Latest news with #ForeignService
Boston Globe
20-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Boston Globe
William H. Luers, diplomat and Met museum leader, dies at 95
Advertisement 'It's precisely where I find one can get most rapidly into a foreign culture,' he told The New York Times in 1985, discussing his love of art. 'It's through talking with and knowing contemporary artists, and learning about the history through art and culture.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Fluent in Russian, Spanish, and Italian, Mr. Luers spent nearly three decades in the Foreign Service, specializing in Soviet affairs. He held diplomatic postings in Naples and Moscow, was a deputy assistant secretary of state in the Ford and Carter administrations, and was ambassador to Venezuela and then Czechoslovakia before retiring in 1986 to become president of the Met. For the next 13 years, he managed the administration, budget, community relations, and fund-raising of the country's largest art museum. He led the institution in tandem with Philippe de Montebello, the Met's longtime director, in a power-sharing arrangement that was often described as strained. Advertisement Mr. Luers coordinated financing for landmark exhibitions, including a 1990 survey of Mexican art, and helped win a historic gift from publisher and philanthropist Walter Annenberg, who agreed to bequeath roughly $1 billion worth of impressionist and post-impressionist paintings. Mr. Luers, in a gallery at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in Manhattan in 1999. Angel Franco/NYT 'He's indefatigable,' Carl Spielvogel, a Met trustee who later served as ambassador to Slovakia, said in 1999, as Mr. Luers prepared to step down at age 70. 'I don't know many people willing to be out at breakfast, lunch, and dinner seven days a week, but he was. And he was very good at it.' As an ambassador, Mr. Luers charmed many of America's most prominent writers and artists, hosting embassy gatherings that drew John Updike, Arthur Miller, William Styron, Peter Matthiessen, Francine du Plessix Gray, and Frank Stella. Mr. Luers's wife said that he became convinced of the value of cultural diplomacy in 1963, as a junior officer at the US Embassy in Moscow. Because of his Russian language skills, he had been assigned to accompany John Steinbeck and Edward Albee on a writers' exchange trip through the Soviet Union, serving as their interpreter and helping them navigate 'the bureaucratic morass,' as he later put it. 'One night in Odessa we went to see an opera, 'Khovanshchina,' which depicts an enormous tragedy in which everyone is burned up in a fire,' he told the Times in 1997. 'That night we went back to our hotel and learned that John F. Kennedy had been shot. The Russians sat up with us that night, and it was quite a moving scene to see them almost as frightened as we were, and so sympathetic.' Advertisement Art, he concluded, could offer an opening, even between adversaries. As ambassador to Venezuela from 1978 to 1982, Mr. Luers sought to distinguish himself from previous envoys who were treated with disdain within the country because of their associations with the US military and business interests. He bought local art, trumpeted his love of Venezuelan culture, and hosted writers including Styron and Updike. He also organized an embassy exhibition of American art, mounting works by Stella and Joan Mitchell. The show's opening drew Venezuela's president, as well as a Caracas journalist who had been critical of Mr. Luers in articles about the oil industry. 'Ambassador,' Mr. Luers recalled him saying, 'after tonight you can do anything you want with oil. You can get away with anything, you know.' After being appointed ambassador to Czechoslovakia in 1983, Mr. Luers leveraged his literary connections on behalf of Havel, who had recently spent several years in prison as a result of his pro-democracy efforts. Fearing that the dissident and playwright might be killed by the communist regime, Mr. Luers launched a publicity campaign on Havel's behalf, bringing in American writers and dignitaries including Time Inc. editor Henry A. Grunwald and Washington Post Co. chair Katharine Graham. His efforts helped elevate Havel's profile in the West, providing a bit of diplomatic cover for the writer and his allies in the dissident movement known as Charter 77. 'Havel had ways of talking about the communist system that I thought were uniquely subtle, profound, and ultimately effective,' Mr. Luers said in a 2015 interview with Hamilton College, his alma mater. Advertisement Still, Mr. Luers said he had little sense that 'this sort of short, shy intellectual' would go on to be elected Czechoslovakia's president in 1989, after the country's communist system was peacefully toppled by the Velvet Revolution. 'Bill shone the light on Havel and the other dissidents,' said his wife, Wendy, a former Amnesty International staffer who started the Foundation for a Civil Society, a New York-based nonprofit. 'We became very good friends with his brother. I became very close to his wife, Olga. To the point that when he became president, he wore Bill's tie when he was inaugurated, and she wore my blouse.' Two months later, in February 1990, the Luers hosted the Czechoslovak president and his wife on a visit to New York City, where Mr. Luers gave Havel a personal tour of his new workplace, the Met. Havel, according to the Times, 'wanted to see the Abstract Expressionist paintings.' The youngest of three children, William Henry Luers was born in Springfield, Ill., on May 15, 1929. His mother looked after the home. His father, the son of a German immigrant, was a banker who served in World War I and again in World War II, when he was wrongly accused of spying for the Nazis while serving as an officer in the Army Air Forces. He was exonerated after a year-long military investigation, according to Mr. Luers. Mr. Luers studied math and science at Hamilton College in New York, received a bachelor's degree in 1951 and enrolled in graduate school at Northwestern University, where he planned to study for a career in chemical engineering. After taking classes with literary critic Richard Ellmann, an authority on James Joyce, he decided to focus on the humanities instead. He studied philosophy, developed an interest in Russian history and the influence of Marxism, and briefly contemplated becoming an Episcopal priest. Advertisement During the Korean War, Mr. Luers joined the Navy, serving as an officer for about five years beginning in 1952. He joined the Foreign Service in 1957, while looking for a way to travel to Moscow, and received a master's degree in Russian studies from Columbia University the next year. Mr. Luers had four children from his first marriage, to Jane Fuller, which ended in divorce. In 1979, he married Wendy Woods Turnbull. In addition to his wife, he leaves three of his children, David and Will Luers and Amy Lynd Luers; two stepdaughters, Ramsay and Connor Turnbull; and 10 grandchildren. His son Mark Luers died of esophageal cancer in 2020. Mr. Luers remained active in diplomatic circles - occasionally, he joked, he used his former title, ambassador, 'to get dinner reservations' - and wrote op-eds about foreign affairs for publications including The Washington Post and the Times. He also taught at Columbia University and helped lead the Iran Project, a group that promotes the use the use of diplomacy to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. Last year, he published a memoir, 'Uncommon Company,' in which he lamented 'the static and toxic state of America today.' 'My message to the leaders of this country is clear: Diplomacy works,' he wrote. 'We must talk to the other. However, until we ourselves can learn to talk with the other who lives next door, until we learn to listen with civility to family and friends and strangers alike, it will be impossible to suggest to other nations that they do the same, but on a global stage.' Advertisement
Yahoo
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Former ambassador to Ukraine: 'Peace at any price is not peace at all'
Bridget Brink, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, is speaking out about why she left her post last month. "I resigned from Ukraine and also from the Foreign Service, because the policy since the beginning of the administration was to put pressure on the victim Ukraine, rather than on the aggressor, Russia," Brink told host Margaret Brennan on Sunday on CBS' "Face the Nation." "I fully agree that the war needs to end, but I believe that peace at any price is not peace at all. It's appeasement and, as we know from history, appeasement only leads to more war." Brink spent three years in Ukraine after attaining unanimous Senate confirmation under former President Joe Biden in May 2022, shortly after Russia began its invasion. In an op-ed for the Detroit Free Press published last Friday, she wrote that she couldn't in good faith adhere to the diplomatic instructions coming out of the new Trump White House. Trump has made ending the war in Ukraine one of the central parts of his foreign policy prospectus. But for the first few months of his time at the White House, he often directed his ire at Kyiv, rather than Russian President Vladimir Putin. "It has to be a peace that does things that advance our own interests, and those are really simple," Brink told Brennan. "It's how to keep Ukraine free, how to deter Russia, and how to send the right signal to China. And this is what we should be doing." For Brink, the first sign was Trump's combative Oval Office press conference with Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, during which Trump and Vance attacked Zelenskyy for being ungrateful and then kicked him out of the White House. Zelenskyy was "not ready for peace," Trump said in a post on Truth Social, his social media platform. Brink's public turn comes with Trump scheduled to speak with Putin on the phone Monday. The president has grown increasingly frustrated with Moscow as he pushes for a 30-day unconditional ceasefire between the two countries. Trump in April acknowledged Putin could be "tapping me along" and may not want to stop the war in Ukraine. At least some Republicans in Congress, meanwhile, are aching to impose new sanctions on Russia. "We've seen the devastation that happens when we appease aggressors, and we do not want to do that again," Brink said. "So my strong advice in terms of how to deal with Putin and Russia is not to give a single meeting or concession or legitimacy until Putin agrees to an unconditional ceasefire that's verifiable and moves forward toward a just and lasting peace."
Yahoo
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The U.S. Foreign Service is vital to safety and security
I served our country for 12 years as a commissioned Foreign Service officer and am dismayed by the ongoing efforts to reduce America's diplomatic and development capacity. Firings, hiring freezes, budget cuts and the dismantling of key agencies jeopardize our national security, our economic strength and our global leadership. Richland's own Gen. James Mattis once told Congress, '... if you don't fully fund the State Department, I'll need to buy more ammunition...' because our diplomatic and development professionals provide our best chance to avoid sending our troops into foreign conflicts. These cutbacks prevent our diplomats from opening export markets for U.S. businesses. They reduce America's influence and leave a vacuum that China and Russia will rush to fill. And they risk our government's ability to assist Americans in trouble overseas – when a passport is lost, a family member is injured or imprisoned or when natural disasters strike. My former colleagues perform difficult jobs in difficult places every day, serving under administrations of both parties. They took an oath to serve America and support the Constitution. They make America safer, stronger and more respected. They deserve our support, not disrespect, firings and budget cuts. Check out for more information. Ron Rhinehart, Kennewick I am writing to express my concern regarding the escalating issue of forever chemicals, specifically PFAS, in our Tri-Cities community. Recent reports highlighting the presence of these harmful pollutants in our water sources are deeply troubling and demand immediate action. The potential long-term health consequences associated with PFAS exposure, including cancer, immune system deficiencies and developmental problems, are simply unacceptable. Our local governments must prioritize the testing of all water sources and transparently share the findings with the public. This transparency is critical in building trust and ensuring informed decision-making. Furthermore, I urge our elected officials to explore and implement effective solutions for PFAS remediation, investing in advanced filtration technologies and exploring innovative solutions for contaminant removal. This isn't simply an environmental concern, it's a public health crisis requiring decisive and immediate action. We deserve clean water and a safe environment, and I believe the Tri-Cities community deserves and demands better. Natalie Lancheros, Kennewick I am respectfully writing to bring attention to the growing drug problem in our cities, especially near our schools. Every day, hundreds of teens are exposed to drugs. Dealers sell pills at very low prices to get kids dependent early, turning them into long-term customers. Many don't realize how dangerous these drugs are to their future. Street drugs are addictive and can seriously harm a child's future. They affect the brain in many ways. According to the National Library of Medicine (NLM), drugs like marijuana and heroin mimic natural brain chemicals but send abnormal signals. Others, like cocaine and amphetamines, release too much of certain chemicals or block their recycling, disrupting how the brain works. We want our community to be strong and drug-free. Drugs don't help our youth, they harm them. Studies by the NLM show that students who used drugs in the past year were more likely to skip school and have low grades, while those who never used reported greater confidence and stronger engagement in school. We must educate teens on how drugs impact their brains and futures. It's heartbreaking to see our generation trapped by substances that steal their potential. Yahaira Lopez, Kennewick 'Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event, it is unpatriotic not to tell the truth, whether about the president or anyone else.' — President Theodore Roosevelt Judith Loomis, Richland In response to Steve Gahn's op-ed in the Tri-City Herald, I am one of those Democrats who regularly helps elect Rep. Dan Newhouse to Congress as the more moderate and experienced choice. Newhouse is wise for signing a letter to the Ways and Means Committee to continue the energy tax credits to his district, and I thank him for it. Preserving the tax credits will allow billion-dollar clean energy projects to continue to be built in our district. We need the additional clean energy they will help produce for the growing demand of electricity for AI, electric vehicles and heat pumps, and in the necessary transition away from polluting fossil fuel energy. This transition is not happening quickly enough! I also ask Rep. Newhouse to use his experience to persuade other congressmen to protect these tax credits that will bring good paying and stable jobs and clean air to their districts. Please write to thank him and ask him to continue to publicly support the clean energy tax credits. Together, we can continue the progress to expand clean energy. 'The most important thing an individual can do, is join together with others in movements large enough to make change.' Bill McKibben, Richland I have repeatedly contacted Rep. Dan Newhouse's office about the administration's ongoing efforts to dismantle our democracy, to no avail. In an effort to get my message to him through a different platform, here's my latest letter: Dear Congressman Newhouse: It is way past time for you to stand up to the authoritarian regime in the White House. They are disappearing people from U.S. streets, holding them without due process and/or abducting them to foreign countries, punishing our allies (Afghans) by revoking protected status and giving refugee status to Afrikaners who created and perpetuated apartheid in South Africa. What kind of a country are we living in? Clearly not one that abides by the Constitution or our long-held position as a welcoming place for those at the margins who seek safety and opportunity. When will you stand up and stand against authoritarianism? I have contacted your office over and over on a variety of issues, and I never get a direct response or see anything from you that indicates you are willing to stand for what is right. Shame on you. The Fourth District deserves better. Susan Dobkins, Richland Rep. Dan Newhouse is backing policies that could strip health coverage from thousands in our district. He supports adding work requirements to Medicaid — rules that sound reasonable but have been tried in states and failed. The result? People lose coverage not because they don't qualify, but because they can't keep up with confusing paperwork. The Congressional Budget Office estimates 8.6 million could lose benefits this way. Here in Washington's Fourth District, nearly 70% of children rely on Medicaid (Apple Health) for care. Many recipients are kids, people with disabilities or already working in low-wage jobs. The truth is (that) most who can work, already do. Still, Newhouse supports Speaker Mike Johnson's plan to cut Medicaid in order to pay for tax breaks that primarily benefit the wealthy. He called it 'a good path.' A good path — for whom? If you or others you know rely in medicaid benefits, your health is on the line. Let Rep. Newhouse know you oppose these harmful cuts. We deserve a representative who protects our care, not one who makes it harder to keep. Your voice matters. Call, write, and vote like your healthcare depends on it. Newhouse's Washington, D.C., Office can be reached at 202-225-5816. Cory Miller, Kennewick
Politico
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Politico
Former ambassador to Ukraine: ‘Peace at any price is not peace at all'
Bridget Brink, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, is speaking out about why she left her post last month. 'I resigned from Ukraine and also from the Foreign Service, because the policy since the beginning of the administration was to put pressure on the victim Ukraine, rather than on the aggressor, Russia,' Brink told host Margaret Brennan on Sunday on CBS' 'Face the Nation.' 'I fully agree that the war needs to end, but I believe that peace at any price is not peace at all. It's appeasement and, as we know from history, appeasement only leads to more war.' Brink spent three years in Ukraine after attaining unanimous Senate confirmation under former President Joe Biden in May 2022, shortly after Russia began its invasion. In an op-ed for the Detroit Free Press published last Friday, she wrote that she couldn't in good faith adhere to the diplomatic instructions coming out of the new Trump White House. Trump has made ending the war in Ukraine one of the central parts of his foreign policy prospectus. But for the first few months of his time at the White House, he often directed his ire at Kyiv, rather than Russian President Vladimir Putin. 'It has to be a peace that does things that advance our own interests, and those are really simple,' Brink told Brennan. 'It's how to keep Ukraine free, how to deter Russia, and how to send the right signal to China. And this is what we should be doing.' For Brink, the first sign was Trump's combative Oval Office press conference with Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, during which Trump and Vance attacked Zelenskyy for being ungrateful and then kicked him out of the White House. Zelenskyy was 'not ready for peace,' Trump said in a post on Truth Social, his social media platform. Brink's public turn comes with Trump scheduled to speak with Putin on the phone Monday. The president has grown increasingly frustrated with Moscow as he pushes for a 30-day unconditional ceasefire between the two countries. Trump in April acknowledged Putin could be 'tapping me along' and may not want to stop the war in Ukraine. At least some Republicans in Congress, meanwhile, are aching to impose new sanctions on Russia. 'We've seen the devastation that happens when we appease aggressors, and we do not want to do that again,' Brink said. 'So my strong advice in terms of how to deal with Putin and Russia is not to give a single meeting or concession or legitimacy until Putin agrees to an unconditional ceasefire that's verifiable and moves forward toward a just and lasting peace.'
CBS News
18-05-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Transcript: Former Ambassador Bridget Brink on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," May 18, 2025
The following is the transcript of an interview with Bridget Brink, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on May 18, 2025. MARGARET BRENNAN: Last month, Ambassador Bridget Brink resigned from her post as America's top diplomat to Ukraine, and last week, she explained why. Though she had been serving as a career diplomat for three decades, Brink wrote in the Detroit Free Press she could, quote, 'no longer in good faith carry out the administration's policy,' accusing President Trump and his team of putting pressure on the victim, Ukraine, rather than on the aggressor, Russia. For more, we're joined now by Ambassador Brink. Ambassador, good to have you here. AMBASSADOR BRIDGET BRINK: Hi, Margaret, thanks so much for having me on. MARGARET BRENNAN: You served this country for so many decades. What happened that made you say, 'I can't take it'? AMB. BRINK: Well, maybe let me give you a little context. What I saw in Ukraine was horrifying. For three years, Russia launched missiles and drones at men, women and children sleeping in their homes, tried to take down the energy grid for millions of Ukrainians, to take out the power, heat and light in the middle of winter, and committed war crimes and atrocities at a level we haven't seen since World War Two. I resigned from Ukraine and also from the Foreign Service, because the policy since the beginning of the administration was to put pressure on the victim Ukraine, rather than on the aggressor, Russia. I fully agree that the war needs to end, but I believe that peace at any price is not peace at all. It's appeasement and as we know from history, appeasement only leads to more war. MARGARET BRENNAN: And to be clear, you are a career diplomat, so that means you serve regardless of who is the president of the United States and what party they come from. And in fact, when you tried to leave post in January, Secretary Rubio asked you to stay on in Kyiv, as I understand it, you were there for a number of months until April. What specifically with this policy is a problem for you? Because you did. You worked at post under the Trump administration. Was there a trigger that made you say we're getting it so wrong? BRIDGET BRINK: Well, I would say it wasn't a hard, a hasty, rash decision. It was one that I took over the first three months of the administration. But the first sign was the Oval Office meeting in February, in February, President Trump and President Zelensky, where I saw that our approach is to put pressure on Ukraine and not pressure on Russia. MARGARET BRENNAN: The President and this administration's policies, you have heard Secretary Rubio say is just to try to get the fighting to stop. Do you see that America has leverage here? AMB. BRINK: Yes, of course we have leverage- MARGARET BRENNAN: On Russia? BRIDGET BRINK: Yes, of course we do. I mean, we're the leader in- of the free world. I think let's just be clear, Russia and Putin have invaded a sovereign, independent, democratic country in the heart of Europe, with the help of North Korea, Iran and China. This is fundamentally against U.S. interests Europe as our largest trading partner, is responsible for 16 million jobs on both continents, and having this war or any festering, unresolved war on the margins of Europe, is very bad for the United States. So what do we need to do as the United States? We need to put together with partners and allies, pressure on Russia to end the war. And there are many ways to do this. We can put additional sanctions in the energy sector, in the banking sector. Russia is not as strong as some people say, or some people think. The economy is hurting. They have 20 percent interest rates- 21 percent interest rates, 10 percent inflation. And so right now is the time to increase the pressure on Russia, to bring Putin to the table, not decrease it. MARGARET BRENNAN: And we know that President Trump and President Putin have plans to speak on Monday, when you were still in Kyiv. President Zelenskyy called out the U.S. Embassy for what he called a disappointingly weak reaction from America following a missile attack that killed small children. He said, you must not be afraid to call things by their names, and the U.S. is afraid to even say the word Russian when speaking about the missile that murdered children. Do you feel American officials are being censored from saying things frankly and honestly? AMB. BRINK: I mean, our job as diplomats is to reflect and represent the policy of the the President and the administration. That's our job. That's- that's what we do as professionals and having worked for five different presidents that requires reflecting that policy that's made constitutionally by the President. So to me, the real question is, how are we going to help to end this war in a way that's in the interest of the United States? And to do that, it can't be peace at any price. It has to be a peace that does things that advance our own interests, and those are really simple. It's how to keep Ukraine free, how to deter Russia, and how to send the right signal to China. And this is what we should be doing. And every step that we make in diplomacy, I think should try to help achieve this goal. MARGARET BRENNAN: And call things what they are. AMB. BRINK: It's important for us, as a leader of the free world- again, to be clear and accurate, and also, I think it's an important moment in history. We've seen the devastation that happens when we appease aggressors, and we do not want to do that again. So my strong advice in terms of how to deal with Putin and Russia is not to give a single meeting or concession or legitimacy until Putin agrees to an unconditional ceasefire that's verifiable and moves forward toward a just and lasting peace. On that basis, I can see a conversation and diplomacy that can achieve our interests. MARGARET BRENNAN: At the State Department, we have seen plans from Secretary Rubio to make some dramatic changes, and- and these are the professionals who would be advising the Secretary and the President in some way on these policies. He's going to close 132 offices, consolidate bureaus, he's going to cut about 15 percent of staff, he says. Eliminate offices. What do you think the impact will be on making the right decision when you have these changes? Is all of this helping our foreign policy or is this hurting the ability to shape it? AMB. BRINK: I mean, again, having worked for five presidents, every new administration comes in with a set of goals, and our job as professional civil service was to execute and implement those goals to the best of our ability. I believe that cutting the State Department in ways that take away our diplomatic power does not help us achieve American interests, and there are key parts of the State Department that- that ensure our security broader than simply security from the defense side. There's cyber security, there's fight against disinformation, there's ensuring that there's free media and free press. That's all that we do as part of the State Department. So I think how we do it really matters. And my concern would be, as many people have said, If you don't fully fund the State Department, you need a bigger military budget. Because what we do- and we do it in small, sometimes quiet and unknown ways, is we help prevent wars. We help to open markets to U.S. businesses. We help American citizens when they're hurt or injured overseas. We play a very important role that's not necessarily the most public role, but I think this is a critical role to American foreign policy and national interest. MARGARET BRENNAN: And do it often in war zones far away from your family, as you did for many years. Thank you very much, Ambassador Brink, for sharing your insights with us. We'll be back in a moment.
