Pentagon Appointee Opposes ‘Belligerent Military Initiatives’ Aimed at China

The Pentagon official tasked with overseeing U.S. defense policy toward Southeast Asia recently advised against pursuing hawkish defense policies and a major trade war against China, a marked contrast with top Trump appointees.

John Andrew Byers, a longtime history professor who oversaw the Charles Koch philanthropic network’s grants promoting libertarian foreign policy stances at universities, was sworn in this week as the deputy assistant secretary of defense for South and Southeast Asia — a role that immediately thrusts him to the center of America’s response to China’s ongoing military pressure campaign targeting the Philippines, with which Washington holds a mutual defense treaty.

Pentagon Appointee Opposes ‘Belligerent Military Initiatives’ Aimed at China

Related:

Lowy Institute: Trump’s grand bargain? The Philippines caught between US and China by Richard Heydarian

CGS non-resident fellow Andrew Byers co-authors article with The American Conservative

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for South and Southeast Asia: Andrew Byers

Don’t Deify Jimmy Carter

Jimmy Carter, out of office, had the courage to call out the “abominable oppression and persecution” and “strict segregation” of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza in his 2006 book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.” He dedicated himself to monitoring elections, including his controversial defense of the 2006 election of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, and championed human rights around the globe. He lambasted the American political process as an “oligarchy” in which “unlimited political bribery” created “a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors.”

Don’t Deify Jimmy Carter

The Soviet Union was asked by the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan to intervene to help fight against the Afghan mujahideen that the US was arming: Soviet-Afghan War

Carter, Charter 77, and Solidarność (Solidarity):

Read More »

Declaration Berlin

Declaration Berlin (translated)

Posted by @nsanzo

“European leaders are scheduled to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and NATO chief Mark Rutte on Wednesday afternoon in Brussels to discuss peace plans and the possible deployment of peacekeeping forces in Ukraine,” Politico announced on Friday, confirming what was already known: NATO is leading the effort to coordinate what may happen in the coming months in the war in Ukraine, which on the ground will depend on European countries. “In addition to Rutte and Zelensky, invited participants include: German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, French President Emmanuel Macron, Polish President Andrzej Duda, European Council President António Costa, and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen,” the outlet added, to show who the main actors are in preparing for the possibility of a significant reduction in the United States’ role in the day-to-day running of the war.

Read More »

Trumpism, NATO and the Ukraine war

Trumpism, NATO and the Ukraine war (original)

“Two years ago, General Mark A. Milley, then President Biden’s chief military adviser, suggested that neither Russia nor Ukraine could win the war. A negotiated solution, he argued, was the only path to peace. His comments caused a furor among senior officials. But President-elect Donald J. Trump’s victory is making General Milley’s prediction come true,” wrote The New York Times in an article published last week, part of a growing line of arguments by those who fear that the arrival of the new Republican administration will mean leaving Ukraine to its own devices. These articles, present in all major American and European media, take literally Trump’s desire to end the war and his lack of interest in the situation in Ukraine. This has also been helped by the words of JD Vance, who, from his ignorance of the conflict, has proposed a plan that can only satisfy Russia, or the exalted response of Donald Trump Jr. after the confirmation of the American permission to use Western missiles against targets on the territory of mainland Russia. Sometimes, think-tankers and experts also add Trump’s disdain for NATO or his desire not to rescue member countries that do not meet the minimum investment required by the Alliance in the event of a Russian attack.

Read More »