Category: Isolationism

Trump’s Funding Cuts to VOA and RFA Celebrate Authoritarianism and Endanger Press Freedom

Chinese state media has praised Donald Trump’s recent cuts to public funding for crucial news organizations like Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA), which have been instrumental in reporting on authoritarian regimes. This decision, which affects thousands of employees—over 1,300 at VOA alone—has been characterized by critics as a significant blow to American democracy and press freedom.

The White House has justified these drastic measures as a way to prevent taxpayer money from funding what they term “radical propaganda.” However, such cuts specifically target the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), the body that funds these services and is responsible for disseminating vital news in countries where free press is often stifled, including China and North Korea.

Beijing’s state newspaper, Global Times, has openly celebrated the funding cuts, calling VOA a “lie factory” and suggesting that its reporting has been discredited by its own government. This reflects a broader strategy by Trump and his supporters to undermine independent media that challenges authoritarian narratives, further aligning with fascist tendencies and the suppression of dissent.

Veteran journalists from VOA have expressed feelings of betrayal, highlighting concerns about their colleagues returning to hostile environments where their safety could be jeopardized. A spokesperson for RFA has condemned the funding cuts as a “reward to dictators and despots,” asserting that the move negatively impacts the 60 million people who depend on RFA for accurate reporting.

Ultimately, Trump’s actions not only serve to bolster authoritarian regimes but also reflect a pattern of undermining America’s commitment to free and independent press. As the landscape of journalism shifts under these pressures, the future of unbiased reporting remains precarious, further eroding democratic values in the process.

(h/t: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgwzmj9v34o)

Trump Dismisses Starmer’s Role in Ukraine War Efforts

Donald Trump has publicly criticized Sir Keir Starmer, asserting that Starmer has “done nothing” to stop the ongoing war in Ukraine. During a Fox News interview, Trump dismissed efforts by international leaders, including British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and French President Emmanuel Macron, stating, “They didn’t do anything either.” He claimed that Russia’s willingness to engage in discussions about ending the war was solely due to his previous administration’s actions, revealing his self-serving approach to international diplomacy.

Trump continued to undermine the importance of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during the same interview, claiming he is “sick” of Zelensky’s leadership style and accused him of complicating negotiations. This blatant disregard for Zelensky’s role in a wartime context not only diminishes the challenges Ukraine faces but also reflects Trump’s ongoing effort to shift accountability away from Russia, which he admitted initiated the war.

The former president’s statements contribute to a troubling narrative within the Republican Party, increasingly characterized by a lack of support for traditional allies and democratic values. Instead of promoting solidarity with Ukraine, Trump appears more interested in aligning with autocrats like Vladimir Putin, further eroding US foreign policy principles that advocate for democracy and collective security.

As tensions between the United States and European allies grow, calls have emerged for Starmer to confront Trump regarding these claims. However, senior officials in Starmer’s camp have indicated a reluctance to engage directly, prioritizing diplomatic relations over challenging Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric. This leaves a significant gap in leadership during a critical moment for NATO and global security interests.

The rhetoric coming from Trump not only showcases a dangerously isolationist stance but also underscores the Republicans’ broader shift away from supporting democracies, as highlighted during international crises. As the war in Ukraine continues, it becomes imperative for current leaders to recognize and counteract the damaging echoes of Trump’s policies, which threaten both geopolitical stability and the foundational ideals of democracy.

(h/t: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/02/21/ukraine-russia-war-latest-news-china-trump/)

Donald Trump’s Support for Putin Endangers Ukraine and U.S. Interests

Former President Donald Trump has made a disturbing claim regarding Ukraine, recently suggesting that the country is to blame for Russia’s ongoing invasion. This assertion comes amid critical developments in U.S.-Russia relations, with high-level meetings between the two countries taking place. Trump’s statement marks a dangerous shift, mirroring sentiments expressed by other members of the MAGA movement, who have unjustly cast Ukraine as the aggressor in the conflict initiated by Russia in 2014.

During a press conference at Mar-a-Lago, Trump stated, “Ukraine should never have started the invasion of Ukraine,” shocking many observers. This statement, clearly at odds with the well-documented reality that Russia launched an unprovoked attack, raises alarms over Trump’s alignment with the interests of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Such rhetoric not only undermines the sovereignty of Ukraine but also emboldens the aggressor, enabling further aggression against an independent state.

Trump’s comments also involved questioning the accountability of U.S. military aid to Ukraine, suggesting that there has been a lack of transparency about where funds are being directed. This illustrates a common tactic used by Trump and Republicans to sow distrust and create division, often placing American interests in jeopardy. By attempting to shift focus from Russia’s transgressions, Trump’s narrative dangerously undermines bipartisan efforts to support Ukraine in its struggle against foreign invasion.

Moreover, Trump’s disparaging remarks occurred during a pivotal moment when U.S. and Russian officials are reportedly discussing a potential reset in relations, raising further concerns among European allies regarding the U.S. commitment to NATO and its partners. The involvement of Trump in these delicate discussions further emphasizes how his administration’s isolationist tendencies threaten global stability and security within Europe.

The implications of Trump’s blame-shifting cannot be overstated. By aligning himself with Putin and casting Ukraine as the antagonist, Trump not only compromises American foreign policy but also poses a serious risk to the democratic values and security that underpin the international order. This trajectory is reflective of a broader trend among Republicans to abandon core democratic principles in favor of authoritarianism and fascism.

(h/t: https://www.mediaite.com/tv/shocking-new-assertion-jake-tapper-floored-by-trump-blaming-ukraine-for-russia-invading-ukraine/)

Trump’s Humanitarian Aid Ban Devastates Global Health Efforts and Jeopardizes Lives

The Trump administration’s ban on lifesaving humanitarian aid remains firmly intact, contradicting claims made by government officials. Despite assertions that operations could resume, major international aid organizations have had to suspend services, leading to an irrevocable loss of vital medical care for desperate populations worldwide. Health workers in Sudan faced an agonizing choice: disobey Trump’s orders or allow vulnerable children to die.

Under Trump’s directives, numerous U.S.-funded aid programs aimed at helping malnourished children and those suffering from infectious diseases have ground to a standstill. Organizations are facing bureaucratic chaos, with new obstacles hindering their ability to obtain necessary waivers for operational continuity. The mismanagement is alarming—it has not only jeopardized humanitarian efforts but has also disrupted longstanding international partnerships, reducing the United States’ credibility on the global stage.

Experts are sounding the alarm on the potential catastrophic consequences of Trump’s policy. With infectious disease experts noting that the halt in operations could exacerbate global health crises, the ramifications are already being felt. This administration’s failure to communicate effectively with aid organizations and a policy environment rife with fear have left many stranded and unable to proceed with essential programs, impacting millions of lives.

The incompetence and misinformation from Trump officials have further stoked international tensions. The promise of waivers and exceptions appears to be illusory, leaving humanitarian agencies in limbo and unable to fulfill their critical missions. Critics highlight that instead of boosting American security and prosperity through these vital initiatives, Trump is inadvertently paving the way for adversaries like China and Russia to step in and fill the void left by U.S. withdrawal from global humanitarian leadership.

The chaos in American foreign aid policy under Trump marks a significant regression from past decades where U.S. efforts were praised for their impact on global health and stability. As the clock ticks down on vital programs that save lives, this administration’s continued negligence embodies a disgraceful departure from moral responsibility and humanitarian leadership.

(h/t: https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-state-department-usaid-humanitarian-aid-freeze-ukraine-gaza-sudan)

Trump’s Reckless Withdrawal from WHO Undermines Global Health

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order initiating the withdrawal of the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO), marking a troubling shift in America’s international health commitments. This action reflects Trump’s persistent disdain for global health institutions, particularly following his criticism of the WHO’s management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This decision is not new; Trump had already begun the withdrawal process during his presidency, expressing grievances about the WHO’s handling of the pandemic, which he unjustly attributed to alleged favoritism towards China. The executive order claims the U.S. is leaving due to the organization’s supposed mishandling of global health crises and excessive financial obligations imposed on the country, echoing a pattern of anti-internationalism that is characteristic of Trump’s administration.

With his recent actions, Trump further solidifies his anti-science, isolationist policies that dismiss the importance of global cooperation in tackling health crises. This disregard is alarming given that combating pandemics and health emergencies requires a united international response, an approach that Trump has consistently undermined in favor of populist, nationalist rhetoric.

Moreover, Trump’s statement, hinting at a possible return to the organization, is disingenuous. His administration’s refusal to engage constructively with international health authorities reflects a broader Republican strategy that prioritizes political gain over public health. The implications of this withdrawal could severely weaken the global response to health emergencies, threatening the well-being of Americans and people worldwide.

As Trump continues to seek political advantage through division and misinformation, the consequences for public health and international relations could be detrimental. His actions not only undermine scientific authority but also represent a broader trend of Republican fascism that seeks to erode trust in institutions designed to protect democracy and public welfare.

(h/t: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c391j738rm3o)

Trump has officially begun to withdrawal the US from the World Health Organization as pandemic spikes

The Trump administration has officially begun to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization, even as the COVID-19 pandemic continues to grip the globe and infections spike in many states across the U.S.  

Congress received formal notification of the decision on Tuesday, more than a month after President Donald Trump announced his intention to end the U.S. relationship with the WHO and blasted the multilateral institution as a tool of China. The White House said the withdrawal would take effect on July 6, 2021.

Democrats said the decision was irresponsible and ill-considered, noting it comes as the pandemic is raging and international cooperation is vital to confront the crisis.

“This won’t protect American lives or interests – it leaves Americans sick & America alone,” Sen. Bob Menendez, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, tweeted after receiving the White House’s notification. “To call Trump’s response to COVID chaotic & incoherent doesn’t do it justice.”

Tarik Jasarevic, a spokesman for the WHO, said the organization had received reports of the United States’ formal notification. “We have no further information on this at this stage,” he said. 

The formal withdrawal comes as the United States nears 3 million reported coronavirus cases and more than 130,000 deaths, according to Johns Hopkins University data. Globally, there have been 11.6 million cases and almost 540,000 deaths.

Trump and his advisers have blasted the WHO for failing to press China to be more transparent about the scope and severity of the COVID-19 outbreak, which began in Wuhan, China.

Trump has said that China “has total control” over the WHO, even though it contributes far less than the US to the health organization’s budget. The U.S. has contributed approximately $450 million dollars a year.

Menendez and other Senate Democrats have introduced legislation to reverse the decision and restore U.S. funding to the WHO. It’s unclear how far that could get in the GOP-controlled chamber, although some Republicans have also expressed concern with Trump’s decision.

Critics said Trump’s WHO attacks are an attempt to deflect blame from his own mishandling of the coronavirus outbreak – and one that will end up hurting the U.S. 

Amanda Glassman, a public health expert and executive vice president of the Center for Global Development think tank, noted the world doesn’t just face today’s threat of COVID-19 but also the treat of future pandemics, which are more likely because of increased zoonotic transmission. 

The probability of a high lethality strain of influenza in the next decade or so is also significant, said Amanda Glassman, a public health expert and executive vice president of the Center for Global Development think tank. She said corrective measures at the WHO are needed but can only happen with the United States staying engaged.

“Withdrawal is counterintuitive at best and dangerous to human life at worst. The US Congress should immediately explore what power it has to prevent this from happening,” Glassman said

Gayle Smith, president and CEO of The ONE Campaign, an advocacy group focused on improving global health and eliminating poverty, echoed that assessment. “The US should use its influence to strengthen and reform the WHO, not abandon it at a time when the world needs it most,” said Smith, who served on the National Security Council and other top positions in the Obama administration.

[USA Today]

Trump says the U.S. will cut ties with World Health Organization

President Donald Trump announced Friday that the United States will cut ties with the World Health Organization.

“China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying, which is approximately $450 million a year,” Trump said during a news conference in the White House Rose Garden.

“The world needs answers from China on the virus. We must have transparency. Why is it that China shut off infected people from Wuhan to all other parts of China?” he added. “It didn’t go to Beijing, it went nowhere else, but they allowed them to freely travel throughout the world, including Europe and the United States.”

Trump has repeatedly criticized the WHO’s response to the coronavirus, which has hit the U.S. worse than any other country, amid scrutiny of his own administration’s response to the pandemic. He has claimed the WHO is “China-centric” and blames the agency for advising against China travel bans early in the outbreak. 

“Fortunately, I was not convinced and suspended travel from China saving untold numbers of lives,” Trump said April 14. 

The agency has defended its initial response to the coronavirus pandemic, saying it gave world leaders enough time to intervene early in the outbreak.

The agency declared Covid-19 a global health emergency on Jan. 30 when there were only 82 cases outside of China and zero deaths, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said during a press conference on May 1. “Meaning, the world had enough time to intervene.”

The WHO has also defended China, saying as far back as February that the country’s response to the virus was an improvement from past outbreaks such as SARS.

Earlier this month, Trump threatened to permanently cut off U.S. funding of the WHO. In a letter, he said that if the WHO “does not commit to major substantive improvements within the next 30 days, I will make my temporary freeze of United States funding to the World Health Organization permanent and reconsider our membership in the organization.”

On Friday, Trump said the WHO “failed to make the requested greatly needed reform” and the U.S. “will be today terminating our relationship with the World Health Organization and redirecting those funds to other worldwide and deserving urgent global public health needs.”

The WHO’s funding runs in two-year budget cycles. For the 2018 and 2019 funding cycle, the U.S. paid a $237 million required assessment as well as $656 million in voluntary contributions, averaging $446 million a year and representing about 14.67% of its total budget, according to WHO spokesman Tarik Jasarevic. 

It’s unclear exactly what mechanism Trump intends to use to terminate WHO funding, much of which is appropriated by Congress. The president typically does not have the authority to unilaterally redirect congressional funding.

Lawrence Gostin, a professor and faculty director of the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law at Georgetown University, said in a tweet Friday that Trump’s move is “unlawful” because pulling funding requires Congress, which has already authorized funding.

It’s also “dangerous” because “we’re in the middle of a pandemic,” he said.

On May 20, WHO officials said they worried the agency’s emergency programs would suffer if the president permanently pulled U.S. funding from the international agency.

Most funding from the United States goes directly out to the program that helps countries in “all sorts of fragile and difficult settings,” Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of WHO’s health emergencies program, said at the time. 

“We’ll obviously have to work with other partners to ensure those funds can still flow,” Ryan said. “This is going to be a major implication for delivering essential health services to some of the most vulnerable people in the world, and we trust developed donors will, if necessary, step in to fill that gap.”

The WHO started sounding the alarm on the outbreak in China in mid-January. On March 11, WHO officials declared the outbreak a pandemic, when there were just 121,000 global cases. The virus has now infected more than 5.8 million people worldwide, including more than 1.73 million in the U.S., according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. 

[NBC News]

Trump formally pulls out of landmark Paris climate agreement

President Trump on Monday began the yearlong process of withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris climate accord.

The official announcement cements a promise Trump made in the White House Rose Garden in 2017 when he first announced his intention to withdraw from the global climate change agreement signed by every other country in the world.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the move in a statement.

“President Trump made the decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement because of the unfair economic burden imposed on American workers, businesses, and taxpayers by U.S. pledges made under the Agreement,” Pompeo said. “The United States has reduced all types of emissions, even as we grow our economy and ensure our citizens’ access to affordable energy.”

“The U.S. approach incorporates the reality of the global energy mix,” he added, arguing “innovation and open markets” will drive emissions reductions.

Trump’s views on the deal have been widely criticized by Democrats, environmentalists and even some Republicans, who say the U.S. is abdicating global leadership at a time when urgent action is required to stem the most dangerous impacts of climate change.

“It is shameful. It is cowardly when we need to be brave and act boldly. Long after the rest of us are gone, future generations will remember this president’s failure to lead on the greatest environmental challenge of our time,” said Sen. Tom Carper (Del.), the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. 

“By breaking America’s commitment to the Paris Accord, President Trump is reducing America’s standing in the world,” Carper added.

The president has repeatedly boasted about already withdrawing the U.S. from the deal, despite the rigid timelines required by the agreement for nations seeking to leave it.

The agreement allowed the U.S. to begin the process to withdraw on Monday and finalize the U.S. exit from the agreement on Nov. 4, 2020 — just one day after the presidential election.

The process will kick off just weeks ahead of a United Nations summit in Spain, where leaders will hammer out final details for complying with the agreement.

Democrats have already asked U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft to recuse herself from the withdrawal process, given her financial and personal ties to the fossil fuel industry. Craft’s husband, Joe Craft, is CEO of Alliance Resource Partners, one of the largest coal companies in the U.S.

Recommitting the U.S. to the Paris climate accord has become a box to tick for Democrats running for president in 2020, most of whom have said they would do so their very first day in office.

While some Republicans may have changed their rhetoric on the realities of climate change, many remain opposed to the deal, arguing the U.S. should not have to make efforts to curb emissions without more efforts from other countries first.

House Democrats have taken steps aimed at preventing Trump from leaving the climate pact, passing a resolution in May that would block the move.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) immediately said the bill “will go nowhere” in the Senate.

Climate experts have called the Paris deal the price of admission to the climate conversation, but warn that even the near-global effort may fall short of the action necessary to limit rising temperatures.

The landmark 2015 agreement signed by former President Obama requires the U.S. to reduce emissions about 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.

The withdrawal kickoff earned harsh rebuke from environmental groups.

“Donald Trump is the worst president in history for our climate and our clean air and water. Long after Trump is out of office, his decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement will be seen as a historic error. Trump has once again demonstrated that he is more interested in catering to the interests of the world’s worst polluters than he is in listening to the American people,” the Sierra Club said in a statement.

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) called the move a “grave and reckless mistake.”

“Climate change won’t be solved without a global effort. It won’t happen without U.S. leadership. It won’t happen as long as the world’s second-largest climate polluter is backsliding on the climate pledge it has made to the rest of the world,” NRDC President Mitch Bernard said in a statement. 

[The Hill]

Trump Tweetstorms Amid Mounting Syria Criticism: Anyone Helping Protect Kurds Good With Me, Whether It’s ‘Russia, China, or Napoleon’

President Donald Trump went on a tweetstorm this afternoon standing by his Syria withdrawal decision amid mounting criticism from Republicans and the atrocities witnessed in northern Syria in the past few days.

Many Republicans have been critical of the decision (some blaming Trump, others going a slightly different route), and just yesterday a harrowing report from Fox News said there’s evidence of war crimes, as well as “civilians being targeted, and ISIS prisoners escaping.”

This morning the president hit back over comments from Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade, and this afternoon he went on a tweetstorm defending his decision, asking, “why should we be fighting for Syria and Assad to protect the land of our enemy?”, and invoking Napoleon for some reason.

[Mediaite]

Trump suggested shooting Hispanic migrants in the legs

President Trump suggested having migrants shot in their legs during a March meeting with White House advisers in the Oval Office, The New York Times reported Tuesday. 

The Times’ report is based on interviews with more than a dozen White House administration officials involved in the events the week of the meeting. The article is adapted from a forthcoming book by reporters Mike Shear and Julie Hirschfield Davis, titled “Border Wars: Inside Trump’s Assault on Immigration.” It will be published Oct. 8. 

The aides told the Times Trump suggested to advisors during the Oval Office meeting that they should shoot migrants in the legs to slow them down. 

The suggestion came after Trump had publicly suggested shooting migrants if they threw rocks, the Times reports. Trump had made the suggestion about shooting migrants that threw rocks during a speech in November. 

Officials who spoke to the Times also recall Trump often suggesting fortifying a border wall with a water-filled trench, stocked with snakes or alligators. 

Trump also “wanted the wall electrified, with spikes on top that could pierce human flesh,” the Times reports. 

When advisors told Trump some of his suggestions were not allowed, he reportedly became frustrated. 

“You are making me look like an idiot!” Trump shouted, according to the Times, citing multiple officials in the room’s description. “I ran on this. It’s my issue.”

The meeting was set for 30-minutes and the Times reports it lasted more than an hour. Officials in the room included then Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Customs and Border Protection Chief Kevin McAleenan, acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and Steven Miller, according to the Times. 

A White House spokesperson was not immediately available for comment.

[The Hill]

1 2 3 … 5