Tag Archives: territorial and national borders

Business

There’s beeen an increase in egg smuggling attempts across the border, says San Diego Customs

Leave a comment



CNN
 — 

High prices are driving an increase in attempts to bring eggs into the US from Mexico, according to border officials.

Officers at the San Diego Customs and Border Protection Office have seen an increase in the number of attempts to move eggs across the US-Mexico border, according to a tweet from director of field operations Jennifer De La O.

“The San Diego Field Office has recently noticed an increase in the number of eggs intercepted at our ports of entry,” wrote De La O in the Tuesday tweet. “As a reminder, uncooked eggs are prohibited entry from Mexico into the U.S. Failure to declare agriculture items can result in penalties of up to $10,000.”

Bringing uncooked eggs from Mexico into the US is illegal because of the risk of bird flu and Newcastle disease, a contagious virus that affects birds, according to Customs and Border Protection.

In a statement emailed to CNN, Customs and Border Protection public affairs specialist Gerrelaine Alcordo attributed the rise in attempted egg smuggling to the spiking cost of eggs in the US. A massive outbreak of deadly avian flu among American chicken flocks has caused egg prices to skyrocket, climbing 11.1% from November to December and 59.9% annually, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The increase has been reported at the Tijuana-San Diego crossing as well as “other southwest border locations,” Alcordo said.

For the most part, travelers bringing eggs have declared the eggs while crossing the border. “When that happens the person can abandon the product without consequence,” said Alcordo. “CBP agriculture specialists will collect and then then destroy the eggs (and other prohibited food/ag products) as is the routine course of action.”

In a few incidents, travelers did not declare their eggs and the products were discovered during inspection. In those cases, the eggs were seized and the travelers received a $300 penalties, Alcordo explained.

“Penalties can be higher for repeat offenders or commercial size imports,” he added.

Alcordo emphasized the importance of declaring all food and agricultural products when traveling.

“While many items may be permissible, it’s best to declare them to avoid possible fines and penalties if they are deemed prohibited,” he said. “If they are declared and deemed prohibited, they can be abandoned without consequence. If they are undeclared and then discovered during an exam the traveler will be subject to penalties.”



Read original article here

US

House Republicans lay groundwork for Mayorkas impeachment as moderates balk

Leave a comment



CNN
 — 

Senior House Republicans are moving swiftly to build a case against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as they strongly weigh launching rare impeachment proceedings against a Cabinet secretary, a plan that could generate sharp backlash from GOP moderates.

Key committee chairmen are already preparing to hold hearings on the problems at the southern border, which Republicans say could serve as a prelude to an impeachment inquiry against Mayorkas. Three House committees – Oversight, Homeland Security and Judiciary – will soon hold hearings about the influx of migrants and security concerns at the border.

The House Judiciary Committee, which would have jurisdiction over an impeachment resolution, is prepared to move ahead with formal proceedings if there appears to be a consensus within the GOP conference, according to a GOP source directly familiar with the matter. The first impeachment resolution introduced by House Republicans already has picked up support, including from a member of the GOP leadership team.

A GOP source said the first Judiciary Committee hearing on the border could come later this month or early February.

One top chairman is already sounding supportive of the move, a sign of how the idea of impeaching President Joe Biden’s Cabinet secretary has moved from the fringes to the mainstream of the conference.

“If anybody is a prime candidate for impeachment in this town, it’s Mayorkas,” Rep. James Comer, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, told CNN.

It’s exceedingly rare for a Cabinet secretary to be impeached, something that has only happened once in US history – when William Belknap, the secretary of war, was impeached by the House before being acquitted by the Senate in 1876. Yet it’s a very real possibility now after Kevin McCarthy – as he was pushing for the votes to win the speakership – called on Mayorkas to resign or face potential impeachment proceedings.

With no signs that Mayorkas is stepping aside, House Republicans are signaling they’re prepared to move ahead, even as a bevy of members are uneasy about the approach.

Indeed, McCarthy has to balance his base’s demands for aggressive action with the concerns from more moderate members – many of whom hold seats in swing districts central to his narrow majority. And some in safer seats aren’t yet sold on whether the GOP should pursue that route.

“Clearly, the management of the Southern border has been incompetent,” Rep. Dusty Johnson, a Republican of South Dakota, told CNN. “That is not the threshold in the Constitution for impeachment – it’s high crimes and misdemeanors. … I would want to think about the legal standard the Constitution has set out – and whether or not that’s been met.”

If he loses more than four GOP votes on an impeachment resolution, the effort would fail in the House and could mark a huge embarrassment for the GOP leadership. Already, he has potentially lost one vote – Rep. Tony Gonzales of Texas who signaled he is opposed to the effort right now – and several other members who are far from convinced that charging Mayorkas with committing a high crime and misdemeanor is warranted, even if they believe he’s done a lackluster job in helping secure the southern border.

“Has he been totally dishonest to people? Yes. Has he failed in his job miserably? Yes,” Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, a Florida Republican, said of Mayorkas. “Are those grounds for impeachment? I don’t know.”

Indeed, Republicans from swing districts are urging their colleagues to not rush into impeachment, which would be dead-on-arrival in the Senate and could turn the American people off if the party is perceived as overreaching.

“The border is a disaster and a total failure by the Biden administration. We should first to try to force change through our power of the purse,” Rep. Don Bacon, who represents a Biden-won district in Nebraska, told CNN. “Maybe after more oversight we’ll see where middle America is at, but I don’t think independent, swing voters are interested in impeachments.”

Asked Tuesday about his pre-election warning that Mayorkas could be impeached by the House over the GOP concerns about the borders, McCarthy railed on the problems at the border.

“Should that person stay in their job? Well, I raised the issue they shouldn’t. The thing that we can do is we can investigate, and then that investigation could lead to an impeachment inquiry,” McCarthy told CNN, adding it could “rise to that occasion” of an impeachment if Mayorkas is found to be “derelict” in his duties.

During the first working week of their new majority, Rep. Pat Fallon, a Texas Republican, introduced articles of impeachment for Mayorkas over problems at the southern border, and Rep. Andy Biggs, a hard-right Arizona Republican, vowed to re-introduce a similar resolution in the coming weeks, which could serve as a template for eventual impeachment proceedings.

Fallon’s resolution says Mayorkas has “undermined the operational control of our southern border and encouraged illegal immigration,” also contending he lied to Congress that the border was secure.

Democrats say Republicans are threatening to impeach Mayorkas for pure political reasons, and say policy disputes hardly rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Mayorkas has already testified in front of Congress numerous times since he assumed his post, and his agency says he is fully prepared to continue complying with oversight in the GOP-led House. So far, there have been no formal requests for hearings or testimony, with congressional committees still working to get off the ground, though Republicans last year sent numerous letters and preservation requests telegraphing their plans for the majority.

In a statement, a spokeswoman for Mayorkas made clear he has no plans to resign and called on Congress to come together to fix the nation’s immigration system.

“Secretary Mayorkas is proud to advance the noble mission of this Department, support its extraordinary workforce, and serve the American people. The Department will continue our work to enforce our laws and secure our border, while building a safe, orderly, and humane immigration system,” the spokeswoman said in a statement. “Members of Congress can do better than point the finger at someone else; they should come to the table and work on solutions for our broken system and outdated laws, which they have not updated in over 40 years.”

Yet there are signs that the push is gaining steam in the House GOP.

Fallon’s resolution has attracted the support of several Republicans who previously held off on calling for impeachment, including Rep. Dan Crenshaw, a Texas Republican and member of the Homeland Security Committee, and Oklahoma Rep. Stephanie Bice, a new member of the GOP leadership team – signaling the idea is hardly isolated to the fringe wing of the party.

Fallon, too, had not previously backed impeaching Mayorkas until this Congress. Fallon said that he introduced impeachment articles to help get “the ball rolling,” but still believes it’s key to show the American public why they believe Mayorkas deserves to be removed from his post.

“It is important, it is an emergency, you need to break the glass, you really do need to take it up, and then we’re going to have an additional investigation,” Fallon told CNN. “While that’s why I filed the articles, you can always just sit on them and not do anything with them. That starts the ball rolling, we’re going to give Mayorkas the opportunity to defend himself and his department.”

Meanwhile, key committee chairs are vowing to hold hearings on the crisis at the southern border and prepping plans to haul in officials for interviews. GOP Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, who leads the powerful House Judiciary Committee where impeachment articles would originate, suggested the issue would be one of the first hearings when his panel gets up and running.

GOP leaders are cognizant of the fact they can only afford to lose four Republicans on any given vote, and want to build a thorough case for impeachment that can bring the entire party along. But pressure is already building on McCarthy, who has emboldened members of his right flank in his bid to claim the speaker’s gavel – and even given them a powerful tool to call for his ouster if he doesn’t listen to their demands.

Rep. Chip Roy, a Texas Republican and one of the key negotiators in the standoff over McCarthy’s speakership and who was the first to call for Mayorkas’ impeachment, told CNN: “I’ve been very public about my belief that he has violated his oath, that he has undermined our ability to defend our country.”

The primary committees that would be involved in building a case against Mayorkas are both chaired by members of the hardline House Freedom Caucus: Jordan and Tennessee Rep. Mark Green, the newly elected leader of the House Homeland Security Committee.

Part of Green’s pitch to become chairman has centered on how he will hold the Biden administration accountable over the southern border. Green told CNN he has a “five-phase plan” to delve into the issue.

“And if it turns out that (impeachment) is necessary, we’ll hand that over to Judiciary,” Green said. “We’ll have a fact-finding role.”

There’s also been talk of holding field hearings at the southern border, while Republicans plan to keep making visits there, as they did in the last Congress.

Jordan told reporters that the border problems will likely be one of his first hearings as chairman of the Judiciary Committee. But a source close to Jordan, who has become a close McCarthy ally, cautioned that they will not move ahead with impeachment unless the party is fully on board

And it’s clear that House Republicans are not yet in agreement on the issue.

Freshman Rep. Mike Lawler, who represents a Biden-won district in New York, told CNN shortly before being sworn in: “I think the top priority is to deal with inflation and the cost of living. … I don’t want to see what we saw during the Trump administration, where Democrats just went after the President and the administration incessantly.”

But there are some Republicans in Biden districts already lining up behind impeachment articles for Mayorkas, suggesting the politics could be moving in the GOP’s direction.

Freshman Rep. Nick Langworthy, another New York Republican, is among the 26 co-sponsors who have signed on to Fallon’s impeachment articles so far.

And another freshman New York Republican from a swing district, Rep. Anthony D’Esposito, has also expressed support for impeaching Mayorkas.

D’Esposito contended that many Customs and Border Protection agents are tired of the leadership from the top.

“They are the ones that will tell you flat out that Secretary Mayorkas is not living (up) to his oath and he is failing to secure our homeland,” he added.

And South Carolina Rep. Nancy Mace, also a Republican who hails from a swing district, said Mayorkas needs to go.

“When you raise your hand and take an oath to protect our country’s border, and you intentionally and willfully neglect to do that job, you should lose it,” said Mace, who pointed to the influx of drugs across the southern border. “Either way, Secretary Mayorkas has to go.”

House Republicans who have long been itching to impeach Mayorkas have been trying to keep the pressure on their leadership, holding a news conference last month and urging McCarthy to more explicitly spell out where he stands on the issue before they voted him speaker.

McCarthy traveled to the southern border shortly after the November election, where he called on Mayorkas to resign and threatened him with a potential impeachment inquiry, though he has not explicitly promised he would go that route.

But even if an impeachment resolution is approved in the House, winning a two-thirds majority in the Senate to convict Mayorkas has virtually no chance of succeeding. Some Senate Republicans, such as Senate GOP Whip John Thune of South Dakota, were noncommittal about backing such a move. And Democrats are roundly dismissing the idea.

“A wonderfully constructive action,” Sen. Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat, said sarcastically when asked about the impeachment talk.

Coons quickly added: “I think that’d be an enormous waste of time.”

This story has been updated with additional developments Tuesday.

Read original article here

US

Title 42: Appeals court rejects bid by GOP-led states to keep Trump-era border policy in force

Leave a comment



CNN
 — 

A federal appeals court on Friday rejected a bid by several Republican-led states to keep the so-called Title 42 rule in force, after a district court struck the controversial Trump-era border policy down.

The new ruling from the DC Circuit US Court of Appeals sets the stage for the case to go to the Supreme Court. The Biden administration is set to stop enforcing Title 42 – which allows for the expulsion of migrants at the US-Mexico border – on Wednesday.

The Republican-led states previously indicated that if the appeals court ruled against them, they’d seek the intervention of the Supreme Court.

In the new order, the DC Circuit denied the states’ request to intervene in the case and dismissed as moot the states’ request that it put the lower court’s ruling on hold.

The unsigned order was handed down by a circuit panel made up of an Obama appointee, a Trump appointee and a Biden appointee.

They wrote that the “inordinate and unexplained untimeliness” of the states’ request to get involved in the case “weighs decisively against intervention.”

The case is a lawsuit the American Civil Liberties Union, representing several migrants brought In January 2021 challenging the program. The appeals court noted on Friday that the Republican-led states had long known that their interest in keeping the policy in force would diverge from the Biden administration’s approach to the case.

The appeals court wrote that “more than eight months ago, the federal government issued an order terminating the Title 42 policy.”

“Yet these long-known-about differing interests in preserving Title 42—a decision of indisputable consequence—are the only reasons the States now provide for wanting to intervene for the first time on appeal,” the DC Circuit said. “Nowhere in their papers do they explain why they waited eight to fourteen months to move to intervene.”

The ACLU attorney representing the migrants praised the court’s decision.

“The states are clearly and wrongly trying to use Title 42 to restrict asylum and not for the law’s intended public health purposes,” the attorney, Lee Gelernt, told CNN in an email. “Many of these states were vigorously opposed to past COVID restrictions but suddenly believe there is a need for restrictions when it comes to migrants fleeing danger.”

White House spokesperson Abdullah Hasan said after the ruling that the administration has a “robust effort underway” for managing the border following the policy’s expected lifting next week.

“To be clear: the lifting of the Title 42 public health order does not mean the border is open. Anyone who suggests otherwise is doing the work of smugglers spreading misinformation to make a quick buck off of vulnerable migrants,” Hasan said in a statement. “We will continue to fully enforce our immigration laws and work to expand legal pathways for migration while discouraging disorderly and unsafe migration. We have a robust effort underway to manage the border in a safe, orderly, and humane way when Title 42 lifts as required by court order.”

The White House also urged Republicans in Congress to agree to more border funding and work on comprehensive immigration reform. The Biden administration has asked Congress for more than $3 billion as it prepares for the end of Title 42 to help shore up resources for border management and technology.

The administration’s handling of Title 42, which the Trump administration put in place during the Covid-19 pandemic, has been the target of litigation from both supporters and opponents of the program.

Last month, US District Judge Emmet Sullivan struck down the program. But Sullivan put his ruling on hold for five weeks so that the Biden administration would have time to prepare for the policy’s wind down. The administration has also appealed the ruling, arguing that the program was lawful, even if federal public health authorities have determined it is no longer necessary.

As the December 21 deadline for Sullivan’s ruling to go into effect approaches, officials have been preparing for a surge of migrants. More than 1 million migrants have been expelled under the rule, which is a public health authority the Trump administration began using at start of the Covid-19 pandemic to expel migrants before they went through the asylum application process.

Republican-led states, in their attempts to intervene in the case, allege that allowing the policy to terminate would “cause an enormous disaster at the border.”

They have argued that the “greatly increased number of migrants that such a termination will occasion will necessarily increase the States’ law enforcement, education, and healthcare costs.”

The Biden administration opposed the states’ attempt to intervene and their request to keep the policy in place, calling the requests untimely and unjustified.

“The States could have sought to intervene after the CDC acted to terminate the Title 42 orders in April 2022,” the administration wrote.

The migrants who challenged the program in the case also opposed the states’ request, writing in a court filing that the states were “transparently interested in Title 42 as a restriction on immigration and asylum” rather than as a public health measure.

The Biden administration tried to wind down the Title 42 program in 2021, but a coalition of mostly GOP-led states – in a separate case filed in Louisiana – successfully sued to block the Department of Homeland Security from ending enforcement.

This story has been updated with additional details.

Read original article here

World

Poland missile explosion: World leaders hold emergency meeting as ‘Russian-made’ weapon kills two in Przewodow

Leave a comment



CNN
 — 

World leaders gathering at the G20 summit in Bali are attempting to diffuse a potential escalation in the months-long Ukraine war after a “Russian-made” missile struck NATO-member Poland killing two people.

The missile landed outside the rural Polish village of Przewodow, about four miles (6.4 kilometers) west from the Ukrainian border on Tuesday afternoon, roughly the same time as Russia launched its biggest wave of missile attacks on Ukrainian cities in more than a month.

The circumstances surrounding the incident, which marks the first time a NATO country has been directly hit during the almost nine-month conflict, remain unclear. It is not known who fired the missile, or precisely where it was fired from, though the Polish Foreign Ministry has described it as “Russian-made.”

Both Russian and Ukrainian forces have used Russian-made munitions during the conflict, with Ukraine deploying Russian-made missiles as part of their air defense system.

Speaking to reporters after holding an emergency meeting with G7 and NATO leaders on the sidelines of the G20 summit, US President Joe Biden said preliminary information suggested it was “unlikely” the missile was fired from within Russia, but was unable to say conclusively until the investigation was complete.

“We agreed to support Poland’s investigation into the explosion … And I’m going to make sure we figure out exactly what happened,” Biden said, adding the leaders offered sympathy over the death of two people. “Then we’re going to collectively determine our next step as we investigate and proceed. There was total unanimity among the folks at the table,” he added.

Following Biden’s statement, a NATO military official told CNN the missile had been tracked by an alliance aircraft flying above Polish airspace at the time of the blast.

“Intel with the radar tracks [of the missile] was provided to NATO and Poland,” the NATO military official added. The NATO official did not say who launched the missile, or where it was fired from.

The missile strike within Poland’s borders on Tuesday “would not have happened without Russia’s horrific missile attacks against Ukraine,” Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said in a statement online Wednesday.

“The G7 and present NATO members convened a meeting this morning in Bali during the G20 to discuss the incident in Poland last night. We are united in our message that we first need to establish the facts and therefore support Poland’s investigation,” Rutte wrote.

In comments earlier Tuesday, Polish President Andrzej Duda noted that while it was not clear who launched the missile, it was “most likely” made in Russia. “We are working calmly and in a very calm manner,” Duda said during an address from the Bureau of National Security in Warsaw.

The Kremlin has denied involvement in the explosion, with Russia’s Defense Ministry calling the reports by Polish media, who first reported the deaths,”a deliberate provocation in order to escalate the situation,” according to a short statement late Tuesday.

It added that the photos of wreckage published by Polish media “from the scene in the village of Przewodow have nothing to do with Russian weapons.”

The Russian mission at the United Nations on Wednesday said “the incident in Poland is an attempt to provoke a direct military clash between NATO and Russia,” adding the incident would be the focus of attention at the UN Security Council meeting later in the day.

Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said Tuesday that evidence suggests the missile that landed in Przewodów was a “single act” and there is no evidence of further missile strikes.

But while urging calm, Morawiecki said Poland would increase its military readiness and was contemplating the activation of Article 4 of the NATO Treaty. Article 4 is a consultation method that allows members of the 30-country alliance to bring an issue – usually about security – for discussion at the North Atlantic Council, its decision-making body.

Whatever the outcome of the Polish-led investigation, the incident has reinforced longstanding concerns related to the risk of battlefield miscalculation triggering NATO-Russian conflict.

Witness to the blast described hearing a terrifying “whoosh” as the projectile flew over the town and the force of the explosion shook nearby windows.

Video taken by a resident, which was geolocated and confirmed by CNN, shows a large smoke plume in the center of the village.

At the site of the explosion, local media showed an image of a crater and upturned farm vehicle. CNN cannot independently confirm the photos.

In his address, Duda said the US would send experts to investigate the site as part of joint operation.

Speaking after a call with Duda Tuesday, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said it was “important that all facts are established.”

“I offered my condolences for the loss of life. NATO is monitoring the situation and Allies are closely consulting. Important that all facts are established,” said Stoltenberg in a statement.

Read original article here

US

Inside the House GOP effort to keep weapons flowing to Ukraine

Leave a comment


Washington
CNN
 — 

After House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy suggested last week that Republicans might pull back funding for Ukraine next year if they take the majority, the GOP leader has worked behind the scenes to reassure national security leaders in his conference that he wasn’t planning to abandon Ukraine aid and was just calling for greater oversight of any federal dollars, sources told CNN.

McCarthy told key Republican national security committee members – some of whom reached out to McCarthy – that his comments that Ukraine wouldn’t get a “blank check” in a Republican majority were being taken out of context, the sources said. Rather, McCarthy told his members he was simply saying that a GOP-led House would not automatically rubber-stamp a request from the administration for additional Ukraine aid.

“McCarthy was not saying, ‘We wouldn’t spend money.’ McCarthy was saying, ‘We’re gonna be accountable to the taxpayer for every dollar we spend,’” one GOP lawmaker familiar with McCarthy’s thinking told CNN. “A ‘blank check’ means that people get whatever they ask for. What we’re saying is there’s going to be some thought, there’s going to be accountability, and taxpayer dollars are going to be used appropriately.”

McCarthy’s effort to soothe the House’s senior defense hawks, which has not been previously reported, underscores the fine line the aspiring speaker is walking on foreign policy as the war in Ukraine appears poised to grind into a second year. But it also offers a preview of the types of policy and political battles to come between the establishment and pro-Trump wings of the GOP, presenting a tricky balancing act — and potential headaches — for Republican leaders in a House majority.

Ukraine has led to messy politics for Democrats as well. On Monday, Progressive Caucus leader Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington state abruptly withdrew a letter pushing the Biden administration to pursue diplomacy in Russia’s war with Ukraine, an about-face following furious internal backlash from Democrats.

Liberal Democrats abruptly withdraw letter on Ukraine policy amid anger

GOP sources told CNN they believe that only a small faction of Republican lawmakers — the midterm elections will determine how many — are opposed to funding Ukraine’s battlefield efforts. What’s more likely to likely face cuts under a GOP majority, sources said, is the economic assistance and other non-military aid going to Ukraine, like the aid money going to the United Nations to help Ukraine rebuild its country and the money going to USAID to support Ukraine’s budget.

If Republicans win back the House, GOP sources say they are likely to ramp up overall oversight of the billions of dollars in aid going to Ukraine, such as examining end-use tracking of weapons. CNN has previously reported that the Biden administration doesn’t have perfect visibility into how or where US-provided weapons are used once they cross the border into Ukraine.

Still, senior congressional Republicans who support robustly funding Ukraine’s war are watching warily as some more isolationist-minded colleagues have become increasingly vocal in recent weeks that they will heavily scrutinize – if not outright oppose – US money for Ukraine.

Fifty-seven Republicans in the House and 11 in the Senate voted against the $40 billion Ukraine aid bill in May. Some vocal GOP opponents like Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Chip Roy of Texas jumped on McCarthy’s recent comments to argue that a Republican majority should scale back aid to Ukraine.

The anti-aid crowd also has influential voices like Fox’s Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump Jr. who have advocated for cutting off aid to Ukraine altogether.

“They’re strong. Amongst Republicans, I call it the ‘Tucker Carlson’ effect,” the lawmaker said of House GOP skeptics. “I love Tucker on other issues, but he’s wrong on this. He’s listening to Russia disinformation. And he’s creating problems for us in our districts.”

McCarthy can’t afford to alienate or ignore the noisy skeptics in his conference who have raised concerns about indefinitely funding Ukraine’s war against Russia – whose votes he will need to become speaker, especially if Republicans win a narrow majority.

“McCarthy cracked the door open here. He is leaning more towards our direction of pulling back. You also have Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham banging the drum on this,” said a source familiar with the ongoing discussions about Ukraine aid who favors tighter purse strings.

A McCarthy spokesman did not respond to requests for comment.

Last week, McCarthy told Punchbowl News, “I think people are going to be sitting in a recession, and they’re not going to write a blank check to Ukraine.”

The comments prompted frantic outreach on Capitol Hill from Ukrainians and European allies alike, sources told CNN, intensifying long-running concerns that a Republican majority in Congress threatens to hamper US support for Ukraine’s war against Russia.

They also led some GOP national security hawks to begin planning a campaign for after the midterm election to ensure that the US doesn’t abandon Ukraine. That includes preparing a combination of education for their new and skeptical colleagues as well as examining ways to increase oversight of where the money and weapons are going inside Ukraine.

To help convince skeptics, Republicans are looking to tap former Trump administration national security leaders as expert voices – rather than Biden administration officials. Some of the voices that Republicans are considering bringing in to speak to new members include former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former Deputy National Security Adviser Matthew Pottinger, sources said.

“They need to hear from people they trust. The administration isn’t necessarily the best messenger for this,” said one GOP congressional aide.

They’re also planning to hold briefings from Republican think tanks with conservative bona fides like the Heritage Foundation, congressional trips to the region and direct engagement with Ukrainian and European officials as part of an education campaign.

“I don’t think the issue is one of lack of support of aid from Ukraine. It’s a signaling that Republicans do things differently,” Rep. Mike Turner, an Ohio Republican in line to chair the House Intelligence Committee next year, said in an interview with CNN.

Turner, who just returned from a bipartisan congressional meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Ukraine, argued the bills that Democrats passed this year – such as a $40 billion aid package in May – included extraneous funding that he criticized as a “bloated bureaucracy,” such as money that went to the UN.

“Kevin McCarthy supports providing weapons systems to Ukraine to continue to win on the battlefield,” Turner said in a roundtable with reporters on Monday.

Despite confidence among GOP hawks that they have the upper hand over the caucus’ more isolationist wing, lawmakers are beginning to lay the groundwork to convince new members in particular that the military support is vital spending.

Congressional Democrats on national security committees told CNN that McCarthy’s comments didn’t raise major alarm bells – yet – as they still believe there’s significant support for Ukraine among their Republican colleagues. One Democrat noted that Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell is a stalwart supporter of funding Ukraine’s war – and the Senate often gets its way in funding fights.

“There’s the Reagan block and there’s the Trump block. And the Reagan block wants to help,” said another House Democrat who works on national security issues. McCarthy, the Democrat said, was “signaling that he’s going to have resistance and it’s not going to be easy.”

In the House, the pro-Ukraine effort is likely to be led by the “three Mikes” poised to become committee chairmen: Turner of Ohio on Intelligence, Mike McCaul of Texas on Foreign Affairs, and Mike Rogers of Alabama on Armed Services.

Another key voice will be Rep. Kay Granger of Texas, a defense hawk who is expected to become House Appropriations chairwoman in a Republican majority.

If he becomes chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, McCaul is considering holding his first hearing next year on Russian war crimes, according to one congressional source, to hammer home the egregiousness of Russia’s actions in Ukraine.

“We’ve got to give them what they need. The Ukrainians, when we give them what they need, they win,” McCaul said on Bloomberg TV last week. “I do think you have broad bipartisan support for what’s happening in Ukraine, but I think you’ll see if we get the majority, more oversight and accountability in terms of the funding and where the money is going.”

The defense hawks are expected to make the case that the war with Russia goes beyond Europe. They argue that the US needs Ukraine to win in order to deter China from invading Taiwan, for instance. One senior Republican noted that Iranian drones now being used on the battlefield show how the war extends far beyond Ukraine’s borders.

The Ukrainians are also likely to make their own case directly to Congress. Ukrainian legislators and other top officials have held meetings with their American counterparts since the war began, telling US lawmakers that it is cheaper to invest in Ukrainian defense now than to defend Europe against wide-ranging Russian aggression later.

Ukraine skeptics both in Congress and on the campaign trail – along with influential outside voices – are preparing to ramp up their own campaign to try to curtail or outright stop the flow of US dollars to Ukraine.

Republican criticism of funding Ukraine has largely focused on the high costs of prolonging the war, as well as concerns about corruption in Ukraine and the need to devote more resources to domestic challenges. Earlier this month, the House Freedom Caucus wrote to McCarthy urging him to stand up a special inspector general on US involvement in Ukraine.

Greene, a far-right Georgia Republican, posted a video on Twitter last month saying, “There is a country’s border that he (Biden) cares about and it is not this country’s border, it is Ukraine’s border. I believe our American tax dollars need to be used only for our country while we have so many problems, security crises.”

After McCarthy’s comments last week, Rep. Jim Banks, an Indiana Republican who is seeking a House leadership post next year, tweeted, “A Republican-led House will put the needs of America first. We cannot continue with unlimited spending for any foreign nation while our people are struggling to get by here at home.”

The Senate GOP conference could also soon have new members who have been vocal opposing the aid, such as J.D. Vance, the Senate GOP nominee in Ohio. “I think we’re at the point where we’ve given enough money in Ukraine, I really do,” Vance told local Ohio television station 13abc last month.

But McConnell also weighed in last week with a statement urging the Biden administration and US allies to “be quicker and more proactive to get Ukraine the aid they need” – comments that were in stark contrast to McCarthy’s statement and a sign that McConnell expects Senate Republicans to continue to support Ukraine’s war.

Dan Caldwell, vice president of foreign policy at Stand Together, a conservative non-profit that opposes open-ended spending in Ukraine, said those advocating for scaling back support to Ukraine are also gearing up to make their voices heard with new members in what’s expected to be a Republican-controlled Congress.

“During the first few weeks of the new Congress, new members will have a lot of people trying to convince them to not keep their campaign promises to oppose interventionist policies in Ukraine,” Caldwell said. “Our community will make the argument to these members that not only is pursuing a more realist approach to Ukraine good policy, it is also good politics – especially considering domestic economic challenges and more important foreign policy priorities in other parts of the world.”

The looming fight over Ukraine aid could come even before Republicans take control of Congress next year, as the Biden administration is considering pushing through another major Ukrainian assistance package before the end of 2022, administration officials told CNN. So far this year, Congress has approved more than $65 billion in aid toward Ukraine. While the administration believes that Republicans are unlikely to completely curtail support for Ukraine, they see value in locking in support now before things could get more challenging.

“End of the year funding in Washington is going to be the wild, wild West of spending, especially if Republicans win the House,” Turner told reporters Monday, adding that Republicans could oppose a bill with extraneous items attached.

Regardless of what it can get approved during the lame-duck session, the Biden administration will likely have to come back to Congress at some point next year to ask for money.

While there is an acknowledgment that oversight will have to ramp up when reconstruction in Ukraine begins – which could be needed even before the war ends due to just how much help Ukraine will need – many congressional aides and administration officials believe that additional layers are not necessary at this time.

Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur argued there already is clear accountability when it comes to weapons getting onto the battlefield.

“I understand their position to have more accountability. I also have information from (Joint Chiefs Chairman) Gen. (Mark) Milley, who said to me that there is more of an accountability as ever, regarding the help sent to Ukraine, because they even have a barcode system to track basically each shipment which was sent to Ukraine,” he said. “I believe this is exactly what also Republicans want to hear that yes, there is accountability.”

Read original article here

World

Immigration: Biden admin working on plan to manage flow of Venezuelan migrants, sources say

Leave a comment



CNN
 — 

The Biden administration is considering a new program to have Venezuelan migrants apply to arrive at US ports of entry, like an airport, instead of unlawfully crossing the southern border, if they have a pre-existing tie in the US, according to four sources familiar with discussions.

The proposal comes amid an influx of migrants from those nationalities at the US-Mexico border, straining federal resources and border cities. In August, 55,333 migrants encountered at the border were from Venezuela, Cuba or Nicaragua, a 175% increase from last August, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

The plan is intended to serve as an expanded and more orderly process. If migrants meet the criteria and are approved, they’d then be paroled into the US at an airport with the ability to also work legally.

Mexico is also expected to take a number of Venezuelans under a Trump-era pandemic emergency rule, known as Title 42, that allows authorities to turn away migrants at the US-Mexico border, according to two sources.

Administration officials have been grappling with mass migration throughout the Western Hemisphere for months, stressing the need for all countries to help alleviate the flow and create better conditions in country. The issue was a topic of discussion again last week at a meeting of foreign ministers in Lima, Peru.

The shift in demographics – with many of the migrants now from Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua – is uniquely difficult for the US given, in part, frosty relations with those nations that largely bar the administration from removing people from those countries.

The proposal that’s under consideration is an acknowledgment of the reality that Venezuelans are largely released in the US while they go through immigration proceedings, and in some cases, have family or friends they are joining in the country.

CNN has reached out to the White House for comment.

The Biden administration took a similar approach as the one under consideration with Ukrainians fleeing their war-torn country, allowing them entry into the United States as well as the ability to work for a temporary period. That program was set up to avoid having Ukrainians to the US-Mexico border and come through an orderly process.

Poor economic conditions, food shortages and limited access to health care are increasingly pushing Venezuelans to leave – posing an urgent and steep challenge to the administration as thousands arrive at the US southern border.

More than 6 million Venezuelans have fled their country amid deteriorating conditions, matching Ukraine in the number of displaced people and surpassing Syria, according to the United Nations. More than 1,000 Venezuelans are apprehended along the US-Mexico border daily, according to a Homeland Security official.

Venezuelans apprehended at the US-Mexico border are generally paroled into the US and released under an Immigrations and Customs Enforcement program that monitors people using GPS ankle monitors, phones or an app while they go through their immigration proceedings. But the latest proposal is expected to take a more organized approach.

The jump in Venezuelans moving in the hemisphere came up during a meeting at the White House last month with 19 Western Hemisphere nations, a senior administration official previously told CNN.

“We do find that a lack of coordination leads to more migrants being exploited,” the senior administration official said. “There’s consensus that there’s value in us working more closely and trying to synchronize our policies.”

This story has been updated with additional information Tuesday.

Read original article here

US

DeSantis’ migrant flights to Martha’s Vineyard appear outside the scope of Florida transport program guidelines, state documents show

Leave a comment



CNN
 — 

A pair of flights carrying migrants from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard last month, orchestrated by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, may have exceeded the original scope of the state’s plan to transport undocumented individuals, according to records obtained by CNN.

The records show that in the months leading up to those flights, Florida had planned a narrower mission for a controversial new state program to transport migrants to other states. The goal, according to a callout to contractors and guidelines for the program, was to, “relocate out of the state of Florida foreign nationals who are not lawfully present in the United States.”

But that’s not what transpired. On September 14, two planes picked up 48 migrants in San Antonio – not Florida – and dropped them off in Martha’s Vineyard.

The documents, provided to CNN through a records request and released Friday evening by the Florida Department of Transportation and the governor’s office, offer new details about the stunt that thrust DeSantis even deeper into the middle of a national debate on immigration. From the White House to Florida, Massachusetts and beyond, the condemnation from Democrats was swift. So was the praise from Republicans for DeSantis, who only further bolstered his standing in his party as he considers running for President in 2024.

A Democratic state lawmaker is already suing the state and asking a judge to stop future flights, arguing the DeSantis administration was illegally spending taxpayer dollars. The budget act that created the $12 million program specified the money was set aside to relocate “unauthorized aliens from this state.”

The governor’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The records for the first time also directly tie a $615,000 state payment made to Vertol Systems Company for the September flights that sent migrants from San Antonio to Martha’s Vineyard. Previously, the payment to Vertol was disclosed by the state, but the governor’s office for weeks declined to confirm that the check was linked to the flights that landed in Massachusetts.

The Florida Department of Transportation, the agency tasked with executing the new migrant relocation program, received a price quote from Vertol CEO James Montgomerie on September 6 for “the first Project,” one document showed. Montgomerie identified that project as “the facilitation of the relocation of up to fifty individuals to the State of Massachusetts or other, proximate northeastern state.” The price, he said, was $615,000.

The next day, FDOT officials sent a letter asking for authorization for the $615,000 and the state made the payment within the next 24 hours, according to financial statements maintained on the Florida Chief Financial Officer’s website previously reported by CNN.

In communications with FDOT earlier during the summer, Montgomerie offered the state services that suggested a considerably less ambitious mission for the migrant relocation program.

On July 26, after a discussion with FDOT’s general counsel, Montgomerie gave the agency estimates for his company to charter flights that could carry four to 12 people from Crestview, Florida, to the Boston or Los Angeles areas, according to an email from the Vertol executive to FDOT.

“We are certainly willing to provide you with pricing information on specific ad-hoc requirements on a case by case basis,” Montgomerie wrote in the email.

The prices quoted for flights originating from Florida more closely aligned with FDOT’s guidelines for the program that it sent to prospective contractors and the agency’s request for quotes. In the three-page guidelines, FDOT stipulated the chosen company needed to ensure “that the Unauthorized Alien has voluntarily agreed to be relocated out of Florida.” The quotes also showed Montgomerie early on anticipated Vertol would be moving less people. Later, in September, his quotes evolved to include many more people on board.

Ultimately, the planes that left San Antonio briefly touched down in Crestview before eventually landing in Massachusetts.

At the time of the state’s request for contractors, DeSantis was publicly claiming that President Joe Biden could send buses of migrants from the US-Mexico border to Florida. But DeSantis acknowledged last month those buses never arrived, and his focus began to shift hundreds of miles away to Texas.

DeSantis has said the intention of executing the flights from Texas was to stop the flow of migrants at the source before they came to Florida.

“If you can do it at the source and divert to sanctuary jurisdictions, the chance they end up in Florida is much less,” DeSantis told reporters in September.

DeSantis has vowed to use “every penny” of the $12 million allocated to his administration for migrant transports. However, the state has not publicly taken credit for any transports since the two planes landed in Martha’s Vineyard.

State Sen. Jason Pizzo, the lawmaker now suing DeSantis, said the governor cannot choose to ignore the law when spending state money.

“You can’t even play by your own rules,” Pizzo told CNN last month when speaking of DeSantis. “This isn’t something that we passed 12 years ago. It was done four months ago at your request.”

DeSantis’ office previously said the lawsuit by Pizzo was an attempt at “15 minutes of fame.”

The state has paid Vertol $1.6 million so far through its migrant program, which is funded by interest earned on federal coronavirus relief money, according to the state budget documents. The initial payment of $615,000 was made by the FDOT on September 8, six days before the Martha’s Vineyard flight. Another payment for $950,000 followed on September 16, though it’s not clear what that payment went for.

A few days after that second payment, reports of a similar flight plan from San Antonio to Delaware, Biden’s home state, sent officials there scrambling to prepare for migrant arrivals. The flights, though, never arrived.

The state did not provide a contract with Vertol in the records released Friday night. Nor do the documents offer further insight into why Vertol was chosen over two other companies that appeared to submit quotes to the state, according to records.

CNN has reached out to Montgomerie for further comment.

Vertol had an existing link to a DeSantis administration official prior to its work with the state. Lawrence Keefe, Florida’s “public safety czar” appointed by DeSantis to lead the state’s crackdown on illegal immigration, represented the aviation company from 2010 to 2017.

In its quoted price to the state, Vertol said it was providing “Project management, aircraft, crew, maintenance logistics, fuel, coordination and planning, route preparation, route services, landing fees, ground handling and logistics and other Project-related expenses,” according to the documents.

The request for quotes from the state also asked that potential contractors have “multilingual capability for Spanish.” The chosen contractor would also have to develop procedures for “confirming with Partner Agencies that the person to be transported is an Unauthorized Alien.” Pizzo and others have questioned whether the migrants are considered “unauthorized” by the federal government if they are legally seeking asylum.

Read original article here

US

Kelly warns ‘wheels’ could ‘come off our democracy’ while Masters tries to tie him to Biden in Arizona Senate debate

Leave a comment



CNN
 — 

While trying to distance himself from his own party, Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly warned during an hour-long debate on Thursday that the “wheels” could “come off our democracy” if candidates like his GOP opponent, Trump-backed Blake Masters, are elected in November.

But Masters aggressively pushed back on those attacks, portraying Kelly, who’s running for a full six-year term, as a rubber stamp for the Biden administration, while refusing to acknowledge that he has attempted to moderate his positions on abortion and the 2020 presidential election.

The Arizona Senate race is among the most competitive in the country, and with the chamber currently split 50-50, every race matters. But Kelly appears to have strengthened his position over the past two months as Masters has struggled to keep up with the Democrat’s fundraising prowess. A new CNN poll released Thursday found that 51% of likely voters are behind Kelly, with 45% backing Masters.

Masters – a venture capitalist and political novice who won the primary in large part because of former President Donald Trump’s endorsement and the financial backing of billionaire Peter Thiel (his former boss) – released a campaign video last year proclaiming that he believed Trump won the 2020 election. But after the primary, he removed language from his website that included the false claim that the election was stolen.

Masters attempted to maneuver around questions about the election during Thursday’s debate – just days before Trump, whose 2020 loss in Arizona set off a cascade of election denialism in the state, heads there to campaign for Masters and other Republicans.

When the moderator asked him whether President Joe Biden, who narrowly carried Arizona, is the “legitimately elected President of the United States,” Masters replied: “Joe Biden is absolutely the President. I mean, my gosh, have you seen the gas prices lately?”

“Legitimately elected?” the moderator interjected.

“I’m not trying to trick you,” Masters said. “He’s duly sworn and certified. He’s the legitimate president. He’s in the White House and unfortunately for all of us.”

When the moderator followed up by using Trump’s language, asking whether the election was “stolen” or “rigged in any way” through vote counting or election results, Masters replied: “Yeah, I haven’t seen evidence of that.”

But Kelly argued that Masters has espoused “conspiracies and lies that have no place in our democracy.”

“I’m worried about what’s going to happen here,” Kelly said. “This election in 2024. I mean, we could wind up in a situation where the wheels come off of our democracy, and it’s because of folks like like Blake Masters that are questioning the integrity of an election.”

Masters insisted that he does not want to get rid of mail-in voting as Kelly alleged. He said he believed military service members should be able to mail ballots back from overseas and said he’d be fine with other voters sending their ballots back by mail if they included a copy of their driver’s license.

Masters and Kelly repeatedly clashed over immigration, with Masters claiming Kelly supports “open borders” and Kelly rejecting those attacks as he insisted that he’s brought more resources to Arizona to deal with that issue.

When asked whether he had done enough to address immigration concerns, Kelly distanced himself from national Democrats.

“When I got to Washington, DC, one of the first things I realized was that Democrats don’t understand this issue. And Republicans just want to talk about it, complain about it, but actually not do anything about it. They just want to politicize that. We heard this tonight from my opponent Blake Masters.”

Masters charged that Biden and Kelly have put out “the welcome mat” to migrants. “We treat these people better than we treat our own US military service members. I find that shameful.”

Kelly said he’s pushed back on the Biden administration multiple times on immigration issues, including when the administration planned to end Title 42, the pandemic-era policy that allowed border patrol agents to send migrants back to their home countries.

“I’ve stood up to Democrats when they’re wrong on this issue … including the President.”

“When the President decided he was going to do something dumb on this, and change the rules,” Kelly said, “I told him he was wrong.”

Some of the sharpest exchanges were over abortion as the moderator and Libertarian candidate Marc Victor drew attention to the fact that Masters scrubbed some of the language about his anti-abortion stances from his website as he tried to pivot toward the general election.

Abortion rights have been a subject of fierce controversy in Arizona since the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, because there are conflicting abortion laws in the state – leading to debate over which one should take precedence.

The state legislature passed a 15-week ban earlier this year that does not include exceptions for rape or incest, only medical emergencies. Masters has said he supports that plan, which was signed into law by Republican Gov. Doug Ducey.

But Arizona also had a pre-statehood law on the books banning nearly all abortions that was enjoined in 1973 after the Roe decision. A Pima County Superior Court judge recently ruled that it could go back into effect at the urging of the state’s GOP attorney general.

Kelly argued that Masters wants to make decisions for Arizona women and curtail their rights. “I think we all know guys like this,” said Kelly, also faulting Masters for supporting a national ban on abortion at 15 weeks that has been proposed by South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham.

“You know, guys that think they know better than everyone about everything,” Kelly continued.

“What I’m doing is I am protecting your constitutional rights,” he added.

When the moderator pressed Kelly to explain what limits he would support on abortion, Kelly said he supports the kind of framework contemplated by the Roe v. Wade decision where “late term abortion in this country only happens when there is a serious problem.”

Read original article here

World

‘I don’t want to die for someone else’s ambitions’: Russian men face mobilization

Leave a comment



CNN
 — 

Tension was in the air as a long trail of cars lined up near the Petkuhovo checkpoint on the border between Russia and Kazakhstan late Friday night.

Andrei Alekseev, a 27-year-old engineer from the city of Yekaterinburg, was among many men in the queue who were fleeing Russia in the wake of President Vladimir Putin’s mobilization orders.

Cars had to go through Russian and Kazakh border checks, both of which lasted about two hours.

Alekseev woke up to the news of Putin’s mobilization order on Wednesday morning and he knew he had to flee Russia. He met up with his friends that night to discuss their next steps and decided to avoid taking any risks and to leave Russia with no plan in mind.

On Saturday, Putin signed the law on military service, setting a jail term of up to 10 years for evading military duty due to mobilization, and up to 15 years in prison for wartime desertion.

The legal amendments also introduce concepts of “mobilization, martial law and wartime” to the Russian Criminal Code. Putin also signed a decree granting university students a deferment from mobilization.

“At the border, all the men were asked whether they served in the army and what is their military service category,” Alekseev told CNN.

“I felt that the border guards were very understanding, however, I had friends who crossed the border to Kazakhstan at a different checkpoint and they were met with grueling questions, it took them seven hours to cross,” he told CNN.

Suffering heavy losses in Ukraine this month amid Ukraine’s counter-offensive, Putin raised the stakes this week with the draft and his backing for referendums in the occupied territories in Ukraine.

The decree signed by Putin appears to allow for wider mobilization than he suggested in the speech that aired on Wednesday. According to the address, 300,000 reservists would be drafted to the front, breaking his promises earlier in the war that there would be no mobilization. However, the decree itself puts no cap on how many people can be mobilized.

“Mobilization is called ‘partial,’ but no parameters of this partiality, neither geographical, nor in terms of criteria, are specified,” Ekaterina Schulmann, a Russian political scientist, wrote on her social media page.

“According to this text, anyone can be drafted, except for workers of the military-industrial complex.”

Men aged 18 to 60 across Russia are now facing mobilization as reservists to fight Putin’s war of aggression in Ukraine.

Once Alekseev and his wife crossed into Kazahstan, they found that all of the hotels in the border towns were booked, so the couple drove to Astana, the country’s capital, where they are now looking for an apartment.

“Three days ago, I did not think that I would be in Kazakhstan and looking for an apartment here. We are planning to stay for two months, then maybe go to Uzbekistan to renew the period of stay, I will look for work at international companies,” he told CNN.

Kirill Ponomarev, 23, who also fled Russia via a Kazakhstan border, said he struggled to book a ticket. The night before Putin’s address he was looking up tickets out of Russia.

“For some reason, I couldn’t buy a ticket, the night before while waiting for Putin’s speech. And then I fell asleep without buying a ticket, when I woke up, ticket prices jumped,” Ponomarev told CNN.

Men rushed to the borders exchanging tips on Telegram channels and among friends. One-way flights out of Russia sold out within hours of the mobilization announcement.

Four of the five EU countries bordering Russia have banned entry for Russians on tourist visas, while queues to cross land borders out of Russia to the former Soviet countries Kazakhstan, Georgia and Armenia take over 24 hours to cross.

The Kremlin mocked Russians’ reactions by calling it a “hysterical and overly-emotional reaction.”

Meanwhile, protests broke out across Russia on Wednesday and brutal detentions followed with reports of detained protesters being handed draft letters at police stations. According to the independent monitoring group OVD-Info, more than 1,300 people were detained by authorities in at least 43 cities across Russia.

While all men aged below 60 in Russia now share the fear of getting drafted, Putin’s mobilization disproportionately affects poorer, more ethnically diverse regions of Russia, according to Alexandra Garmazhapova, president of the Free Buryatia Foundation, who spoke to CNN.

“In Buryatia, mobilization is not partial, everyone is mobilized. Summons come to students, pensioners, fathers of many children, people with disabilities,” she told CNN.

Garmazhapova, whose organization provides legal help to mobilised men and their relatives, says every day she hears multiple stories of people being drafted without any regard to age, military history or health conditions.

“Yesterday afternoon, a taxi driver went to refuel the car, and when he was standing at a gas station, a bus passed by with the recruits,” she told CNN.

“The bus stopped abruptly when they saw him and they stuffed him into this bus. They didn’t give him any things to take, nothing. His car was left at this gas station, then relatives took it away,” she said.

Those men who stayed behind in Russia, now take extra caution when leaving their house. Kirill, a 27-year-old IT professional from St. Petersburg who declined to give his surname, said he is starting to think about moving after most of his friends have already received draft letters.

“I adore St. Petersburg but I am starting to have thoughts about moving. Today, I lived another day and tomorrow it might not be safe for me to get into a taxi without a risk of getting drafted,” Kirill told CNN.

“For now, I am keeping an eye on the situation and how it develops. For me, going to war or going to prison are ‘bad options, so hopefully, I can avoid both,” he said.

Kirill, who is half-Ukrainian, said he cannot imagine going to war and killing Ukrainians. “I will not be able to explain my actions to relatives who are in Ukraine. We talk every day,” he said.

Some men were lucky to find out the news of mobilization orders from abroad. Ilya, 35, was on vacation with his family in Turkey when he received a text from his co-workers in Kurgan, a city in the Urals region of Russia, that his office had received a draft letter for him.

His wife and child returned to Russia while he stayed behind in Turkey. “I don’t want war, I don’t want to die for someone else’s ambitions, I don’t want to prove anything to anyone, it was a difficult decision to not return to Russia, very difficult, I don’t know when I can now see my family, my loved ones,” Ilya told CNN.

Ilya served in the Russian army years ago, so is considered to be in the reserve. “I am at a loss and do not know what to do, how to provide for my family being so far from them. I’m deep in debt because of such sudden forced decisions, and I’m just morally exhausted,” he said.

Since the start of Moscow’s war in Ukraine, economic sanctions on Russia made any international transactions close to impossible. Ilya said he wants to be reunited with his family.

Read original article here

World

Putin speech: Russia announces immediate ‘partial mobilization’ of citizens for its offensive in Ukraine

Leave a comment



CNN
 — 

Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced the immediate “partial mobilization” of Russian citizens in an escalation of Moscow’s offensive in Ukraine and pledged to use “all means” to defend the country and its people.

“Our country also has various means of destruction and in some components more modern than those of the NATO countries, and if the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, we will certainly use all the means at our disposal to protect Russia and our people,” Putin said in a speech Wednesday indicating a possible new chapter in the months long conflict.

The latest developments follow a significant shift in Russia’s position after a sudden and successful Ukrainian offensive through most of occupied Kharkiv this month, which has galvanized Ukraine’s Western backers and led to recriminations in Moscow.

Addressing the potential for escalation and use of nuclear weapons, Putin said “those who try to blackmail us with nuclear weapons should know that the prevailing winds can turn in their direction.”

Conducting “partial mobilization” in the country was necessary in order to “protect our homeland, its sovereignty and territorial integrity,” the Russian leader said, and those efforts would begin Wednesday with their decree was already signed.

The mobilization would mean citizens who are in the reserve and those with military experience would be subject to conscription, he added.

The announcement comes as Russia is believed to face shortages of manpower and follows amendments to Russia’s law on military service made Tuesday, which raise the penalties for resistance related to military service or coercion to violate an official military order during a period of mobilization or martial law.

Putin framed the ongoing fighting as part of a larger struggle for Russian survival against a West whose goal is it is to “weaken, divide and ultimately destroy our country” – a statement that takes on more weight as several Russian-occupied regions of Ukraine announced referendums multiple Kremlin-backed authorities in occupied areas of eastern and southern Ukraine that they will hold referendums on formally joining Russia this week.

“They are already saying directly that they were able to split the Soviet Union in 1991 and now the time has come for Russia to break up into a multitude of regions and areas which are fatally hostile to each other,” he said.

The referendums could pave the way for Russian annexation of the areas, allowing Moscow to frame the ongoing Ukrainian counteroffensive there as an attack on Russia itself, thereby providing Moscow with a pretext to escalate its military response.

In what appeared to be a coordinated announcement, Russian-appointed leaders in the occupied regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia and the self-declared Luhansk People’s Republic and Donetsk People’s Republic all said they planned to hold “votes” beginning on September 23.

Together the four regions that have announced their referendum plans make up around 18% of Ukraine’s territory. Russia does not control any of the four in their entirety.

The expected referendums, which run counter to international law upholding Ukraine’s sovereignty, have been announced as world leaders have descended on New York for a meeting of the United Nations General Assembly, where the war and it impacts were already poised to loom large.

Ukraine has dismissed the announcement of referendums in the occupied regions as a “sham” stemming from the “fear of defeat,” while the the country’s Western supporters signaled they would not alter their support for Ukraine.

The announcements received swift support from Russian politicians. Former Russian President and vice-chairman of Russia’s National Security Council Dmitry Medvedev has publicly endorsed referendums in the self-declared Donbas republics, saying this would have “huge significance” for “systemic protection” of the residents.

“Encroachment on Russian territory is a crime which allows you to use all the forces of self-defense,” Medvedev said on his Telegram channel, in an apparent allusion to the potential for the military escalation.

It’s unclear what form an escalation could take, but concerns have been raised throughout the conflict over whether Russia would resort to using its nuclear stockpile in the Ukraine.

US President Joe Biden addressed these concerns in a 60 Minutes interview earlier this week, when a reporter asked what he would say to the Russian leader regarding the use of chemical or tactical nuclear weapons.

“Don’t. Don’t. Don’t. You will change the face of war unlike anything since World War II,” Biden said, adding that the US response to such actions would be “consequential.”

Putin endorsed a new “deterrent” strategy in June 2020 that allowed for the use of nuclear weapons in response to a non-nuclear attack on Russia that threatened its existence.

On Tuesday, Russia’s lower house of parliament, the State Duma, amended the law on military service, toughening the punishment for violation of military service duties – such as desertion and evasion from service – according to state news agency TASS.

The bill sets a jail term of up to 15 years for resistance related to military service or coercion to violate an official military order, involving violence or the threat of its use, during the period of mobilization or martial law.

Read original article here