Month: October 2020
Serbia should not be at stake in US elections
Saša Janković, expert on human rights and security governance, former Serbian National Ombudsman, and runner up at the Serbian presidential election of 2017, writes in Belgrade daily Danas:
From circles close to the Democrats in the United States, two short program documents of their candidate for US President Joseph Biden were recently published – one on the vision of American-Albanian relations, essentially addressed to Albanians from Kosovo and Albania, and the other on the future of American-BiH relations. In both documents, Biden emphasizes on the one hand his help and vision for Kosovo, Albania and BiH and, on the other hand, his efforts to suppress the harmful influence of Serbia and certain Serbian politicians. After the President of Serbia, Aleksandar Vučić, joined Donald Trump’s pre-election campaign, Biden hereby took the position “Serbia has chosen its side, I am also choosing it.”
Improving relations between Serbia and the United States is the utmost Serbian national interest. However, by the so-called economic agreement with Pristina under Trump’s patronage, in the middle of his presidential campaign, Aleksandar Vucic approached Trump, not America; he made a hazardous move, entered the gamble of extremely uncertain American presidential elections, and put Serbia as a stake.
It is clear why Vučić decided to gamble – he is slowly but surely losing his footing in the European Union, especially Germany, and without the previous open support from abroad, his government is on glass legs. But Serbia, which still avails of the remnants of once balanced and stable Yugoslav diplomacy, did not need such gambling.
In the previous presidential elections in the USA, Vučić supported the candidate who lost. That, a much less visible mistake, he paid with a three-and-a-half-year cold attitude of the winner. Now, at the very end of Trump’s (first) mandate, Vučić is paying for a ticket to fly to his bench by disrupting Serbia’s diplomatic relations with Russia, the EU, the Arab world and Palestine. In the event of Biden’s victory, Serbia will pay even more for Vučić’s new dice.
It would have been better for everyone if Biden had ignored Vučić’s classification with Trump. Especially since Aleksandar Vučić does not really control the will of the Serbian diaspora – in the last presidential elections he won only 10% of its votes in the USA, and the second-runner, who is in opposition to him, won 60%. If Biden found the strength to stand up and extend his hand towards Serbia, that would be a real sign of a winning mentality. That sign would be noticed and rewarded by Serbs in America. They are small electorate, but it seems that every vote will be precious.
On this side of the ocean, the government in Serbia should pursue state, not private and party interests. And the opposition should not rejoice to the chance that anyone from abroad, including Biden, will punish Vučić. As in 1998, Serbia and its citizens would pay the largest fine in such a scenario.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, October 26
– WSJ says US is to sign defense cooperation agreement with India this week. No more details yet.
– Coast Guard is also sending cutters to western Pacific
– China retaliates over Taiwan arms sales.
-Kushner helped turn foreign development agency into domestic loan provider.
– NYT tells how Trump supporters tried and failed to get WSJ to run unverified Hunter Biden story.
– Both Georgia Senate races may go to runoffs, complicating Senate action in January.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks | October 26 – October 30, 2020
Notice: Due to public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream.
1. Elevating Humanitarian Action in Sudan’s Democratic Transition | October 27, 2020 | 10:30 – 11:30 AM EDT | CSIS | Register Here
On October 19, the White House announced it was taking steps to delist Sudan as a state sponsor of terrorism (SST), clearing the way for increased international assistance and opportunities for development financing. Removing Sudan from the SST list is long overdue and comes at a pivotal moment for its nascent political transition. Prior to the Covid-19 crisis, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) estimated that 9.3 million people in Sudan would need humanitarian assistance in 2020. Now, months of heavy flooding have led to increased displacement, while high levels of inflation are making it increasingly difficult for people to purchase food and limiting the services humanitarian organizations can provide.
Sudan’s ongoing democratic transition has enabled increased humanitarian access for multilateral aid organizations, yet restrictions on NGOs remain, and prospects for enhanced access are uncertain. As peace negotiations and the democratic transition continue, political leaders in Sudan must ensure that meeting humanitarian needs remains at the forefront of their agenda.
In a follow-up to our recent commentary, this webinar will highlight the enduring humanitarian needs in Sudan and examine how Sudanese political actors can prioritize humanitarian needs during the state’s democratic transition. To help understand these issues, we will be joined by Dr. Suliman Baldo, Senior Advisor at The Sentry, and Hala Al-Karib, Regional Director at the Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa.
Speakers:
Dr. Suliman Baldo: Senior Adviser, The Sentry
Hala Al-Karib: Regional Director, Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa
2. Local Elections, National Implications: Ukraine at the Ballot Box | October 27, 2020 | 12:00 PM EDT | Atlantic Council | Register Here
Ukraine’s local elections on October 25 are highly contested and impossible to predict. Following President Zelenskyy’s landslide victory last year, he and his party have fallen in the polls, with approval ratings hovering below 35 percent. With deadlocked peace talks, a continued war in the Donbas, stalled reforms, and increased coronavirus cases devastating the economy, a 2019-style victory for Servant of the People is increasingly unlikely. The new electoral code, which bars independents from running in districts with more than 10,000 citizens, further complicates the picture.
Mykhaylo Shtekel, Odesa correspondent and Donbas reporter for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s (RFE/RL) Ukrainian Service, Nataliya Sedletska, editor-in-chief and host of RFE/RL’s “Schemes: Corruption in Detail”, Adrian Karatnycky, Eurasia Center senior fellow and managing partner at Myrmidon Group LLC, and Brian Mefford, Eurasia Center senior fellow and managing director at Wooden Horse Strategies LLC, will analyze the results and what they mean for Ukraine’s future. Melinda Haring, deputy director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center, moderates.
Speakers:
Mykhaylo Shtekel: Odesa correspondent and Donbas reporter for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s (RFE/RL) Ukrainian Service
Nataliya Sedletska: editor-in-chief and host of RFE/RL’s “Schemes: Corruption in Detail”
Adrian Karatnycky: Eurasia Center senior fellow; managing partner at Myrmidon Group LLC
Brian Mefford: Eurasia Center senior fellow; managing director at Wooden Horse Strategies LLC
Melinda Haring: Deputy Director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center
3. Election 2020: Driving Forces and Possible Outcomes | October 27, 2020 | 2:00 – 3:30 PM EDT | Brookings Institute | Register Here
As voters begin casting their ballots in the 2020 election, many issues still have the potential to transform the political landscape and determine the outcome of the presidential election, as well as congressional, gubernatorial, and statehouse races across the country. Voters go to the polls with several serious policy issues on their mind including an economy in recession, the COVID-19 pandemic, health care, race relations, social justice, women’s rights, and the future of the judiciary. These issues raise a number of questions that will determine the outcome of the election.
During a campaign season colored by the pandemic, will congressional leadership and the White House strike a deal for another round of economic stimulus before Election Day? And how will delays in a relief package affect House members and senators in tough reelection fights?
With a Supreme Court nomination in process that has the potential to shape the country for years, will Republican voters show up at the polls on election day to reward GOP Senate candidates like Lindsay Graham, Cory Gardner, and Joni Ernst for voting to confirm Amy Coney Barrett? Will Democratic backlash hurt those senators’ chances for reelection?
Long lines, postal delays, concerns about voter intimidation and suppression, and the possibility of contested elections have raised concerns about the integrity of the U.S. elections process. How will political leaders and courts respond when the influx of mail-in ballots might extend election day to several weeks? And will efforts to disrupt voting strike a chord with voters in affecting their drive to vote and their vote choice?
On October 27, one week before election day, Governance Studies at Brookings will host a webinar to discuss the driving forces and possible outcomes of the 2020 election. Expert panelists will offer their analysis on these and other pressing issues and answer questions from viewers.
Speakers:
John Hudak, moderator: Deputy Director – Center for Effective Public ManagementSenior Fellow – Governance Studies
William A. Galston: Ezra K. Zilkha Chair and Senior Fellow – Governance Studies
Sarah A. Binder: Senior Fellow – Governance Studies
Elaine Kamarck: Founding Director – Center for Effective Public ManagementSenior Fellow – Governance Studies
Rashawn Ray: David M. Rubenstein Fellow – Governance Studies
Vanessa Williamson: Senior Fellow – Governance StudiesSenior Fellow – Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center
4. Kyrgyzstan’s Unfinished “Revolution”: How the Upheaval from 2020 Is Different | October 28, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:30 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
For the third time in 15 years, protesters in the Kyrgyz capital of Bishkek have seized and set fire to the “White House,” the seat of parliament and presidential staff. The chaotic situation has toppled President Jeenbekov and is still rapidly evolving, with political actors jockeying for power. It’s a scene all too familiar to Kyrgyzstan, which since 2005 has experienced several cycles of protests and calls for advancing democracy followed by backsliding into authoritarianism. But this time around, even with all the familiar players and moves, there are also strong differences that are worth thorough assessment.
Join USIP for a discussion of the ongoing situation in Kyrgyzstan and its implications for peace and stability in Central Asia. The conversation will examine how organized crime, youth mobilization, social media, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic have factored into the crisis. The discussion will also analyze how the United States and the region, including Kyrgyzstan’s Central Asian neighbors and Russia, are assessing and responding to the developments.
Speakers:
Scott Worden, welcoming remarks: Director, Afghanistan and Central Asia Programs, U.S Institute of Peace
Dr. Mariya Omelicheva: Professor of Strategy, National War College
Jonathan Henick: Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau for South & Central Asian Affairs, U.S. Department of State
Dr. Andrew Kuchins: President, American University of Central Asia
Dr. Ivan Safranchuk: Leading Research Fellow, Institute for International Studies, MGIMO
Keneshbek Sainazarov: Central Asia Program Director, Search for Common Ground
Dr. Gavin Helf, moderator: Senior Expert, Asia Center, U.S. Institute of Peace
5. Women, Democracy, and Peace: A Conversation with First Lady of Afghanistan Rula Ghani and Former First Lady of the United States Laura Bush | October 28, 2020 | 8:00 AM EDT | Atlantic Council | Register Here
Afghanistan is entering a new phase, with ongoing talks offering an opportunity for peace and stability after years of conflict. As the government and the Taliban negotiate peace, questions remain regarding the future of gender equality and minority rights in the country. What will it take to ensure long-term security without compromising on the rights of women and minorities in Afghanistan? How do the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic impact the ability to sustain democratic institutions in the country?
Building upon their longstanding partnership to promote women’s rights in Afghanistan, the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center and the George W. Bush Institute invite you to join us on October 28 at 8:00 A.M. (EDT) / 4:30 P.M. (Kabul) for a virtual conversation with First Lady of Afghanistan Rula Ghani and former First Lady of the United States Laura Bush on these issues and to lend their insight into what will need to be done to ensure an equitable and inclusive peace.
Speakers:
H.E. Rula Ghani: First Lady of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
Mrs. Laura Bush: Former First Lady of the United States
6. Negotiating Peace: Lessons from the Western Balkans | October 28, 2020 | 11:30 AM – 12:30 PM EDT | Wilson Center | Register Here
25 years ago, the Dayton Peace Accords ended conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, violence continued in the Western Balkans, which led to the Kosovo War and the international mediation needed to end it. Even after the conflict stopped, Serbia and Kosovo struggle with their relations. Today, the Western Balkans remains turbulent. Join us as two experienced European negotiators discuss what lessons can be drawn from efforts to negotiate peace in the Balkans, both for the region and elsewhere.
Speakers:
The Right Honourable Catherine Ashton, Baroness of Upholland: Bank of America Chair, Global Europe Program; Former Vice President of the European Commission and former High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
Carl Bildt: Former Prime Minister of Sweden; Former UN Special Envoy for the Balkans; Co-Chair, Dayton Peace Conference
Jane Harman: Director, President, and CEO, Wilson Center
7. The Implications of Brexit for Ireland: A Conversation with Irish Ambassador Daniel Mulhall | October 29, 2020 | 1:30 – 2:30 PM EDT | CSIS | Register Here
Please join us for a conversation with H.E. Daniel Mulhall, Ambassador of Ireland to the United States, about the implications of Brexit for Ireland. This discussion will be moderated by Bill Reinsch, CSIS Scholl Chair and Senior Adviser, and Heather Conley, Senior Vice President for Europe, Eurasia, and the Arctic and Director of the Europe Program at CSIS.
With the deadline for reaching a trade agreement between the European Union and the United Kingdom fast approaching, there is growing concern that new borders, customs procedures and tariffs may be imposed which will harm both the Irish and Northern Ireland economies. The UK government has moved forward with legislation, the Internal Market Bill, which allows the UK government to breach its legal agreement with the EU on Northern Ireland. The EU has recently initiated legal procedures against the UK for this legislation and prominent members of Congress have stated that the Internal Market Bill or anything else that jeopardizes the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, makes a future US-UK trade agreement impossible. U.S. Special Envoy to Northern Ireland, Mick Mulvaney, recently visited Dublin and Belfast to assess the impact of the Internal Market Bill. Irish Ambassador to the U.S., Ambassador Daniel Mulhall will present the Irish government’s perspective on the situation, on prospects for an acceptable resolution, and the economic and political implications if one does not appear.
Speakers:
H.E. Daniel Mulhall: Ambassador of Ireland to the United States
Heather Conley: Senior Vice President for Europe, Eurasia, and the Arctic and Director of the Europe Program at CSIS
Bill Reinsch: CSIS Scholl Chair and Senior Adviser
8. The Good, Bad, and Ugly: How the World Sees the United States | October 29, 2020 | 9:00 – 9:50 AM EDT | Carnegie Endowment for Peace | Register Here
Critics make a strong case that the United States has never been less respected or admired abroad than it is today. President Trump’s disruptive policies abroad and his mishandling of the pandemic at home have fundamentally undermined U.S. credibility in the eyes of both allies and adversaries in the short run, but will the damage last? And if Joe Biden wins in November, what will the world expect from U.S. leadership?
Join us as three veteran foreign correspondents, Christiane Amanpour, Steven Erlanger, and David Rennie, sit down with Aaron David Miller to discuss the United States and its role in the world.
Speakers:
Aaron David Miller: Senior Fellow, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Christiane Amanpour: Chief International Anchor, CNN; Host, “Amanpour & Company”, PBS
Steven Erlanger: Chief Diplomatic Correspondent, Europe, The New York Times.
David Rennie: Beijing bureau chief, The Economist
9. Ten Years On: A Post-Arab Spring Middle East | October 29, 2020 | 2:00 -3:00 PM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
The conditions that led to the 2011 Arab Spring protests continue to linger in the Middle East and North Africa. Widespread corruption, political repression, human rights abuses, and economic difficulties proliferate throughout the region, and have been complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Tunisia is often considered an Arab Spring success story, but despite a number of notable improvements since 2011, its fragile democratic transition has had little impact on the day-to-day lives of average Tunisians, and the economic realities that led to the 2011 uprising largely remain unchanged. In countries such as Syria, Yemen, and Libya, civil conflict and foreign intervention have worsened these crises without addressing the root causes of instability.
How have the Arab Spring protests changed the Middle East and affected regional stability over the past decade? What role does the United States play in the various crises throughout MENA and how does it affect American foreign policy goals?
The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to host its third event in a series to discuss the recently published briefing book, Election 2020: Challenges and Opportunities for US Policy in the Middle East. The briefs in this book offer policy insights from MEI scholars on key issues in the Middle East and serve as a contribution to the broader discussion about the challenges and opportunities for US policy in the region.
Speakers:
Nadwa Al-Dawsari: Non-resident Scholar, MEI
William Lawrence: Professor of Political Science and International Affairs, American University
Charles Lister: Senior fellow and director, Countering Terrorism and Extremism and Syria Programs, MEI
Mirette Mabrouk: Director and senior fellow, Egypt program, MEI
Ibrahim Al-Assil, moderator: Senior fellow, MEI
10. Strengthening Global Safeguards and Security in an Advanced Nuclear Age | October 29, 2020 | 1:00 PM EDT | Atlantic Council | Register Here
The Atlantic Council and Third Way are co-hosting a virtual event highlighting the potential global market for advanced nuclear technologies, and the important role safeguards and security must play in ensuring US reactors are ready to compete.
We are delighted to invite you to join our virtual event on the afternoon of Thursday, October 29th, 2020, from 1:00 – 2:30 p.m. EDT. Over the last five years there has been significant technological, financial, and policy progress toward developing and commercializing advanced nuclear reactors in the US. But we are not alone in this pursuit. China and Russia are both developing new reactor designs aggressively to capture the emerging market for advanced nuclear and the global influence that will come with it. It is in the best interest of the world for safety, proliferation, and climate reasons, that the US leads the way.
To maintain the United States’ global leadership, advanced nuclear reactors should not only provide affordable, zero-carbon power; they should provide it in a way that builds upon the nuclear security architecture developed over the last five decades. The US government and advanced nuclear developers could be in the position to enhance global nuclear security and safeguards as a new set of aspiring nuclear countries looks at deploying a new generation of nuclear reactors.
The event will feature keynote remarks by Dr. Brent Park, Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation at the National Nuclear Security Administration. Immediately following his remarks, Third Way will present a first-of-a-kind international advanced nuclear map and global market analysis, and we will host a panel discussion on the critical role US clean energy innovation can play in reducing emissions in the US, addressing energy poverty around the world, and the challenges and opportunities presented by applying safeguards- and security-by-design to the next generation of nuclear energy technologies.
Speakers:
Keynote remarks
Dr. Brent Park: Deputy Administrator, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, National Nuclear Security Administration
Panel Discussion
Laura Holgate, Ambassador (ret.): Vice President, Materials Risk Management, Nuclear Threat Initiative
Allison Johnston: Director, Office of International Nuclear Security,National Nuclear Security Administration
Christine King: Director, Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear, Idaho National Laboratory
Kevin Veal: Director, Office of International Nuclear Safeguards, National Nuclear Security Administration
Jackie Kempfer, moderator: Senior Policy Adviser, Climate and Energy Program; Senior Fellow, Global Energy Center
Closing remarks
Dr. Jennifer Gordon: Managing Editor and Senior Fellow, Global Energy Center, Atlantic Council
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, October 25
“Give ’em hell, Harry,” the man at the whistle stop yelled.”I don’t give ’em hell,” President Truman replied. “I just give ’em the facts, and it looks like hell.”
Today’s list:
WaPo says Trump has failed to drain the swamp.
WSJ says the China trade war has failed, too.
WaPo says US is helping the Taliban with our air strikes.
How US has been helping Putin. FP says US elections are looking like Bangladesh.
WSJ looks at the elections of 1864.
Recommended viewing: We signed up for one of those first week free deals on Apple TV to see a great documentary: “Boys State,” showing how 17-year old Texans learned about politics. [I was a bit nostalgic because I had been elected Lt. Governor in the Colorado Boys State I attended many years ago.]
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, October 24
Academics find that tough talk on China helps in elections.
Politico notes this:
Which U.S. races feature China as a hot topic? We have the data. Wichowsky is also a principal investigator at Elecurator, a research project affiliated with the Northwestern Mutual Data Science Institute. She shared some findings with China Watcher:
— Close senate races: China figures most prominently in advertising in Montana’s Senate race, where incumbent Republican Steve Daines faces former Gov. Steve Bullock. In Arizona, incumbent Martha McSally (R-Az.) is attacking Mark Kelly on China. In Kentucky, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and challenger Amy McGrath have both mentioned China in attack ads. In total, attack ads referring to China appear in 10 Senate races, including Colorado, Michigan, Alabama, Iowa, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina.
— Close House races: Democratic Rep. Anthony Brindisi in New York’s 22nd congressional district has run several ads that discuss how he fought to bring jobs back from China. In Utah’s 4th, vulnerable Democratic incumbent Ben McAdams is getting hit by Republican challenger Burgess Owens for being soft on China. In Iowa’s open 2nd district race, both sides are using China in attack ads.
SCMP has analysis of new Taiwan arms.
Former ambassador and Trump official laments politicization of State Dept.
Intelligence officials say Russia poses greater election threat than Iran.
New order threatens career government employees.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The tense homestretch and tumultuous aftermath
We are entering the final 10 days of the 2020 election campaign. Former Vice President Biden is in the lead. Both The Economist and 538 forecasts give him a better than 85% chance of winning the Electoral College and virtual certainty in the popular vote. The Economist has only Iowa, Arizona, and Georgia in the tossup category. Biden has as much of a chance of winning Arizona as Trump does Iowa. Trump is also favored in Georgia, but by a sliver. Biden can lose all three tossup states and is still likely to win the Electoral College. His greatest vulnerability beyond them is Florida, but even without it he can win because Pennsylvania is leaning his way.
This means President Trump, who gained no ground after Thursday evening’s debate, will be on his worst behavior. We should expect surprises. Maybe the President will be successful in his effort to hound Attorney General Barr, the ultimate loyalist, into indicting Biden or his son Hunter. Maybe there will be a new attempt to dump supposedly incriminating emails into the public domain. Maybe Trump will announce a Covid-19 vaccine approval. At the very least, we should expect an inundation of lies: Trump will
- claim credit for the Obama Administration reform of the Veterans’ Administration,
- continue to describe the epidemic as ending despite record numbers of infections,
- falsely claim companies are bringing manufacturing jobs back to the US,
- brag about his pre-pandemic economy, which was growing at more or less the same pace as Obama’s.
He will also ignore his biggest “accomplishments”: a record-setting deficit, the tensest race relations in a generation, and hurting the prospects for a new bipartisan relief bill in response to the epidemic.
We should also expect continued efforts to interfere with voting, counting, tabulation, and communication of the state-by-state results to Washington on December 14. This counter-electoral campaign will take many forms: court cases trying to limit counting of mailed-in ballots, intimidation of voters and poll workers by armed groups at the polls, monkeying by state legislatures in the tabulation of results, and armed interference with the convening of the Electoral College in each state capital.
Unlike his often hollow narcissism, Trump sounds as if he really believes he is in the lead. If he loses, he may be the only person in Washington who will be surprised. He has made it absolutely plain that he will regard a loss as possible only due to massive electoral fraud, none of which has been demonstrated. He has pointedly refused to promise that there will be peaceful transition. His all too often armed base will be astonished and infuriated.
This will make the period between November 3 and the inauguration of Biden January 20 fraught. Trump will do everything he can to make it difficult for Biden to reverse the Administration’s retrogression on environmental issues, worker safety, health care, immigration, refugees, public education, LGBTQ rights, and abortion. Trump will also pardon all his sidekicks as well as himself for Federal offenses (he has no power to pardon for state crimes). The armed terrorist groups that support Trump may try to interfere with the inauguration.
In the meanwhile, Biden will be trying to steady the ship of state and prepare for at least a partial restoration of its previous course, especially on domestic social issues. But much of the world, and even the country, has moved on from the Obama years. With its citizens determined to retrench, America will need to find its place in a world where China and Russia are more belligerent, Europe less compliant, and much of the rest of the world less interested hedging against an unreliable US. Biden will need to adjust to reality even while restoring ideals. It won’t be easy. More on that anon.
PS: Here’s a useful message from Mary McCord of Georgetown Law:
PPS: Here is one way the results of the election may have to be protected.
RSS - Posts
