Judge John H. Wilson – USA Gov Policy

The New York Analysis is pleased to present this guest editorial by Judge John H. Wilson, who recently retired from the Bronx/Brooklyn Criminal Court Bench

In February of this year, I moved to North Dakota from New York City, where I had resided for most of my life. Besides the usual culture shock one would expect, the real surprise came when I first visited the North Dakota state capitol.

I was amazed at the lack of security. No checkpoints, no armed guards, not even unarmed security patrols. I took this as a testament to the peace and safety of my adopted home.

You see, I was in New York City on September 11, 2001, specifically at my home in the Bronx. That day, my wife lost her best friend, and I nearly lost my brother and two other close friends when Islamic terrorists drove commercial jetliners into the World Trade Center. My other brother, a now-retired Lieutenant with the NYPD, spent months searching the pile of rubble that had been the Twin Towers, looking for the body parts of those murdered that terrible day.

Thus, you can understand my being surprised at the utter lack of security I found at the North Dakota State Capitol. In New York, I routinely saw police officers and soldiers on the streets of Manhattan, dressed in riot gear, flak vests, and carrying automatic rifles.

Like much of the Midwest, North Dakota is a friendly place, full of people who trust to the good will of their fellow human beings. I was therefore not terribly surprised to learn that North Dakota Governor Jack Dalrymple had not immediately joined the other governors who told the federal government that they would not accept Syrian refugees. Though his position was interpreted as a “no” to the resettlement of Syrian refugees in North Dakota, his position was actually more nuanced. In reality, the governor stated that he would “urge President Barack Obama to halt resettlement of Syrian refugees in the U.S. until security and screening measures can be reviewed.”

In fact, at last count, 31 states, with both Republican and Democratic governors, have stated their intention to reject Syrian refugees.
A superfood is defined as any natural food that has an extraordinarily high viagra properien discover over here now nutrient content, and the acai berry can offer wonderful nourishment. For putting this in perspective, consumption a single 12oz cup of brewed coffee has about 120mg of caffeine. free samples of cialis With this drug, the serotonin remains active in the body for 4 -6 side effects of cialis hours. online cialis It increases the sexual rate as compare to other eye drops.
President Obama has claimed the moral high ground on this issue, comparing the refugees from Syrian to the Pilgrims, calling them “men and women who want nothing more than the chance for a safer, better future for themselves and their families.” In pointed language, the President has also criticized Republicans for being “scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America as part of our tradition of compassion. At first they were too scared of the press being too tough on them in the debates. Now they are scared of three-year-old orphans. That doesn’t seem so tough to me.”

New York City learned the hard way not to trust the federal government and its supposed vetting processes. The September 11 hijackers were all present in America on student, tourist or business visas. But it wasn’t until AFTER the 911 attacks that the federal government significantly tightened its requirements for the issuance of a visa, ineffectively, and almost literally, closing the barn door after the cows had escaped.

Since 911, The New York Police Department handles its own security on behalf of New York City. This includes the establishment of an overseas program in 2003, under which New York City Police Officers are stationed in various hotspots around the globe. As then Commissioner Ray Kelly stated, ““The terrorists knew no national boundaries. Why should the New York City police?”

The NYPD cooperates with the federal authorities. But they also follow Ronald Reagan’s famous maxim – trust, but verify.

There can be no doubt that as President Obama stated, many of these refugees are simply seeking a better life. But at the same time, it is equally true that many are dangerous. In fact, the debate has only been sharpened by the revelation that one of the recent Paris terror attack participants was a “Syrian refugee.”

Until effective measures can put into place to distinguish refugees from terrorists, is it so unreasonable for the governors of 31 states to not trust the safety of their citizens to a federal government that has a different agenda?

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.