| | | | America's Democratic Test | | As the House moves toward impeachment, Gary J. Schmitt writes in an American Interest essay that America's founders only intended it to be used when presidents seriously abuse their powers. But given that the Constitution provides a lower bar for the House to impeach a president (a majority vote), than for the Senate to remove a president from office (a two-thirds majority), Schmitt argues the founders never meant impeachment to be too "exceptional," even if presidents would rarely be removed from office as a result.
Impeaching President Trump is risky, The Economist writes, but perhaps necessary: Otherwise, future presidents might be incentivized to solicit foreign political help, and foreign powers might decide on their own to dig up dirt on US politicians, in attempts to curry favor. | | Justin Lynch writes in Foreign Policy that Ukrainian analysts have offered mixed reactions to the scandal, varying from concern that it gives Russia an advantage to disappointment with President Volodymyr Zelensky: Any fraying of the US-Ukraine relationship endangers Kiev's ability to confront its eastern war, while a scandal of this nature might look bad for Zelensky, who won office on anti-corruption promises.
Taking a broad look at Zelensky in a new paper, the European Council on Foreign Relations depicts a new style of leader—a populist who ran against corruption and the old elite, rather than on ethnic demagoguery, and who has revolutionized citizen outreach, asking Ukrainians to choose a governor on Facebook, for instance. And he entered office with historic momentum: Zelensky "received an exceptionally strong mandate to create a new Ukraine, but its outlines remain blurry," the group writes, while foreign policy and military affairs have been his weak spots. | | Diplomacy With Iran: Still the Best Option | | | Writing at LobeLog, Mahmood Monshipouri and Jonathon Whooley conclude that neither President Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign, nor Iran's strategy of "no war, no negotiation," has moved the needle in either side's favor. Each country should see myriad risks of failing to calm tensions, they write; Tehran is overmatched militarily, and America would see its allies, including Israel, endangered if conflict escalates. "Internationally, the stakes are too high for the EU, China, and Russia to allow this crisis to escalate into war in the coming months," they write—all of which points to diplomacy as the only reasonable solution. | | Domestic Terrorism Isn't Purely Domestic | | | That's what Clint Watts, the former FBI agent and online-extremism expert, warned in recent prepared Senate testimony. While America has turned more attention to the threat of homegrown, right-wing extremism, Watts cautions that law enforcement needs to keep global connections in mind: Terrorists network online, and their links "extend beyond the internet leading to physical movement across international boundaries to attend training or execute attacks," Watts writes, citing attackers in Sweden who received training in Russia. In fighting right-wing terrorism, he says, law enforcement and intelligence should use lessons from tracking globally networked jihadists. | | Boris Johnson: Down but Not Out | | | Though British Prime Minister Boris Johnson suffered a defeat at the hands of Britain's highest court, Peter Harris writes in The National Interest that Johnson (and his Brexit plans) may well be poised for a comeback: Johnson "has been gifted the opportunity to cast the next general election as a contest between 'the people' and 'the Establishment,'" while his opposition still appears weak. Writing in the Financial Times, meanwhile, Philip Stephens recommends the EU extend Brexit once again, partly on the theory that it can't trust Johnson as a negotiator—while cautioning that an election in the UK (whenever it happens) still might not clear things up. | | | | | | |
No comments:
Post a Comment