Connect with us

Politics

U.S. defense chief says NATO membership for Ukraine is unrealistic

Published

on


U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that NATO membership for Ukraine was unrealistic and in sweeping remarks suggested Kyiv should abandon hopes of winning all its territory back from Russia and instead prepare for a negotiated peace settlement to be backed up by international troops.

Hours later, President Donald Trump said he and Russian President Vladimir Putin had agreed to begin “negotiations” on ending the Ukraine war. In a social media post, the Republican disclosed a call between the two leaders and said they would “work together, very closely.”

Addressing allies eager to hear how much continued support Washington intends to provide to the Ukrainian government, Hegseth indicated that Trump is determined to get Europe to assume most of the financial and military responsibilities for the defense of Ukraine, including a possible peacekeeping force that would not include U.S. troops.

The Defense Secretary, making the first trip to NATO by a member of the new Trump administration, also said the force should not have Article 5 protections, which could require the U.S. or the 31 other nations of the NATO alliance to come to the aid of those forces if they end up in contact with Russian forces.

Hegseth’s stark message, and his insistence that Russia should keep some territory that Ukraine wants back, offered the closest look yet at how the administration might try to end the war.

The Secretary’s comments were also sure to dim Ukraine’s hopes of making itself whole again and to complicate talks later this week between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and U.S. Vice President JD Vance and other senior American officials at a major security conference in Munich.

“The United States does not believe that NATO membership for Ukraine is a realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement,” Hegseth said, as Kyiv’s backers gathered at NATO headquarters for a meeting to drum up more arms and ammunition for the war, which will soon enter its fourth year.

All 32 allies must agree for a country to join NATO, meaning that every member has a veto.

“Instead, any security guarantee must be backed by capable European and non-European troops,” Hegseth said. “To be clear, as part of any security guarantee, there will not be U.S. troops deployed to Ukraine.”

Hegseth insisted that NATO should play no role in any future military mission to police the peace in Ukraine and that any peacekeeping troops should not be covered by the part of NATO’s founding treaty that obliges all allies to come to the aid of any member under attack.

Article 5 has been activated only once, when European allies and Canada used the collective security guarantee to help the United States in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, al-Qaida attacks on New York and Washington.

Hegseth also said Europe “must provide the overwhelming share of future lethal and nonlethal aid to Ukraine.” Ukraine currently relies equally on Europe and the U.S. for about 30% each of its defense needs. The rest is produced by Ukraine itself.

Speaking with the allies of Ukraine known as the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, he also insisted that Ukraine’s Western backers must abandon the “illusionary goal” of returning the country to its pre-2014 borders, before Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula and seized parts of eastern Ukraine.

“Members of this contact group must meet the moment,” Hegseth said to the approximately 50 member countries that have provided support to Ukraine since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022.

Speaking to reporters after the meeting, U.K. Defense Secretary John Healey said Hegseth’s words would not go unheeded.

“We heard his call for European nations to step up. We are, and we will,” he said.

Healey underlined that “Ukraine’s rightful place is in NATO. That is a process that will take some time.”

He also announced that Britain would provide Ukraine with a fresh $187 million “firepower package,” including drones, tanks and air-defense systems.

Over nearly three years, those 50 countries have collectively provided Ukraine with more than $126 billion in weapons and military assistance, including more than $66.5 billion from the U.S., which has served as the Chair of the group since its creation.

Hegseth’s trip comes less than two weeks before the third anniversary of Russia’s invasion on Feb. 24, 2022. Most U.S. allies fear that Putin won’t stop at Ukraine’s borders if he wins, and that Europe’s biggest land war in decades poses an existential threat to their security.

Trump has promised to end the war quickly. He’s complained that it’s costing American taxpayers too much money and suggested that Ukraine should pay for U.S. support with access to its rare earth minerals, energy and other resources.

Hegseth in his remarks said that NATO member nations also need to significantly increase defense spending to 5% of their budgets — a high mark that the U.S. does not presently meet either.

“The United States will no longer tolerate an imbalanced relationship which encourages dependence. Rather, our relationship will prioritize empowering Europe to own responsibility for its own security,” Hegseth said.

European allies have hiked their military budgets since Putin ordered his troops into Ukraine, and 23 of them are estimated to have reached or exceeded last year’s target of spending 2% of gross domestic product, but a third still fall short.

Some U.S. allies worry that a hasty deal might be clinched on terms that aren’t favorable to Ukraine.

Before Hegseth spoke, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte told The Associated Press that Putin will only negotiate a peace deal with Ukraine if its backers continue to provide enough weapons and ammunition.

“We have to make sure that he has no other option, and that means to force him to the table,” Rutte said. “He needs to understand that we will not give up on Ukraine. We have to make sure that we have maximum economic impact on Russia.”

Hegseth’s remarks come a day after American history teacher Marc Vogel returned safely to the U.S. after three years in a Russian prison. The White House suggested that his release could help to advance negotiations on ending the war.

Trump said another American, someone “very special,” would be released Wednesday, though he declined to name the person or say from what country.

___

Republished with permission of The Associated Press.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Major reform is needed at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Published

on


For a decade, as a member of the Florida State Senate, I fought against overregulation.

After the passage of the REINS-style state law overhauling our state’s regulatory environment, I worked tirelessly to help usher in some of the major changes that have made our state a better place to live, work, and raise a family.

Now, as President Donald Trump begins his second term, I am proud to see a focus on overregulation take hold in Washington, D.C.

Shortly after the inauguration, Trump signed one of his most important executive orders: a regulatory freeze that halted further rulemaking pending an executive branch review. This was a key step in his deregulation agenda.

Included in the President’s regulatory freeze was a pause on any rulemaking currently underway at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). This pause was especially necessary, because as other agencies had slowed down rulemaking at the end of the Joe Biden era, the CFPB sped up.

Originally formed in 2011, the CFPB has too often strayed from its stated mission of protecting consumers. Under the last administration, it served as a partisan rule-maker that functioned exclusively to help the Democrats. It opted to regulate by enforcement and exceeded its statutory authority, putting consumers and small businesses in harm’s way.

As the Biden administration prepared to leave office, the CFPB ignored the changing of the guard in pursuit of a left-wing agenda that was little more than an assault on small businesses and consumers.

Thankfully, Trump recognized the threat that former CFPB Director Rohit Chopra posed to the administration and fired him. Now, with new leadership in charge, it’s important that the lame-duck, partisan rulemaking be reviewed and repealed if necessary.  

Under the last administration, the CFPB changed the rules of the game when it came to regulating financial institutions. Instead of establishing clear guidelines everyone could follow, the CFPB made rules on the spot and expected companies to comply. The agency adopted a dangerous precedent of regulation by enforcement, punishing institutions for not abiding by rules that the CFPB made up on the spot.

The CFPB’s overreach has created regulatory uncertainty for the institutions it oversees, including banks. The consequences of this uncertainty have trickled down to consumers and small businesses who have paid the ultimate price for overregulation. When financial institutions do not have clear rules of the road, they cannot operate as freely as they would like. Access to capital becomes more difficult than necessary and costs increase.

While most federal agencies slowed down once Trump won in November, the CFPB sped up and attempted to cement its partisan agenda. As the Trump administration was preparing to take over, the CFPB ushered through new regulations on credit card late fees, medical debt, and payment app oversight. All of these issues are outside of its jurisdiction. The rules were nothing more than partisan power grabs in the waning days of the Biden term.

Effective regulation requires clarity, consistency, and most importantly, accountability. The Biden CFPB failed on all fronts. The agency has acted as judge, juror, and executioner on a myriad of cases and hurt the very consumers and small business owners they swore to protect.

The American people deserve better. The last-minute rulemaking and agency actions need to be put under a microscope. In many cases, these partisan rules need to be repealed before they do any further harm.

Change is needed now to correct the misdeeds of the last several years.

___

Former Senator Jeff Brandes is the founder and president of the Florida Policy Project.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Carlos Guillermo Smith and Johanna López want old pools to meet new safety standards

Published

on


Florida is the leader in a terrible statistic: More children under the age of 5 die from drowning in the Sunshine State than any other place in the country, according to the Department of Children and Families.

Two Orlando Democrats are pushing legislation to add more pool regulations they hope will save lives.

Sen. Carlos Guillermo Smith and Rep. Johanna López filed legislation (SB 604, HB 93) that would require, starting Oct. 1, all residences with swimming pools being sold or having ownership transferred to pass a final inspection to make sure the older pools meet the same safety standards for newly constructed pools.

“We must put an end to the epidemic of preventable child drownings that continue to happen in this state,” Smith said in a statement. “Our proposed pool safety requirements are great tools for drowning prevention, and it is critical we ensure they apply to the sale and transfer of all residential homes, regardless of construction year.”

Under their bill, title companies, inspectors and mortgage underwriters will be required to report any home that fails to meet safety and drowning prevention standards, the lawmakers said.

Current Florida law requires pools to have at least one safety measure in place which includes either a safety pool cover, an exit alarm on the home’s doors or windows leading to the pool or a swimming pool alarm.

López co-sponsored a similar bill last year with Rep. Rita Harris that died in the Regulatory Reform and Economic Development Subcommittee.

Too many families in Florida have suffered the unimaginable loss of a child due to accidental drowning — an entirely preventable tragedy,” López said. “By refiling HB 93 alongside Sen. Carlos Guillermo Smith, we are taking a critical step toward strengthening residential pool safety laws, ensuring that every pool has at least one life-saving safety feature.”

Their identical bills were endorsed by Brent Moore, Executive Director of Children’s Safety Village of Central Florida, a nonprofit focused on protecting kids.

“With Florida again leading the nation in unintentional drowning of children under 18 we emphasize the need for heightened safety standards,” Moore said in a statement. “We believe these updated standards reduce drownings, and all homes should have these protections.” 

The Legislature’s Regular Session convenes March 4.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

FDOT chief proposes using electric mini-planes to circumvent traffic

Published

on


It’s time for Florida to start looking to the skies to escape bumper-to-bumper highway traffic, according to Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Secretary Jared Perdue.

Perdue this month said he’s interested in having the state seek development of helipad-like sites called vertiports to facilitate the operation of electrical mini-planes to shuttle travelers to and from nearby destinations.

The mini-planes, called eVTOL (electric vertical take-off and landing) aircraft, have been in various stages of development — and in various talks for Florida projects — for years.

U.S. Rep. Carlos Giménez met with a German builder called Lilium GmbH when he was Miami-Dade Mayor in 2018 to pursue the option locally. The County Commission later directed his successor, Daniella Levine Cava, to further study developing an “Urban Air Mobility System” in Miami-Dade, with the potential of bringing services to South Florida by as early as 2026.

Purdue’s onboard too, and he envisions “thousands of (eVTOLs) flying back and forth on the I-4 corridor.” He expects the tech will soon be significantly more efficient, affordable and in broader use.

“You can think about movies that you’ve seen that are science fiction,” he told members of the House Economic Infrastructure Subcommittee last week. “I think you’re going to see rapid development over just a few-year time span.”

The concept of flying cars, taxis, buses and freight vehicles is hardly new, as anyone who has watched “The Fifth Element,” “The Jetsons” or read any number of comic books can attest.

Ride-share company Uber has pumped millions into a flying car project. Amazon’s drone delivery system, Prime Air, launched in 2022. Walgreens and Alphabet, the parent company of Google, launched a drone delivery service called Wing the year before.

More such initiatives were or have been in the works across myriad urban areas worldwide, from Miami to Los Angeles to London to Japan and many places in between.

In January, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) updated its design guidelines for vertiport facilities, partly grouping them with heliports. The move came about three months after the agency issued its final rule for the qualifications and training that instructors and pilots must have to fly aircraft in the “powered-lift” category — meaning they have characteristics of both airplanes and helicopters — to which eVTOLs belong.

It marked a milestone in aviation, FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker noted in October; powered-lift vehicles are the first new category of aircraft in nearly 80 years.

“This historic rule will pave the way for accommodating wide-scale Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) operations in the future,” he said.

Florida lawmakers last year approved legislation to help fund vertiport developments through a new grant program under the Florida Department of Commerce. They could soon consider a next step through twin bills (SB 266, HB 199) by Stuart Republican Sen. Gayle Harrell and Miami Republican Rep. Juan Porras that would exempt eVTOL sales, leases or transfers from the state sales tax.

Neither measure has received a hearing yet.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.