DV Journal

(For another point of view, see: Point: U.S. Must Stop Putin.)

As the Russian invasion of Ukraine continues, we must remember that too much is at stake to walk away.

Autocrats and those with autocratic tendencies are having a global moment. While it may seem to some that a relatively small piece of the overall puzzle is at play in this conflict, the domino effect of allowing Vladimir Putin’s bullying to win in Ukraine would have a profoundly worldwide effect.

There is, of course, Ukraine itself. It is unacceptable in the 21st century to allow one nation to engage in a hostile takeover of another sovereign country. Ukrainian civilians and fighters alike are dying needlessly daily.

Allowing Putin to win only continues to embolden an already largely unchecked autocrat. Having just been sworn in for a fifth term as Russian president, Putin is tightening his grip at home. Russia’s “president for life” continues to drag the Russian people into an illiberal sinkhole. Validating his aims in Ukraine by walking away is not an option.

Eastern Europe is already on constant alert for these potential threats. The United States has long been committed to peace and security in Europe. Ceding more ground to Putin raises and expands the danger level even more, eroding trust in the United States.

With Putin continuing to rattle his nuclear saber, any more encroachment upon Europe and the borders of NATO member states could put us all on the brink of a nuclear catastrophe.

Putin’s allies, sympathizers and sycophants are also threats to a peaceful world order. Allowing Russia to win in Ukraine could, and likely would, also bolster these autocrats. China, Iran and North Korea are already threats that do not need more encouragement.

We are already at an uneasy time with Iran in the Middle East, China and Taiwan, and the ever-present unpredictability in North Korea. Fueling those flames by walking away from Ukraine could be a global disaster.

Another threat we must not overlook is the one right here. An autocrat in the making, Donald Trump is the presumptive Republican candidate for president. His enablers in Congress and MAGA-aligned media continue to degrade, delay and dismiss U.S. efforts in Ukraine.

If these domestic skeptics, who are already supporting the erosion of democracy here, had their say in Ukraine, we would leave Ukraine and our allies in Europe to fend for themselves. This is not and cannot be the U.S. position.

Our national stability and prosperity depend on preserving democracy at home and abroad. Both are in great peril, and the war’s outcome in Ukraine is critical to how our future will turn out.

Will we allow anti-democratic forces to prey on apathy, political expediency and division in their efforts to gain power? Or will we stay true to our principles and our best interests by protecting democracy through continuing aid and support in Ukraine?

The answer should be simple. Too much is a stake, and the United States must stay the course in Ukraine.

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

(For an alternative point of view see: Point: Do Not Give Up on Ukraine)

After months of delay, U.S. aid is again flowing to Ukraine. Yet the war’s trajectory remains uncertain. Russia is determined to win a protracted conflict, while Washington’s appetite for further aid remains in question. As the United States heads into a presidential election that could be key in determining the war’s outcome, we should take a moment to remind ourselves that a Russian victory in Ukraine would spell disaster for the West.

Vladimir Putin has been candid about his desire to dismantle NATO, undermine democracy globally, re-establish Russia as a global power and achieve a new multipolar world order. The Kremlin already sees itself as engaged in a war of sorts against the United States and its NATO allies. In Putin’s eyes, the conflict in Ukraine is critical to that broader struggle.

Make no mistake. If allowed to prevail in Ukraine, Putin will not stop there. The Russian leader will feel emboldened, believing he’s taken the best NATO had to throw at him and still triumphed. He will probably still think twice before starting a direct military conflict with a NATO member. However, the risk of such a possibility will grow, especially once Russia has reconstituted its military. Many NATO members on the alliance’s eastern flank, particularly the Baltic states, are sounding the alarm.

A direct war with NATO is not the only way the Kremlin could destabilize Europe. Last week, NATO warned that Russia is waging an “intensifying campaign” of “sabotage, acts of violence, cyber and electronic interference, disinformation campaigns, and other hybrid operations” against its members. European intelligence agencies similarly accuse Moscow of conducting or plotting violent acts of sabotage across Europe as part of a broader strategy to confront the West. Russia is already attempting to influence the European Parliament elections in June. It will undoubtedly seek to do the same in November’s U.S. elections.

Meanwhile, Russia continues to stoke tensions within Bosnia and Herzegovina and between Serbia and Kosovo, further jeopardizing an already fragile peace in the Western Balkans. Russia also seeks to subvert the pro-Western government of Moldova, where Russian forces still occupy the pro-Russian separatist enclave of Transnistria. As Moldova prepares to hold a presidential election this year, Moscow will likely use information operations, cyberattacks and proxies to destabilize the country. And Chișinău fears that if Ukraine falls, “Moldova would be next,” as the country’s foreign minister said recently.

The implications of a Russian victory in Ukraine would extend well beyond Europe. The war’s outcome will “to a great degree determine the outlines of the future world order,” noted a classified addendum to Russia’s 2023 Foreign Policy Concept.

A Russian victory would embolden authoritarian regimes that seek to overthrow the current international order. China, in particular, may feel more inclined to use military force against Taiwan. This potential conflict would wreak havoc on the global economy and could precipitate a hot war between the United States and Beijing.

So, what can the West do to stop this? The first step is to understand that aid for Ukraine is not charity but a smart investment in our own security. We must then channel that understanding into a greater sense of urgency to provide Ukraine with the weapons and training to hold its lines and eventually retake the advantage. Western governments should also stop allowing Russian nuclear extortion to deter them from providing maximum support to Ukraine.

In Ukraine, the Kremlin aims not just to subjugate Kyiv but to rewrite the global order at the expense of Western democracies. The West has the power to stop Putin. The only question is whether we’re willing to do so.

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Bucks/Montgomery) sent this letter to his constituents on Friday:

Dear Friend,

I am sending you a special update on my recent trip to our allies Israel and Ukraine as they fight raging wars to defend their homeland and survive.

On my travels to Ukraine, I met with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. In our discussion, I promised I would do whatever necessary to pass our bipartisan bill providing urgently needed military aid to Ukraine and protecting democracy in the region.

As part of my briefings, I also received status updates on the war from the Ukrainian Armed Forces and intelligence officials. The briefings highlighted the need for additional military aid on the frontlines to protect Ukrainian borders against ruthless dictator Vladimir Putin.

Additional meetings included a discussion with U.S. Ambassador Brink on the role of the U.S. in the region, a visit to brave Ukrainian soldiers and veterans, and participation in a public lecture about U.S. support for Ukraine.

I then visited Israel where I received briefings on operations in Gaza and met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss the role of the U.S. in this war.

While in Israel, I also attended security briefings as part of my role on the Intelligence Committee. These meetings with Israeli defense and intelligence officials provided insights into addressing national security and intelligence-related matters in the region.

Hamas wants to wipe Israel from the face of the earth. Congress has a moral obligation to continue to provide defensive aid to our strongest democratic ally in the Middle East. The United States must never waver from supporting freedom and democracy throughout the world.

We have an obligation to assist our allies, especially when they come under assault by dictators, terrorists, and totalitarians. Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan are all freedom-loving democracies, they are our allies, and we must assist them in protecting their borders just as we must protect our own. I recently introduced the bipartisan Defending Borders, Defending Democracies Act, which would provide critical defense aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, as well as secure our southern border. Learn more about the bill here.

Sincerely,

Brian

A 70-29 majority in the U.S. Senate passed a $95 billion defense spending bill Tuesday that includes aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. Nearly half the GOP caucus — 22 members — voted with nearly every Democrat. Vermont socialist Bernie Sanders opposed the bill, as did Democrats Jeff Merkley (Ore.) and Peter Welch (Vt.).

Both Pennsylvania Sens. Bob Casey and John Fetterman voted yes.

“This bipartisan bill sends a clear message to Ukrainians and our partners and our allies around the world: America can be trusted, America can be relied upon, and America stands up for freedom,” Casey said.

The bill now heads to the House, where it faces long odds and strong GOP opposition. But Ukrainian-Americans living in the Delaware Valley tell DVJournal they are hopeful the aid will reach their war-torn homeland.

“Providing Ukraine with the requisite military, economic, and humanitarian aid essential to defeating Moscow is in America’s best interest for several reasons,” said Eugene Luciw of Towamencin. The son of Ukrainian immigrants, he’s president of the Philadelphia branch of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America.

“First, it is morally correct for us to rescue the innocent people of Ukraine from the genocidal death and destruction that Putin is committing in their country that so desperately fights for its freedom, democracy, and territorial integrity.

“Second, Ukraine is not only defending its own country, sovereignty, and territorial integrity. It is also defending the Euro-Atlantic security dynamic and the people of the West.

“Aid to Ukraine will achieve a decisive victory for her. This, in turn, will produce a peace dividend. America will not have to send its young people to defend the West from an attack on our European allies that is sure to come if Russia defeats Ukraine. Nor will we need to expend any additional financial resources. By the same token, a restored Ukraine promises to be an economic powerhouse that will be a tremendous economic and military partner to the United States.”

Natalie A. Firko, president of the Ukrainian Educational & Cultural Center in Abington, said the U.S. has led the world since World War II ended.

“Unfortunately, this peace and prosperity was shattered when Russia, led by its terrorist leader Vladimir Putin, initiated a massive and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022,” she said. “Since then, Russia has continued its relentless destruction of Ukraine and genocidal murder of innocent civilians and children in the hopes of wiping Ukraine off the map and subjugating this democratic and sovereign nation again,” Firko said.

“However, with the strong leadership and support of the United States, the people of Ukraine have fought bravely against all odds to prevent Russia from succeeding. This strong support from the United States sent a powerful message to all ruthless dictators, like Putin, that unprovoked aggression of a sovereign country will not be allowed and will not succeed.

“Stopping support for Ukraine now will only embolden this ruthless terrorist to continue not only in his quest to take over and destroy Ukraine but also set his sights on invading and subjugating other neighboring countries as well. When that happens, history will repeat itself, just like in 1939, when another ruthless dictator invaded a sovereign country, and then another, and then another until a world war was needed to stop him in his ruthless quest,” Firko said.

“The United States needs to show leadership, now more than ever,” Firko added. “The world is watching to see what we do. Let us not repeat history.”

Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-Chester/Berks) signed a letter with other so-called “national security” Democrats, urging House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to quickly bring the Senate bill to a floor for a vote.

“This legislation is long overdue, and we applaud the Senate for its demonstration of unified American leadership to secure global and national security and peace,” they wrote.

“Our impact on the future of democracy has never been more clear. Ukraine now enters its third year of war with Russia with a depleted stockpile of weapons and necessary supplies, the threat of Hamas still looms large in Israel and Gaza, and China’s intentions within the Indo-Pacific region are of deep concern. The stakes of failing to enact this legislation now cannot be overstated. Therefore, we implore you to take up this legislation immediately.”

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Russian leader Vladimir Putin, despite his public swaggering, has privately signaled support for a settlement in his war with Ukraine that would freeze current battle lines, according to former Russian officials close to the Kremlin and U.S. and international officials who have received Putin’s offers.

After a failed recent counteroffensive and less certain continued U.S. and European assistance, Ukraine should accept negotiations that could require it to give up territory but nevertheless credibly claim victory in the war against Russia.

Understandably, after Putin’s unnecessary and brutal invasion of Ukraine, which has purposefully killed many Ukrainian civilians, President Volodymyr Zelensky and other Ukrainian leaders are still pledging to fight until they regain all their lost territory. Yet, Ukraine’s uncompromising position, which demands that the Russian military withdraw from all Ukrainian land and pay for damages, is untenable.

Even if the war ended today, and existing battle lines became future national boundaries, the magnitude of Ukraine’s victory should not be forgotten. Recent news reports have focused on the failed counteroffensive and the vicissitudes of Western aid. Still, Ukraine, a country much smaller in population and much weaker in military power than invading Russia, not only repulsed the initial Russian attack but has succeeded in clawing back territory in previous counteroffensives in Kherson and the northeast region of Ukraine, after which Putin licked his wounds and made a prior entreaty for a ceasefire in the fall of 2022.

The Ukrainian military has fought tenaciously, and the civilian population has valiantly endured many intentional Russian attacks and depredations that should be deemed war crimes. In short, Ukraine has nothing to be ashamed of.

Instead, Ukraine can be satisfied that it has inflicted severe pain on Putin and Russia — for example, catastrophic casualties, erosion of military capability through destroyed equipment, economic pain and the destabilization of Putin’s rule, as indicated by an aborted coup against his government.

Despite the calm exterior of a former KGB operative, Putin is likely livid at the horrific performance of his generals and vastly overrated military. And in the negotiations, perhaps Ukraine could regain more of its territory.

In the future, Putin, in his created kleptocracy, cannot be sure that, once again, any “much improved” military will be just another shell for corruption and, therefore, incompetence on the battlefield. Even if current battle lines become frozen, Putin, despite his show of arrogance and despite the fears of other Eastern European countries, will likely be deterred by this black eye from using his badly decimated army to invade any NATO country or engage in other substantial mischief anytime soon.

Ukraine is not the first smaller country to best the big Russian bear in a conflict. In 1939, Russia invaded Finland. Like the Ukrainians, the Finns fought hard and effectively to preserve their country from Russia’s larger army. Although Finland had to give up some territory, it prevented Russia from erasing Finland from the map. Today, the world perceives that Finland won the Winter War against Russia. Bearing this out, Finland became a prosperous, non-communist country living in the shadow of an imperially oriented great power.

Ukraine should keep the Finnish example in mind when assessing the costs and benefits of continuing to fight this bitter war. A pragmatic conclusion should question the sensibility of continuing the bloody fight and suffering many more casualties in an unlikely, and even quixotic, effort to regain from a dug-in Russia the Russian-speaking areas of eastern Ukraine, which may well prefer to be in Russia.

A measure to help both countries save face and sell a negotiated settlement to their own publics would be to conduct legitimate, internationally monitored referenda in Crimea and east and southeast Ukraine (unlike Putin’s early sham referenda in those areas) to allow the people there to genuinely determine the country they want to call home.

For Ukraine, the future of continued war looks dismal; the future, if peace is restored, looks much brighter. Ukraine made inroads in being able to start the application process for becoming a member of the European Union — its ticket to future prosperity and becoming part of the West. As it did with Finland after 1940, the world will regard the outcome of this war as an unlikely but courageous victory for Ukraine in preserving its sovereignty against a hostile great power aggressor.

Ending the war rapidly, despite some loss of territory, is the ticket to getting its economy rapidly on the road to prosperity.

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

President Joe Biden supports the mammoth $118 billion border and foreign aid deal released by the U.S. Senate Sunday night. And despite complaints from some progressives that it’s “a new version of a failed Trump-era immigration policy,” Delaware Valley Democrats say they’re on board, too.

“Now we’ve reached an agreement on a bipartisan national security deal that includes the toughest and fairest set of border reforms in decades. I strongly support it,” Biden said in a statement.

The bill, which approves $60 billion in aid for Ukraine and another $14 billion for Israel, is poised for its first vote in the Senate on Wednesday. On immigration, it would raise the standard for claiming asylum, end “catch and release,” and add money for 50,000 detention beds for migrants awaiting review.

It was negotiated by Sens. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), and James Lankford (R-Okla.)

But in Pennsylvania, attitudes toward the legislation fall along partisan lines.

“The bipartisan bill released last night takes critical steps towards securing our border and stopping fentanyl while providing key assistance to Ukraine and Israel,” said Sen. Bob Casey Jr. (D-Pa.) via social media. “It’s time to put politics aside and get this done.”

His likely Republican opponent, Dave McCormick, posted his opposition. “This is not a compromise; it’s a capitulation. This bill does not secure the border — it allows 4,000 migrants to cross illegally every. single. day.”

McCormick was referencing a provision in the legislation that mandates the Department of Homeland Security turn away all would-be migrants at the border if encounters reach a weekly average of 5,000 per day. The bill also grants the president the authority to invoke that measure at 4,000 encounters per day.

Like many of his fellow Republicans, McCormick argues there’s no reason to allow that level of undocumented migration — about 1.4 million per year — before shutting down the border.

“To protect Americans and fight the scourge of fentanyl, we need to CLOSE the border to illegal immigration. I oppose this deal,” McCormick wrote.

Progressive Sen. John Fetterman posted on social media that he had former Republican Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson as a professor.

“Back in 1998, Sen. Simpson said that we’ll never have any meaningful immigration legislation because it will forever be a useful political weapon. Here we are more than a quarter century later. I hope my Senate Republican colleagues don’t prove him right. Let’s PASS THIS BILL.”

The three Democrats in the Delaware Valley federal delegation also support the package.

“Our border and immigration system is dysfunctional and has been under both parties,” Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Montgomery/Berks) posted on social media. “It’s time to start talking solutions. So far, House Republicans are unwilling. I pray they change their minds soon — for the sake of our communities and for the sake of those seeking refuge.”

Republican David Winkler, who is running against Dean, said he is “deeply disappointed” in the “lack of seriousness” from Democrats on the border, and he cites the lack of a border wall mandate in the bill.

“We should propose a bill that focuses on strengthening border security by implementing physical security measures, utilizing advanced technology, and increasing staffing.”

Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-Chester/Berks) supports the bill. She visited the border last Thursday and Friday. Houlahan also penned a letter asking her colleagues to send more aid to Ukraine.

“I’m calling on Speaker [Mike] Johnson to change his deeply cynical position that “now is not the time” for immigration reform—I couldn’t disagree more. Most people in communities across America couldn’t disagree more. No solution will be perfect, but we cannot let that keep us from making progress for both the American people and those who seek refuge here,” Houlahan said in an op-ed in Newsweek on Monday.

Her request is falling on deaf ears. Speaker Johnson and other key House leaders signed a letter Monday declaring the bill dead on arrival in the House.

“It fails in every policy area needed to secure our border and would actually incentivize more illegal immigration,” they wrote. “The so-called ‘shutdown’ authority in the bill is anything but, riddled with loopholes that grant far too much discretionary authority to Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas – who has proven he will exploit every measure possible, in defiance of the law, to keep the border open.”

Neil Young, the Republican running against Houlahan, said he agrees with Johnson.

“Senate Republicans who voted in favor of this bill should be made to account for their vote and primaried if necessary. The American people do not want a quota system on how many people should be allowed into this country illegally.

“We deserve leaders who will vote to protect our borders from all threats, be they drug, crime, or illegal immigrant-related,” said Young. “In addition, for them to also tie this nonsense to yet another $60 billion foreign aid handout to Ukraine is doubly insulting. Last year’s HB2, which Speaker Johnson passed, was the blueprint for how to handle this, and the Senate still failed to deliver meaningful border security. The American people are smart enough to know that this current administration is responsible for our crisis at the border, and no amount of media spin can change that.”

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Bucks/Montgomery) did not respond to requests for comment, nor did Ashley Ehasz, the Democrat making her second attempt to unseat him.

In a departure from a largely do-nothing Congress, we may have real votes and many difficult choices to make in the coming weeks. During this time, with respect to Ukraine, I ask my colleagues to remember our collective history, remember who we serve, and be brave.

There is a buzz in the nation and Washington D.C. that we should no longer continue to support the Ukrainians in their battle against Putin’s unlawful invasion. Many of my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, say that they hear from their communities and constituents that we should send our resources elsewhere: the southwestern border, Israel, to support childcare or end homelessness, to name a few. The list of our nation’s needs is indeed long and worthy.

I would argue two things, however: 1) it is the responsibility of the elected Members of Congress not simply to hear and reflect in Washington what our constituents might be feeling and saying but also to bring home from Washington and the world what our role as a nation should be, and 2) sometimes it also is a Representative’s fiduciary, rather than elective, job to vote based on the needs of the nation as a whole and over the long term, and it is our job to help our community understand why we voted the way we did.

Last week, I traveled to Lithuania as a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. I was also there because my home state of Pennsylvania’s Army National Guard partners with Lithuania for their State Partnership Program. The Pennsylvania Guard has worked with Lithuania for over 30 years; we specifically help them with cyber security. In addition, many of our nation’s active duty troops from all over the United States are based in Lithuania as part of our collective forward line of defense of the NATO alliance.

Rep. Chrissy Houlahan meets with U.S. Troops in Lithuania

Lithuania borders Russia and Belarus. Belarus has proven itself to be nothing more than a puppet state of Russia throughout the war in Ukraine; recently, one might recall it housed and harbored the Russian merciless mercenary Wagner Group.

While in Lithuania, I had the chance to meet with the Assistant Minister of Defense. While speaking with him, he implored me to bring an urgent message back home: we must continue to help Ukraine defend itself. He reminded me that Lithuania and many, many more nations have spent upwards of 2.75 percent of their GDP on their defense and the defense of Ukraine, materially surpassing our commitment here in the U.S. Recall at one point that former President Trump maligned the members of NATO for their supposed lack of commitment.

This, indeed, is no longer the case.

Over the past couple of years, the Biden Administration has led a large international coalition to support Ukraine robustly, and the participation of dozens of nations has been historic in scale and scope. In fact, the United States is not even ranked in the top ten in terms of our overall contribution by GDP to defense and Ukraine support. NATO and many non-NATO nations are doing their part, and we must continue to do ours.

I also had the chance to meet with many of our troops in Lithuania. They are stationed very close to the border of Belarus — thousands of miles from home — in cold and challenging conditions. It is not lost on them that they are on the frontline. I was struck by their youth, their eagerness and patriotism, and their commitment to the people of Lithuania and NATO. I was also struck by their exposure and the fact that they were in literal harm’s way should the war in Ukraine go sideways.

Without our continued support to Ukraine, we are dangerously close to this, ultimately evolving into a war that requires our troops to be pulled in. If we allow Ukraine to fall to Russia, it is Putin’s expressed and stated purpose to continue onward to places like Lithuania. We have a commitment through Article 5 that if Lithuania or any other NATO nation is attacked, it is an attack on us all. And we will be required to respond.

So, as a U.S. House Representative, I know fully that there are many pulls on my community, Commonwealth, and country that deserve our attention. But I also know it is my responsibility to take hard and unpopular stands when I know it’s the right thing to do — in this case, to passionately advocate and vote for continued support for Ukraine. Such actions and support show our allies we are good for our word and here to stay. Actions such as these keep our young men and women in uniform out of harm’s way. And this is an effective use of our resources because it helps decimate Russia’s military and capabilities without depleting our own.

I genuinely believe that my colleagues — both Republicans and Democrats — fully know this, too. We must not put ourselves in a position to regret not supporting Ukraine when the war has come to us. The loss will become more severe, and I fear the price will be much more expensive in many ways. So, I ask my colleagues once again: remember our history, remember who we serve, and be brave.

In 2023, we were reminded that evil lurks in the world and is on the rise, and that we need strong leadership and moral clarity to deter and overcome it.

Over the last three years, the world has become an increasingly dangerous place for the United States and our allies as adversaries probe for weakness.

First, America’s enemies watched as our commander-in-chief botched our withdrawal from Afghanistan. Thirteen brave servicemen and women lost their lives and America was humiliated because of this failure of leadership.

Having witnessed President Biden’s weakness, Putin’s Russia invaded Ukraine, killing tens of thousands of Ukrainian civilians and destroying peace in Europe. Meanwhile, the Chinese Communist Party has continued one of the largest military buildups in history and escalated pressure on Taiwan and the Philippines.

Then, Hamas launched a barbaric assault against innocent Israelis that was the deadliest attack on the Jewish people since the Holocaust. Since then, Iranian-backed terrorist groups have attacked U.S. forces across the Middle East and paralyzed international shipping in the Red Sea. This is a stark reminder that the enemies of Americans, Israelis, and others who enjoy freedom and prosperity remain a significant threat.

At home, we’ve seen protests calling for the genocide of Jews, a dramatic rise in hate crimes, and leaders of our country’s most elite institutions failing to show moral clarity and the leadership needed to meet this moment.

The world is watching to see whether our leaders will stand up for the American people, and this has been a brutal wake-up call that all is not well for America and our closest allies.

We need leaders with the strength, the will, and the moral clarity to meet these challenges. Leaders who will make our enemies think twice about attacking America and our allies. Leaders who defend America’s interests. And leaders who will make serious, generational investments in rebuilding our military.

President Joe Biden and Senator Bob Casey will do none of these things.

Their every move has weakened our position on the world stage, undermining deterrence, and showing our adversaries that the United States may not be the superpower it once was.

Biden’s failures have had the support every step of the way of rubber stamp Senator Bob Casey.  Pennsylvania’s senior senator votes for the president’s disastrous agenda 98 percent of the time and repeatedly has failed to use his position of power when it matters most.

Pennsylvanians deserve better than weak, ineffective leaders who have proven themselves to be incapable of keeping America and our friends safe.

In the business world, when someone fails to deliver results, they’re fired. I learned that the hard way while CEO of an investment firm. My boss initially decided I was not cutting it in the job, and demoted me. I learned some hard lessons and later earned my way back to CEO and successfully led the company for a number of years.

Bob Casey should be held to the same high standard. Congress had a historically unproductive year, with the fewest bills signed into law in decades, and Casey has not seen a single significant piece of his own legislation become law in 17 years in the Senate.

The world is a scary place. We need leaders who are capable of protecting the American people and America’s role in the world.

My decades of leadership experience demonstrate I’m equipped for this dangerous moment, and I’d be honored to carry the torch as the new U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania.

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

“On February 24 (2022), I woke to the sound of explosions. Of course, my first reaction was to panic, and I didn’t know what to do. At that time, my son was three and a half months old,” said Anna Zaitseva. “My husband worked at Azovstal at the time. I called him, and he told me the best thing to do was to go down to the bunkers of Azvostal.”

Zaitseva’s story is one of more than 81,000 accounts from civilian survivors of the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine that are archived in the new Museum of Civilian Voices.

Natalya Yemchenko, a spokeswoman for the museum, told DVJournal the project began in 2014 when Russia invaded Crimea. Separatists took over government buildings in two eastern provinces, Donetsk and Luhansk, declaring they were part of Russia, leading to fighting for control of those areas.

The Rinat Akhmetov Foundation sent teams with kits of supplies to survivors, eventually helping to save 3.5 million people, according to its website. The group found survivors who received food also wanted to talk about their experiences, their survival, and their losses. When they told their stories, it helped ease their post-traumatic stress disorder.

The teams recording those civilian accounts include journalists and psychologists, said Yemchenko. The stories are from the point of view of the person telling them.

Because Zaitseva’s husband had been in the military and knew the Russian attack was moving quickly, “He said we might not have time to hide. So, we decided we would take the essentials and go down there (into the bunker).” Her parents, her husband, and her baby son came with her.

“I was a new mother,” she said. “This decision was such a challenge to me because once I came to Azovstal, I could not breastfeed my baby as I did not have breast milk.”

“The Ukrainian servicemen found formula and diapers,’ she said. “At first, I tried to save the formula because I didn’t know how long it would last…the baby was malnourished and didn’t see sunlight for two months…I could call it ‘steel motherhood.’”

Zaitseva spent 65 days in the Azovstal bunker with her baby. Before the full-scale invasion, she was a French teacher in Mariupol. Zaitseva’s husband, Kirill, is a former Marine. When his son was born, he left the military to be with his family. He found a job at the Azovstal Iron and Steel Works but later returned to the military and was later captured.

Zaitseva and the baby left the bunker under the auspices of the Red Cross, but their journey to freedom led them into a Russian filtration camp. There she was stripped naked, searched, berated by female Russian soldiers, and then interrogated because her husband was a soldier. The Russians data-mined the refugee’s cellphones and added trackers.

Hers is just one of many stories of brutality, tragedy, and survival the museum is collecting from the most massive military action in Europe since the end of World War Two.

Many of the stories are difficult to listen to.

Volodymyr Obodzinsky was at work when he learned that a Russian bomb hit and destroyed his house, killing his wife, son, daughter, and two grandchildren.

“Two air bombs came in from some Russian bastards (I don’t want to use curse language). One landed at the corner of the house, and the other bomb landed in the garden behind the garage. Three generations died here. I am the only one left,” said Obodzinsky. “Only our cat, dog, and I are left from our family.”

“No one is eternal, and my time will come too – a place [in the cemetery] has already been prepared for me,” said Obodzinsky. “But the memory must remain so that generations could know. Centuries will pass, but the memory of what the ‘Russian world’ is should stay. They are not worth even any curse words. Generations and centuries will pass, but people should know what the ‘Russian world’ is and whom it ‘helped’ in this life.”

Another survivor whose story is in the museum is Natalia Dedova, a television journalist who founded a charity, Marathon of Kindness. She was in her Mariupol apartment building with her husband, Viktor Dedov, a television cameraman, their son, Sasha, her mother, and her father-in-law when a Russian shell flew through the balcony door on March 11, 2022.

Viktor was in the kitchen cooking food when the first shell struck, she said.

“There was dust, concrete dust before my eyes, and the whole ceiling and some structures were collapsing upon us,” said Dedova. “I was screaming. Everything collapsed immediately.”

She and her mother suffered head wounds, though she believes their hats helped protect them. She called out for Sasha, and he answered.

“Then I realized we could not stay there (in the rubble) anymore,” Sasha said. “We needed to save ourselves.”

Later, Dedova looked for Viktor and found his body in the hallway in part of the building still standing. He was bleeding from a neck wound.

She said they were married 22 years and thought they had a future.

“It turned out that we had only today,” said Dedova. “Or rather, not even today.”

The testimonials are part of the museum’s online collection. They stand as a testament to the atrocities committed by Russia against Ukrainian civilians and as an emblem of Ukrainian resolve to remain a free and separate country.

The museum has an additional mission of countering Russian propaganda, Yemchenko acknowledged.

“The Russians say we don’t have a history; they try to take that away,” said Yemchenko.

The foundation hopes to work with a university to house its collection and possibly have a physical space someday. They envision an archive like Steven Spielberg’s Shoah Foundation at the University of Southern California.

“There are many, many moving stories,” said Yemchenko.

Eugene Luciw, a Ukrainian-American community organizer in the Delaware Valley, called the Museum of Civilian Voices “absolutely compelling.”

Manor College Dean Nicholas Rudnytky mentioned the old saying, “History is written by the victors.” But, with today’s technology, “we see that (slant) is simply no longer possible.”

“The democratic traditions entrenched in our consciousness along with generations of free-thinkers added to innovations in technology has ensured that the truth, with all its warts, contractions and hypocrisies, will be documented by someone somewhere and an official party-line from a state-sponsored source will never again be its sole font,” Rudnytky said.

“Future scholars are blessed (or cursed, depending on one’s view) of having a multitude of sources to sift through, connect and weave together to generate a proper tapestry of the past. To create and maintain a depository of such sundry sources, like what the Museum of Civilian Voices seeks to do, is of the utmost benefit to our society.

“Western scholars and Slavophiles as a whole, never properly examined, let alone challenged, the official party line that had been emanating from Moscow and St. Petersburg since the dawn of the 18th century when Russia emerged as a polity of immense proportions on the eastern frontier of Europe. The Russian denial of Ukraine and Ukrainians became a generational exercise that, seen through the focus of history, borders on the absurd,” he said.

“They denied the existence of the Ukrainian language by banning it (how or why would one even need to ban something that does not exist?) They denied the existence of the Ukrainian national consciousness by assassinating its leaders, liquidating its churches, and forcibly starving its population. They sought to erase Ukraine from any memory by renaming its lands and moving in whole villages from its more remote realms, all in the hopes of successfully usurping Kyiv’s long history and grand traditions as their own. They could not succeed.

“Even though, like today, the state in Russia controls the church, the media, and any other conduit it has to the hearts and minds of its denizens, they could never successfully succeed in their goal. Ukraine and Ukrainians endure.”

The Ukrainian diaspora is keeping their language and traditions alive, he said.

“With over 81,000 testaments, the Museum of Civilian Voices serves as a critical and important repository of their journeys, experiences, and truths. It not only will ensure that cries for justice against Russian atrocities never lack for witnesses but also serve as a testament to the undaunting and ever-enduring spirit of the Ukrainian people,” said Rudnytky.

And founder Rinat Akhmetov, a successful Ukrainian businessman, said, “I would like all these stories to stay un-erased from memory so that our memories remain forever. So that every human story from the Museum of Civilian Voices becomes a call to stop this terrible war and prevent such tragedies in the future.”

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

While most of her fellow Pennsylvania Democrats remain silent, Rep. Chrissy Houlahan is speaking out against the Biden administration’s plan to send cluster munitions to Ukraine.

Progressive groups and peace organizations are condemning the administration’s decision to send those weapons to the frontline of the Russia-Ukraine war. However, Keystone State Democrats — with the exception of far-left activists like Rep. Summer Lee (PA-12), have been silent rather than break with the White House.

Not the Delaware Valley’s Houlahan, an Air Force veteran.

“From the outset of Russia’s unjust war, I have been one of the most vocal and supportive members of Congress when it comes to providing Ukraine the resources and weapon systems they need to defend itself and its sovereignty,” said Houlahan (D-Chester/Berks). “I believe a victory for Ukraine is an essential victory for democracies across the globe, but that victory cannot come at the expense of our American values and thus democracy itself. Cluster munitions are indiscriminate, and I strongly oppose providing these weapons to Ukraine.”

“There are some who will say that these weapons are necessary to level the battlefield given Russia’s reported use of them. To those individuals, I challenge the notion that these weapons are the most effective support we can provide Ukraine right now,” Houlahan added. “I challenge the notion that we should employ the same tactics Russia is using, blurring the lines of moral high ground. And I challenge all of us to remember that this war will end, and the broken pieces of Ukraine will need to be rebuilt. History remembers not only who wins a war but also how a war is won.”

Cluster munitions, which the Russians are currently using against Ukrainian targets, are so controversial a 2008 treaty bans their use. However, neither the U.S. nor Ukraine are signatories to that agreement.

While cluster munitions can effectively target large areas, they have raised significant concerns due to their humanitarian impact. One main issue is the submunition’s high failure rate resulting in many unexploded bomblets that can pose long-term threats to civilians.

Nonetheless, President Joe Biden says Ukraine needs them.

Ironically, Biden’s representative to the United Nations, Linda Greenfield-Thomas, disavowed the use of cluster munitions in March 2022, according to The Washington Post. And during her time as Biden’s former White House spokesperson, Jen Psaki called Russia’s use of cluster munitions “potentially a war crime.”

Progressives and peace activists are pushing back while Pennsylvania Democrats remain largely silent.

“This decision is beyond disappointing and heartbreaking. Since the initial invasion in 2014, Russia and Ukraine have been actively fighting. More weapons, and certainly not more indiscriminate weapons, are not the answer. Diplomacy is,” said Bridget Moix,  general secretary of The Friends (Quaker) Committee on National Legislation.

Bob Smith, a founder and coordinator of the Brandywine Peace Community, said the Biden administration should “absolutely not” be sending cluster munitions to Ukraine.

“It not only crosses a line but raises the threshold of war and can only lead to more death,” said Smith. “For those of us who lived through the Vietnam War and were active during the Vietnam War, the cluster bomb has a particular image. It’s an image and was, at that time, and still is, an anti-personnel weapon. It’s not for destroying things or places or structures. It’s for killing people.”

“And I was horrified when I saw that President Biden had decided to go ahead and release U.S. cluster bombs to Ukraine,” Smith said. “The United States should have outlawed or should have banned cluster bombs (as other) countries around the world have already banned them.

“Why is it that our president doesn’t call for negotiations? Why doesn’t President Zelensky at least say, ‘Yes, negotiations are necessary’? Put the onus on the Russians,” Smith asked.

Veterans For Peace and other U.S. anti-war organizations will hold a rally on July 22 at the Scranton Army Ammunition Plant to oppose sending cluster bombs, and all weapons, into the Ukraine War and call for an immediate ceasefire.

But amid the controversy, there is total silence from the rest of the Delaware Valley delegation.

Reps. Madeleine Dean (D-Montgomery), Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Delaware/Philadelphia), and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Bucks) all chose not to respond to requests for comment about Biden’s decision. And as of press time, none of them had released a public statement on the issue.

The same with Pennsylvania U.S. Sens. John Fetterman and Bob Casey, who is up for re-election next year.

Houlahan is co-chair of the bipartisan Unexploded Ordinance (UXO)/Demining Caucus. She has strongly supported Ukraine and said the House will be debating and passing the National Defense Authorization Act this week.

“I have authored and supported numerous provisions in the NDAA supporting Ukraine’s defense, and I will enthusiastically advocate for those provisions as we pass the final bill. As discussions regarding support for Ukraine continue in the House, Senate, and White House, I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration to ensure we make the best possible decisions for the future of our nation and our globe.”

For Smith, the issue is far more simple.

“The problem is, in war, ultimately no one wins. And all that will be left is more killing.”

Please follow DVJournal on social media: Twitter@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal