Lawrence Freedman/substack:
The Problem with the Donbas
But for the moment it is important to note that Putin may be as vulnerable to his critics among the hawkish nationalists as to those from more technocratic circles alarmed at the path now taken. It is the nationalists who have been energised by Putin’s aggression and will be most distressed should he fail. As cracks start to appear in the state-controlled media, challenging the view that the military campaign is going well and on schedule, those sounding the alarm warn of the consequences should the multitude of Russia’s enemies, from Americans to the ‘Nazis’ in Kyiv, triumph. They want to move beyond the limited operation that Putin claimed to have set in motion to something more absolutist. Ukraine must be defeated, and seen to be defeated, no matter what the costs. Perhaps because he is aware of this, Putin shows no sign of relenting on any of his core demands. He dare not confirm the weakness in his position.
More from the Lawrence Freedman piece, a must read:
Take away all the dissembling and the make-believe and one can see the policy dilemma that has been present from 2014 which the invasion was intended to solve. The starting point then may well have been Putin’s belief that Russia had some responsibility to protect the population of the Donbas after the unfortunate turn of events in Kyiv and the flight of Yanukovych. The main concern, however, was that this would lead to Ukraine drifting away even more from Russia despite the historic connections between the two countries. Although Putin’s actions in 2014 accelerated the detachment he hoped, somehow, to use the Minsk agreements to pull it back. This effort has proved to be futile which is why he really did want to achieve regime change in Kyiv as the only way to reconstitute this lost unity.
This partly explains why he held back from taking the Donbas in 2014 when he had the chance to do so. But it was not the only reason. There were three others. First, he was aware that there was no real clamour in this territory to join Russia. It would be challenging and costly to govern them. Second, there would be far more severe Western sanctions imposed on Russia than those following the annexation of Crimea. And third, a new border would be created between Russia and Ukraine that would then have to be defended against an angry Ukraine that would get increased backing from the West.
All those considerations still apply except more so.
David Rothkopf/Daily Beast:
How Russia’s War Revealed a Blindspot in U.S. Intelligence
They had one job. But with intelligence, it’s not as simple as getting it “right” or “wrong.”
This raises the question: If the intelligence community was so successful at predicting the invasion, as well as key Russian tactics, how did it get this core question that has been so central to its mission so wrong?
Or did it?
Sources familiar with senior levels of the Biden national security team suggest that it was not so much that Western intel was wrong about Russia’s capabilities, as it was that the response of Ukraine and the NATO alliance was so much more effective than expected. There is also a belief among some in the administration that the real problem was not Western intelligence being off but, rather, it was Russia that got it wrong—from underestimating the Ukrainian and Western responses to the invasion, to a Russian plan that is now regarded as profoundly ill-conceived.
Greg Sargent and Paul Waldman/WaPo:
An abject Biden failure on immigration should prompt a real rethink
The big question will be what happens when more are permitted to enter the system. That question has substantive ramifications (how will they all be processed?) and political ones (how will Democrats respond when Republicans scream?).
There are no easy answers here for Democrats. But one way forward might be rooted in a recognition that using Title 42 to keep migrants out bought President Biden and Democrats no good will, either from Republicans or the public.
This policy didn’t work substantively or politically. Its rationale — that it’s needed for public health purposes — has been widely denounced by public-health experts as baseless. As policy for managing the border — which isn’t even supposed to be its rationale anyway — its success has been highly questionable.
Daniel Summers/Daily Beast:
Republicans Say ‘Groomer’ to Put a Nice Face on Homophobia
The new “Don’t Say Gay” law in Florida is just one part of a larger nostalgia for straight-up hate.
Queer bait. The kind of child predatory homosexuals would target. Because that’s what we were taught gay people did. On the schoolyard, it was implied, but in the church I grew up in, it was spelled out clearly. Gay people were out to prey on kids. It is one of the many painful lessons it took me years to unlearn as a gay man myself. (A more recent definition of “queerbait,” whereby straight celebrities or programs tease affinities or storylines that might appeal to LGBTQ+ fans, is an unrelated concept.)
It is easy to look at all the progress LGBTQ+ people have made in the decades since, from open military service to marriage equality to 14 seasons of RuPaul’s Drag Race, and locate those lies about us strictly in the past. It is comforting to think that that hateful and bigoted slander has been abandoned.
Florida’s loathsome new law, the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” bill signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis earlier this week, has blasted that false comfort to smithereens.
Jennifer Bendery/HuffPost:
New Bill Would Finally Let Tribes Access CDC Money For Public Health Emergencies
Native Americans have been “unjustly excluded” from federal aid that could have blunted the devastation of COVID-19, said Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
During the COVID-19 pandemic and other public health crises, state and local public health departments have relied heavily on federal dollars provided by the CDC’s Public Health Emergency Preparedness program, a cooperative agreement that’s been in place since 2002. Public health departments in all 50 states, four localities and eight territories are eligible to apply for this money to pay for things like staffing, supplies, planning and training.
But tribal public health departments have been prohibited from applying for this support — even as tribes were being hit especially hard by the coronavirus. The Navajo Nation, for example, confirmed more COVID-19 cases per capita than any state for a period of time, and its tax base was wiped out as casinos and other tribal businesses closed. And like so many other tribes around the country, the Navajo Nation was already more vulnerable to the coronavirus because of high rates of poverty, health disparities, poor infrastructure and decades of negligence by the U.S. government.
The legislation likely being introduced Thursday, called the CDC Tribal Public Health Security and Preparedness Act, would finally give tribes access to the CDC program. It also includes a baseline requirement for the CDC to fully fund at least 10 tribes for emergency preparedness, and to set aside 5% of the total amount of funds in the program specifically for tribes.
Charles P Pierce/Esquire:
For Once, the Truth of American History on Voting Rights Just Triumphed in the Courts
And among the defeated parties was Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.
Ordinarily, this might’ve gone into our semi-regular weekly survey, but it happened after the post went up. Also, it’s a win for the right to vote and a defeat for Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis, and for those two things alone, it deserves its own booth here in the shebeen. Most significantly, as part of his 288-page ruling, Federal District Judge Mark Walker used the largely vestigial powers of the Voting Rights Act to do it.
“Florida has repeatedly, recently, and persistently acted to deny Black Floridians access to the franchise…At some point, when the Florida Legislature passes law after law disproportionately burdening Black voters, this Court can no longer accept that the effect is incidental.”
Walker therefore put Florida under pre-clearance requirements for the next 10 years, a power the federal courts still have under what’s left of the VRA. Walker threw out three provisions in the new Florida law that were carefully tailored to make it harder for minority citizens to organize and vote: a so-called “line warming” ban, a restriction on drop-boxes, and a warning requirement for non-partisan voter registration campaigns. And he minced no words in explaining his decision.
It’ll get overturned, say the pros, but for a moment (at least) the spotlight is on truth.
Oh, and this just in: