his preferred terms,” according to Blumenthal and Scissors.

At times the intelligence community (IC) in Washington underestimates the domestic political problems inside China.  For Xi, a thriving private sector risks powerful constituencies developing outside party control. The result is increased repression and expanded domestic surveillance programs. China’s politicians don’t like Luan, or chaos. They want order and loyalty to the CCP and its leadership. Blumenthal and Scissors argue that with the party determined to retain control of the economy, potentially productive industries face many barriers to expansion. They say “In their place are sectors that serve the party’s interests first. This is not conducive to innovation and scientific breakthrough and, along with deteriorating demographics and high debt, will continue to limit growth.” Washington is at risk of misreading the signs and assuming China has given up on it geopolitical plans.  What has changed is how it will go about doing it. Xi will use state-shaped technological development and its preeminent position in global supply chains. “China will be neither the world’s low-tech factory nor its leading tech pioneer, but will aim instead to make itself indispensable as a producer of high-value goods upon which even its adversaries depend. This is a perceptive and potentially fruitful alternative to rapid economic growth,” say Blumenthal and Scissors. 

China hopes to kill off foreign competition by absorbing foreign innovation and then eventually drive foreign producers out of business. “The dominant feature of the Sino-American commercial competition will not be a race based on economic growth or on technological advancement, as many anticipate. Rather, through subsidies, coercive technology transfer, and unbalanced market access, inferior Chinese firms will win market share at the expense of more dynamic competitors,” notes Blumenthal and Scissors. Heavy spending on science and technology and a focus on strategic economic leveraging, combined with manufacturing prowess, a very large domestic market, and coercion as a tool, will enable China to insulate itself from Western sanctions and rules.  

If American policy makers and the private sector want to avoid this fate, it must be willing to challenge China’s bid on supply chains. With a challenge, there will be a further shift patterns of production and trade in its favor. The nature of the economic challenge has changed. Now American must respond while it can offset China’s attempts to remake the world economic order.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

President Vladimir Putin is running low on soldiers to conduct his war in Ukraine. Despite adding soldiers once assigned to the Arctic, others recruited from the country’s prisons, and older civilians from among the general population, there is an overall lack of willingness to replace frontline soldiers. Reports coming in from various Western media organizations say that new are not receiving the minimal amount of training normally required to conduct military operations. Training videos snuck out of Russia depict women teaching soldiers how to use feminine products as bandages. Others show soldiers training without guns, equipment, or meals. Russian soldiers are left to fend for their own food while on the battlefield. The dearth of money and human capital has forced Putin to move his effort to dragoon more men into service from Russia to the countries in Central Asia.

In November, the Russian president signed a decree allowing foreign citizens to serve in the Russian Army as contractors and conscripts. It was depicted as an opportunity for Central Asian citizens residing in Russia. Nurbek Bekmurzaev, of the Jamestown Foundation, notes that the Russian publication Vzglyad is reporting that the Deputy Chairman of the Russian State Duma Defense Committee Andrey Krasov expressed his firm belief that “a comparable number [of Central Asians] will want to come to Russia to serve—with an eye on the potential acquisition of Russian citizenship and career advancement.”   It has, he adds, stirred discussions about the extent of the conscription of those from former Soviet satellite states, with many Russians concluding that it is a sign that the Kremlin is desperate to locate new soldiers. 

As early as last February, at the start of the war in Ukraine, videos emerged of Kyrgyzstani, Tajikistani and Uzbek men driving Russian military vehicles. By March videos emerged of Central Asians dying and being buried in Ukraine. In September, Bekmurzaev says the first evidence of Uzbekistani citizens fighting in the war appeared on the internet, when a Ukrainian journalist released a video of two young Uzbekistani men in military captivity. The motivation for these young recruits is the result of Russian trickery and coercion. In some cases, they are threatened with the stripping of potential citizenship if they refuse to join the Russian armed forces and fight.

According to CabarAsia, several human rights defenders who work with labor migrants have reported hundreds of cases in which Central Asians with Russian passports received summons to arrive at military enlistment centers or risk being stripped of their citizenship. Putin’s policy goes further. “For those without Russian passports, the authorities in Moscow have legalized organizational arrangements conducive to recruitment. On September 20, Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin announced the launch of a recruitment center at the Sakharovo Migration Center, where virtually all labor migrants have to visit to undergo mandatory fingerprint scanning and physical examinations, as well as receive work permits,” according to Bekmurzaev. The Duma recently simplified the pathway to citizenship  by reducing the five-year wait to one in exchange for military service.

Despite all of Putin’s recruiting attempts, the Russian Armed Forces continue to fall short of recruiting goals this January. Central Asians are not stronger patriotic toward Moscow. Their citizenship, notes Bekmurzaev, is only a means to better cope with the discrimination and bureaucracy they face daily in Russia. The colossal losses on the Russian battlefield continue to suppress the number of able-bodied men willing to go fight in Ukraine. Add to this, that Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan have issued stern warnings to their citizens not to fight in Ukraine. The potential soldiers now face lengthy prison sentences for participating in armed conflicts abroad as mercenaries. Most Central Asian migrants plan to return home after their time in Russia and do not want to risk ending up with a long prison sentence upon their return.

This leaves Putin needing to locate addition manpower on the frontline to compensate for growing losses as the war approaches the one-year mark. News of the deaths of foreign recruits is suppressed by the Russian media in an attempt to fill the ranks with those faraway people who will go largely unnoticed from Russian cities if killed in the war. Bekmurzaev points out that the mass participation of Central Asian migrants in the war spells a whole new set of troubles for the region and not just Putin. “Besides a significant decrease in remittances, which comprise one-third of the GDPs of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, the region faces a threat of welcoming back numerous war veterans, which could lead to a subsequent increase in alcohol and drug abuse, suicide, domestic violence and crime.” Returning compatriots are now trying to discourage migrants from fighting in Ukraine are in direct competition with the Russian government. Despite things not going well for Putin he is not backing down and there is no end in sight to the war in Ukraine.   

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Illustration: Pixabay

Are there more than two sexes? Can releasing criminals from jail result in safer streets? Will homes be heated and goods shipped if 80% of our energy supply is cut off? Is it safe to ignore very real threats from abroad?

Those issues are vital, but they do not dominate much of our national conversation. Instead, a panoply of false claims and artificial disputes grab the headlines and the lion’s share of the news. The reason for that absurdity is to distract from the clear and manifest failure of leftist policies on the true challenges of our current time.  

The philosophy espoused by the Left has, for a century, resulted in dire economic misery, mass deaths, and an almost total loss of freedom.  That is why its proponents have chosen the path of illogic, dissembling, and pretending that past conflicts still exist.

That strategy works well when most of the media and academia are on your side. Those pointing out the obvious are ridiculed, labelled with insulting terms, denied opportunities, and censored.

There is abundant evidence of leftist failure.

 Do you recall life in America two years ago? Gasoline averaged $2.60 a gallon. Inflation was 1.23%. The Russians had been kept within their borders for four years. The North Koreans had pulled back from nuclear and missile testing. The Middle East was experiencing a rare moment of significantly improved relations, thanks to U.S. diplomacy. The U.S. military was focusing on protecting the nation, not engaging in “woke” politics.  The Army had met its recruiting goals. Illegal crossings at the U.S. southern border had declined by 53% over 2019. Total crossings were the lowest since 2017.

After just under two years of leftist domination of American politics, gasoline is $3.86 a gallon. Inflation is 7.7%. The Russians have invaded Ukraine.  The Taliban now has $7.7 billion worth of U.S. military equipment. The North Koreans are vigorously firing off missiles and appear to be ready to restart nuclear testing. The U.S. Army came 15,000 soldiers short of meeting its 2022 recruiting goals, making the year the worst on record since the services switched to an all-volunteer force nearly 50 years ago The Biden White House has restarted discredited attempts to censor free speech. Under that Administration, illegal immigration has reached historic highs. Its media allies urgently downplay extraordinary scenes of large numbers of military-age males waving flags charging across the border and assaulting border patrol personnel.

Not all issues revolve around Washington. Two areas that were and continue to be dominated by the left, education and city management, highlight the disastrous impact of its failed policies.

“Bail Reform” has unleashed a massive crime wave. Taking just one jurisdiction as an example, New York City, crime increased an average of 20.05%.

Leftist domination of America’s public education has produced failure on an epic level. The United States invests more in K-12 public education than almost all other developed countries, yet U.S. students remain poorly prepared to compete with global peers.

This litany of deteriorating statistics in key areas should have resulted in a national conversation on the failure of the Left, but this has not occurred. Instead, those raising wholly reasonable objections to the drive to end fossil fuel use are dismissed as “Climate deniers.”  Outraged parents complaining about failing schools are labelled “domestic terrorists.” Those presenting statistics about bail reform’s overt failure, and Russia’s largest-in-the world nuclear arsenal or China’s largest-in-the world Navy, are ignored.

False narratives are created and highlighted. Absurd political claims are madw that voting for anyone other than a leftist is a threat to democracy. Ideologically corrupt officials seek to turn the population against itself, pitting blacks against whites, woman versus men, straight against gay. Grievances long since resolved are advertised as though they were current.

This is a massive recipe for failure, on a scale never before seen in American History. The future of the nation depends on shattering these ridiculous illusions.

Illustration: Pixabay