Latest news with #JamesMattis
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump Addresses a Military He's Remaking in His Image
The last time President Donald Trump addressed Army cadets at West Point, he was locked in a dramatic conflict with America's military establishment. Two days before Trump spoke to the academy's graduates in June 2020, Army General Mark Milley, the nation's top military officer, had made an extraordinary televised apology for having appeared in uniform with the president outside the White House, after security personnel used force to clear peaceful protesters from the scene. Two weeks before Trump's commencement address, Defense Secretary Mark Esper had made what turned out to be an irreparable break with the president when he pushed back on Trump's desire to use active-duty troops to put down unrest triggered by the killing of George Floyd. Trump had mused about shooting protesters in the legs, according to Esper, who later wrote, 'What transpired that day would leave me deeply troubled about the leader of our country and the decisions he was making.' Trump, who denied suggesting that protesters be shot, fired Esper five months later. [From the November 2023 issue: The patriot] Trump's impulse to enlist the military to respond to nationwide protests generated an outcry from some retired officers, who denounced what they saw as presidential overreach. Most notably, James Mattis, who as Trump's first defense secretary had tried to steer the president away from decisions he feared would endanger allies or undermine U.S. security, decried Trump's effort to politicize the military and divide Americans. That now feels like a different era. As he returns to West Point to speak at the academy's commencement today, Trump faces little resistance from the Defense Department. Instead, in selecting civilian leaders at the Pentagon, the president has prioritized perceived loyalty rather than experience. In doing so, he has brought the Defense Department much closer in line with his MAGA political agenda than it was in his first term, and raised questions about who, if anyone, will attempt to stop him if he tries to use the military in unconstitutional ways. Unlike Mattis, Milley, and Esper, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth—a former Fox News host and National Guard soldier with little management background—has acted as an accelerant for Trump's political priorities. He has moved swiftly to root out military diversity programs, overturned Joe Biden–era decisions on transgender troops and the COVID-19 vaccine, and altered combat standards in ways that might push women out of certain jobs. Hegseth has also expanded U.S. forces' involvement in repelling illegal migration, augmenting troops' power to detain migrants at the southern border, ordering military deportation flights, and expanding camps to house migrants at the U.S. base at Guantánamo Bay. Although the military has long been one of the country's most respected institutions, its standing has fallen dramatically in recent years, and pulling U.S. troops more deeply into polarizing activities such as policing the border could further erode Americans' trust in the armed forces. Like Trump himself, Hegseth has brought a combative, norm-busting approach to his leadership of the Pentagon, attacking enemies online, deriding the 'fake news' media, and flouting government security rules. On Wednesday, he led a Christian prayer service in the Pentagon auditorium, a highly unusual move for the leader of a workforce comprising more than 3 million people who come from a wide range of backgrounds and faiths. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Dan Caine, was nominated by Trump after the president abruptly fired General Charles Q. Brown, the second Black officer to serve in that role, and other top officers in February. A respected former National Guard officer with less command experience than most previous JCS chairmen, Caine has maintained a low profile so far and has said little about his views. In his confirmation hearing, Caine—who denied a story Trump has told about him wearing a MAGA hat when they met on a military base in Iraq—said he would be willing to be fired for following the Constitution. (Other top brass, anticipating moves by Hegseth to slim down the military's uppermost ranks, have sought to keep their head down and avoid contentious issues.) [Tom Nichols: A Friday-night massacre at the Pentagon] The service academies, including West Point and the Naval Academy, are now at the center of the administration's push to remake military culture. In response to a White House order that bans the teaching of 'divisive concepts' and references to racism in American history at the academies, leaders at the schools have removed books from library shelves and are altering curricula. Sometimes acting in anticipation of the administration's preferences, they have also shut down student groups related to race, gender, and ethnicity, and canceled speakers and events they feared could violate the new rules. It's difficult to know how West Point cadets feel about all this. The academy has no independent student newspaper and few venues for students to voice their views on such issues. Cadets, like most service members, usually keep their political beliefs to themselves. Kori Schake, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, told me that Trump is undermining core tenets of U.S. military culture, including the institution's apolitical nature and service members' sworn allegiance to the Constitution rather than to any one person. While the checks from Trump's first term are long gone, Schake said, 'what I see as continuity from 2020 is President Trump trying to corrode the good order and discipline of the American military to establish a much more personalistic kind of loyalty.' In his 2020 remarks at West Point, Trump largely stuck to a typical presidential script, congratulating troops on making it through the rigors of academy life and eulogizing Army leaders including Douglas MacArthur and George Patton. Perhaps his speech today will take a similar tone. If it does, it will mark a departure from his more recent appearances at troop events. When he addressed service members at Al Udeid Air Base, in Qatar, this month, Trump sounded like no other president has in a military setting. He criticized 'fake generals' who fail to adhere to his worldview, belittled the role of allies such as France in winning World War II, and suggested that he might run for a third term. Trump praised the service members assembled around him for 'defending our interests, supporting our allies, securing our homeland.' 'And you know what? Making America great again,' he continued. 'That's what's happened. It's happened very fast.' Article originally published at The Atlantic
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
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - USAID whistleblower to Congress: Don't rubberstamp DOGE's destruction
The dust is settling on the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development, providing the first clear view of DOGE's work product. The results are devastating for the mission of helping our allies become healthier and wealthier — a mission that benefits Americans by controlling disease, strengthening alliances and growing markets for our products. The reckless destruction of USAID is in fact a travesty for those who want more efficiency in government, because DOGE's methods and results discredited a rare opportunity to substantially cut red tape while improving services. I'm a former USAID employee who worked with colleagues to improve the agency from within, including by filing a whistleblower lawsuit. I and many talented colleagues were then laid off in January as part of Elon Musk's woodchipper assault on the agency. After the ensuing two-month 'review' — in which methods and criteria were kept hidden — the State Department released its list of 5,341 cancelled awards, totaling $28.8 billion in planned aid, and submitted to Congress plans to absorb USAID's remaining portfolio. The abrupt stoppage of so much aid for the stated reason of 'the convenience' of the government, rather than performance or strategic value, is causing well-documented damage to human lives and to America's reputation, with disease outbreaks and hunger predictably increasing. Worse, the inflicted pain comes with little gain; the savings total around two weeks of Pentagon spending. It is penny-wise and pound-foolish. When retired four-star Gen. James Mattis said, 'If you don't fund the State Department fully, then I need to buy more ammunition,' he could have been foreshadowing the consequences of DOGE's destruction of USAID. All government agencies need some reform, and my former USAID colleagues and I battled our fair share of bureaucracy to get the job done. But its valuable mission needed rehabilitation, not decapitation. The unfolding damage can now only be mitigated if Congress adheres to its constitutional duty to check executive branch overreach. The courts are proving too slow. While the slim Republican congressional majority may feel pressure to rubberstamp the administration's proposals at USAID and elsewhere, that would cement irreparable harm and set a dangerous precedent. Around 60 percent of Americans once supported the idea of DOGE, but 60 percent now disapprove of its execution. While the administration apparently believed it needed to 'move fast and break things,' an overhaul conducted so quickly has predictably proved inexact, with extensive collateral damage. Chainsaws may have their purpose, but not in billion-dollar budgets. It takes work to distinguish good contracts from lesser ones, talented employees from ineffective ones. Thousands of gifted Americans, along with 10,000 foreign nationals who helped USAID do hard work in difficult countries, will be fired by August despite often stellar performance. Undeserved unemployment is cruel and bad policy. The firing of Pete Marocco, a MAGA loyalist, as the acting USAID lead in April — his fifth departure from Trump administration jobs after only a few months — may signal quiet recognition that the overhaul went too far and needs to be reeled in. As Congress considers whether to intervene in USAID's reform, it can begin with one of the least divisive of all issues: child survival. The numbers reveal how problematic DOGE's results are at USAID. Each year, around 5 million children under age five die globally from preventable causes, such as unsafe childbirth, malaria, malnutrition, dehydration after diarrhea or pneumonia preventable by vaccines or treatable by antibiotics. For example, over 100,000 children still die every year from measles, and around 2.5 million annual measles deaths globally are prevented by vaccination. Preventable child deaths are much larger than the 630,000 people globally who still die from HIV/AIDS every year. Yet the Trump administration proposes to eliminate nearly $1.75 billion annual funding for maternal and child health programs, including its highly leveraged support for vaccines, and abruptly terminated over 90 percent of existing work for these vulnerable populations. Meanwhile, the proposed cuts to programs combating HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria are certainly damaging, with widespread disruptions and layoffs already reported that put at risk the tremendous gains made against these diseases, but are at least not complete. Why the selective eliminations? Simple partisanship and inattention to detail are the most straightforward explanations, which again signal why Congress must step in. America's current HIV, tuberculosis and malaria programs began during the second Bush administration, while our maternal and child health programs date to the 1980s. Since 2004, America's HIV programs saved the lives of more than 25 million people living with the disease, and prevented at least 6 million children from being born with HIV. These are astonishing and cost-effective achievements worthy of continued taxpayer support. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has noted that America makes friends when we prevent people and their children from dying. Instead, DOGE almost literally threw the baby out with the bathwater at USAID. The administration also canceled most of the awards that help developing countries protect endangered species. Supporting biodiversity and sustainable agriculture in poor countries is morally right, but it also benefits America. In the aftermath of the latest Ebola outbreak in Uganda, evidence is mounting that destroying wild habitats is associated with that disease's emergence as a human pathogen. As we have learned from Ebola and COVID-19, thousands of viruses are circulating in wildlife that could suddenly upend human lives. The Trump administration is running amok with a chainsaw, and the costs are becoming clear. Congress must reign in the executive branch's overreach, not rubberstamp it. Rob Cohen worked at USAID for eight years as an epidemiologist, including serving as acting deputy chief of staff of the USAID Global Health Bureau in 2020. He filed a successful whistleblower lawsuit against USAID in 2022. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
16-05-2025
- Business
- The Hill
USAID whistleblower to Congress: Don't rubberstamp DOGE's destruction
The dust is settling on the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development, providing the first clear view of DOGE's work product. The results are devastating for the mission of helping our allies become healthier and wealthier — a mission that benefits Americans by controlling disease, strengthening alliances and growing markets for our products. The reckless destruction of USAID is in fact a travesty for those who want more efficiency in government, because DOGE's methods and results discredited a rare opportunity to substantially cut red tape while improving services. I'm a former USAID employee who worked with colleagues to improve the agency from within, including by filing a whistleblower lawsuit. I and many talented colleagues were then laid off in January as part of Elon Musk's woodchipper assault on the agency. After the ensuing two-month 'review' — in which methods and criteria were kept hidden — the State Department released its list of 5,341 cancelled awards, totaling $28.8 billion in planned aid, and submitted to Congress plans to absorb USAID's remaining portfolio. The abrupt stoppage of so much aid for the stated reason of 'the convenience' of the government, rather than performance or strategic value, is causing well-documented damage to human lives and to America's reputation, with disease outbreaks and hunger predictably increasing. Worse, the inflicted pain comes with little gain; the savings total around two weeks of Pentagon spending. It is penny-wise and pound-foolish. When retired four-star Gen. James Mattis said, 'If you don't fund the State Department fully, then I need to buy more ammunition,' he could have been foreshadowing the consequences of DOGE's destruction of USAID. All government agencies need some reform, and my former USAID colleagues and I battled our fair share of bureaucracy to get the job done. But its valuable mission needed rehabilitation, not decapitation. The unfolding damage can now only be mitigated if Congress adheres to its constitutional duty to check executive branch overreach. The courts are proving too slow. While the slim Republican congressional majority may feel pressure to rubberstamp the administration's proposals at USAID and elsewhere, that would cement irreparable harm and set a dangerous precedent. Around 60 percent of Americans once supported the idea of DOGE, but 60 percent now disapprove of its execution. While the administration apparently believed it needed to 'move fast and break things,' an overhaul conducted so quickly has predictably proved inexact, with extensive collateral damage. Chainsaws may have their purpose, but not in billion-dollar budgets. It takes work to distinguish good contracts from lesser ones, talented employees from ineffective ones. Thousands of gifted Americans, along with 10,000 foreign nationals who helped USAID do hard work in difficult countries, will be fired by August despite often stellar performance. Undeserved unemployment is cruel and bad policy. The firing of Pete Marocco, a MAGA loyalist, as the acting USAID lead in April — his fifth departure from Trump administration jobs after only a few months — may signal quiet recognition that the overhaul went too far and needs to be reeled in. As Congress considers whether to intervene in USAID's reform, it can begin with one of the least divisive of all issues: child survival. The numbers reveal how problematic DOGE's results are at USAID. Each year, around 5 million children under age five die globally from preventable causes, such as unsafe childbirth, malaria, malnutrition, dehydration after diarrhea or pneumonia preventable by vaccines or treatable by antibiotics. For example, over 100,000 children still die every year from measles, and around 2.5 million annual measles deaths globally are prevented by vaccination. Preventable child deaths are much larger than the 630,000 people globally who still die from HIV/AIDS every year. Yet the Trump administration proposes to eliminate nearly $1.75 billion annual funding for maternal and child health programs, including its highly leveraged support for vaccines, and abruptly terminated over 90 percent of existing work for these vulnerable populations. Meanwhile, the proposed cuts to programs combating HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria are certainly damaging, with widespread disruptions and layoffs already reported that put at risk the tremendous gains made against these diseases, but are at least not complete. Why the selective eliminations? Simple partisanship and inattention to detail are the most straightforward explanations, which again signal why Congress must step in. America's current HIV, tuberculosis and malaria programs began during the second Bush administration, while our maternal and child health programs date to the 1980s. Since 2004, America's HIV programs saved the lives of more than 25 million people living with the disease, and prevented at least 6 million children from being born with HIV. These are astonishing and cost-effective achievements worthy of continued taxpayer support. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has noted that America makes friends when we prevent people and their children from dying. Instead, DOGE almost literally threw the baby out with the bathwater at USAID. The administration also canceled most of the awards that help developing countries protect endangered species. Supporting biodiversity and sustainable agriculture in poor countries is morally right, but it also benefits America. In the aftermath of the latest Ebola outbreak in Uganda, evidence is mounting that destroying wild habitats is associated with that disease's emergence as a human pathogen. As we have learned from Ebola and COVID-19, thousands of viruses are circulating in wildlife that could suddenly upend human lives. The Trump administration is running amok with a chainsaw, and the costs are becoming clear. Congress must reign in the executive branch's overreach, not rubberstamp it. Rob Cohen worked at USAID for eight years as an epidemiologist, including serving as acting deputy chief of staff of the USAID Global Health Bureau in 2020. He filed a successful whistleblower lawsuit against USAID in 2022.
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - Military power alone is not enough — international aid is vital to US security
Before he served as President Trump's first secretary of defense, Gen. James Mattis, as head of U.S. Central Command, testified before Congress in 2013 that 'If you don't fund the State Department fully, then I need to buy more ammunition.' He was right then, and he is right now. Mattis recognized that a 'peace through strength' foreign policy centered on deterrence demands the most lethal and formidable military in the world. He, like so many of our military leaders, also understands that this strength must go hand-in-glove with the critical tools of international assistance and diplomacy, which help prevent conflict and insecurity from escalating to costly wars that can require American troops. Trump inherited a complex diplomatic battlefield, with an axis of rivals and competitors — China, Russia, Iran and North Korea — working to undermine U.S. influence, security and economic interests around the world. It's no secret that the Chinese Communist Party is on the march, looking to replace America as the preeminent economic driver of the international order. In fact, Beijing has been ramping up its Belt and Road Initiative by 525 percent over the past decade and a half, a long-range strategy focused on influencing countries through non-military development, humanitarian support, financing and political influence. From exploiting critical minerals in Africa and South America to cultivating relationships in southeast Asia, the race is on for partnerships and export markets that will define this century. When one of us led U.S. Southern Command, we witnessed Beijing's bold diplomatic maneuvering: Panama signed 47 bilateral agreements with China — at a time when the U.S. lacked an ambassador on the ground — joining 22 other Central and South American nations signing on to the Belt-and-Road Initiative. The outcome? Increased revenue and jobs for Chinese workers and state-owned enterprises, while our neighbors fell into debt traps. American influence waned. Gutting U.S. international assistance infrastructure will not help the American people win the battle for the 21st century. Instead, we are seeing significant unintended damage from the abrupt and chaotic dismantling of programs, which will ultimately put America at a disadvantage to our rivals. These actions undermine Secretary of State Marco Rubio's doctrine that every dollar we spend should make America safer, stronger and more prosperous. We need to play both offense and defense to advance a 'peace through strength' agenda to outcompete rivals like China; prevent costly wars; and stop disease, drugs and terror from reaching our borders. Withdrawing from America's leadership role on the global playing field risks leaving a void for our adversaries to fill. What do we lose by stepping back from our counterterror assistance programs? When one of us led U.S. Central Command and spent decades rooting out terror infrastructure across the Middle East, we were most effective in our mission when our civilian aid implementers were empowered. It is far preferable to strengthen the capacity of partner nations to fight Al Qaeda and ISIS themselves, so Americans don't have to. But now we are seeing programs from Syria to the Sahel that work alongside the U.S. military abruptly terminated. Security guards at the Al Hol and Al Roj camps in Syria — which house close to 10,000 captured ISIS fighters — were cut off, jeopardizing hard-fought progress in the campaign to defeat the terror group. And across the Sahel — the new epicenter of jihadist activity and Russian mercenaries exploiting power vacuums — counterterror programs that improve local law enforcement capacity to prepare, respond, apprehend and prosecute terrorists have been paused. Long before Sept. 11, many military leaders warned of the acute risk of terrorism that our absence from diplomacy and development in Afghanistan would invite. Imagine how many trillions of dollars and lives could've been saved if we had invested back then in what Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has called 'national security insurance.' America's competitors and rivals are seizing on the opportunity to fill the vacuum we are leaving behind. In Cambodia, China has stepped into the void we created, subsidizing de-mining programs, once funded by the U.S. government. What will China demand in return when U.S. freedom of navigation is threatened in Southeast Asia? In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Kremlin is now supporting disease specialists to help detect and stop outbreaks where U.S. programs have been suspended. Congo is home to one of the largest supplies of critical minerals in the world, needed for everything from smart phones to AI chips. What will Moscow expect in return as supply-chain competition intensifies? There is still time to send a clear message that America intends to use all instruments of national power to safeguard our economic and security interests. If Americans want to win — and avoid losing — influence around the world, then we need international development, global health and humanitarian assistance programs to support our allies, deter our adversaries and ultimately protect our homeland. Anthony Zinni is a retired four-star U.S. Marine Corps general. Gen. Laura Richardson served as the commander of U.S. Southern Command until her retirement earlier this year. They now serve as co-chairs of the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition's National Security Advisory Council. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
