Pelosi – USA Gov Policy

There should be concern about the partisan-tenor of the statements Speaker Pelosi issued in response to the triumph of American special forces in eliminating ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

President George Washington famously warned about the dangers of political parties. He was deeply concerned that dedication to party would exceed loyalty to the nation as a whole. While both sides have their share of overenthusiastic zealots, it cannot be reasonably denied that the leadership of the Democratic Party, and its steadfast media friends have adopted a slash and burn mindset that places the fortunes of party above the national interest.

The raid on Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was a substantive victory in the War on Terror. While ISIS will continue to exist albeit in a weakened form, it has lost a crucial leadership element. Combined with the prior destruction of the ISIS caliphate by the Trump Administration, significant progress has been made.

Ex Effect Tired of being dumped by losers. buy cipla cialis Order Kamagra Oral Jellies Online which are available in the online pharmacies. order generic cialis Vitamin A is viagra online in canada http://downtownsault.org/farmers-market/ a key component to developing healthy cells and tissues in the body, including hair. It improves sensation in the genitals. online viagra canada

But that progress has apparently not been uppermost in the minds of Speaker Pelosi. After giving due praise to the military for its heroism, Pelosi complained: “The House must be briefed on this raid, which the Russians but not top Congressional Leadership were notified of in advance, and on the Administration’s overall strategy in the region. Our military and allies deserve strong, smart and strategic leadership from Washington.” (The White House noted that Turkish, Russian, and Kurdish forces needed to be partially informed since they had forces in the region.)

Pelosi’s comments were given prominence in major media outlets. The Associated Press reported: “ House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is criticizing the White House for failing to notify congressional leaders before the U.S. raid in Syria that President Donald Trump says killed the leader of the Islamic State group… Pelosi says the Trump administration must brief Congress on the operation and on the administration’s overall strategy for the Mideast.”

Similarly, USA Today wrote: “President Donald Trump did not give House Speaker Nancy Pelosi or other key members of Congress advance notice of the Saturday night raid that ended in the death of terrorist leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Trump said he knew about plans for the top-secret mission for three days but kept most members of Congress in the dark because he feared the information would be leaked to the public and endanger the lives of American forces. ‘Washington leaks like I’ve never seen before,’ Trump told reporters at the White House on Sunday. ‘There’s no country in the world that leaks like we do. And Washington is a leaking machine.’

Leaks have been a significant Washington news item lately. Earlier this month, WTOP reported that “A Defense Intelligence Agency official was arrested…and charged with leaking classified intelligence information to two journalists, including a reporter he was dating…He was charged with willfully disclosing national defense information. The official had a top secret government security clearance, and reportedly ‘accessed at least five classified intelligence reports and provided top secret information about another country’s weapons systems to the reporter with whom he was having a relationship’…The arrest is the latest in a series of prosecutions under the Trump administration of government workers accused of providing nonpublic information to journalists.”

The leadership of the Democratic Party have had a significant problem with leaks and internal security matters. Former Democratic Party National Committee Chair, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Florida) protected her IT aide, Imram Awan, who hacked house servers. As National Review notes “Awan, who worked as an IT aide for roughly two-thirds of House Democrats, was found to have gained ‘unauthorized access’ to House servers in July 2016. …Wasserman Schultz became ‘frantic, not normal’ and began ‘making the rounds’ to pressure House officials to kill the probe, according to the Daily Caller‘s sources. She reportedly attacked House chief administrative officer Phil Kiko, calling him a “f***ing Islamophobe.’”

The partisanship-above-everything emphasis by the Democratic leadership is precisely what President Washington warned about.

Photo: Speaker Pelosi

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.