DV Journal

Russia on Wednesday accused Ukraine of attempting to assassinate President Vladimir Putin by attacking his official residence using two unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The Kremlin claimed “timely actions taken by the military and special services” disabled the drones using electronic warfare systems, resulting in no casualties or damage.

But video footage aired on Russian state TV appears to show a small drone crashing into the dome atop the Kremlin’s Senate Palace. Minutes later, another drone attacks the same target from a different angle, this time exploding just above the dome as two individuals — presumably state personnel — climb stairs running up the roof. However, the damage appears to have been minor.

The strike’s impact is chiefly psychological. It could prompt Russia to redeploy additional air defense assets to Moscow, potentially leaving other areas more vulnerable. But otherwise, the incident has little direct military impact. According to Putin’s spokesman, the Russian leader wasn’t at the Kremlin when the strike occurred. (He usually spends most of his time at his other residences.) The Kremlin said Moscow “reserves the right to take countermeasures wherever and whenever it deems appropriate.” But short of employing weapons of mass destruction, which seems unlikely, there isn’t much Russia could do to Ukraine that it hasn’t already done or attempted.

Kyiv officially denied involvement in Wednesday’s strike. A senior U.S. defense official likewise said Ukrainian officials “assure us it was not them,” noting that Kyiv did not provide Washington with “a heads up about the drone strike.” However, Ukraine appears to have (unsuccessfully) launched UAVs toward Moscow on multiple previous occasions, most recently in late April. In most instances, the attempted strikes used the UJ-22 Airborne, a Ukrainian-made, propeller-driven drone with a reported range of 800 kilometers when using preprogrammed coordinates. (The Kremlin is around 450 kilometers from northeastern Ukraine.) It remains unclear what kind of UAV was used this time around, but the drones appear to have been winged, like the UJ-22. It’s also unclear whether the drones were launched from Ukrainian territory or within Russia, perhaps by Ukrainian special forces.

Although Moscow is well-defended by Russian air defense and electronic warfare systems, small drones flying low and slow can be difficult to detect. In addition to satellite guidance, the UJ-22 reportedly has an inertial guidance system, providing redundancy (but decreased accuracy) against GPS jamming. Russia has reportedly stepped up GPS jamming in Moscow following the Wednesday strikes.

These recent UAV attacks are part of a long line of Ukrainian drone strikes and sabotage operations against targets deep in the Russian rear. Over the last week alone, a Ukrainian drone strike last weekend set ablaze a fuel storage facility in Russian-occupied Crimea. In Bryansk Oblast, which borders Ukraine, explosions derailed two trains carrying fuel. Later, drone strikes reportedly caused fires at a handful of oil facilities in southwestern Russia. On Wednesday, Russian Telegram channels reported that Ukrainian drones had attacked a military airfield in the Bryansk region, damaging an out-of-service An-124 Ruslan heavy transport aircraft.

Ukraine’s Air Force Command said Russian bombers fired 23 Kh-101 or Kh-555 air-launched cruise missiles at targets in Ukraine early Friday morning, then another 18 early on Monday morning. These were Russia’s first large-scale missile strikes in almost two months, likely reflecting Russia’s dwindling stocks. The Ukrainian military said its forces downed all but five of the missiles. But at least 23 people, including four children, reportedly died after a Russian missile struck an apartment building in Uman, located in Cherkasy Oblast in central Ukraine. Cherkasy’s governor said another missile struck a warehouse in the region.

According to Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Yuriy Ihnat, Moscow’s strategy has shifted. Last October, Russia launched a missile and drone strike campaign targeting Ukraine’s critical infrastructure, particularly its power grid, apparently aiming to erode Ukrainian will to fight. But that effort failed. Now, Ihnat says Russia is chiefly targeting Ukrainian weapons depots. A Ukrainian military intelligence official gave a similar assessment back in March, saying Russia had reoriented its strike campaign to focus on Ukrainian military facilities, troop concentrations, and logistics systems.

Following its May 1 missile barrage, Russia’s Defense Ministry said its forces had destroyed Ukrainian military-industrial facilities. Russia appears to have hit Ukraine’s Pavlohrad Chemical Plant, which produced components and fuel for various Ukrainian missile and multiple-launch rocket systems. The enterprise also housed decommissioned SS-24 ICBMs, and many expired rocket fuel, which probably caused a powerful explosion following the strike. The explosion caused extensive damage to nearby buildings. According to Ukrainian sources, the strike killed at least two members of Ukraine’s National Guard, who apparently belonged to a military unit tasked with protecting the plant and other important state facilities.

On Tuesday and Wednesday night, Russia launched barrages of Iranian-made Shahed-136/131 “suicide drones” at targets across Ukraine, fired from Bryansk Oblast and the Sea of Azov’s eastern coast. Ukraine’s Air Force Command said Ukrainian troops downed 21 of 26 UAVs during the first strike and 18 of 24 during the second.

But three drones reportedly did hit an oil depot in Kropyvnytskyi, in central Ukraine. Local authorities said other drones struck the administration building in Dnipro, destroyed an unspecified infrastructure object, and damaged five high-rises in Kostiantynivka, the key supply hub for Bakhmut in eastern Ukraine. According to the Ukrainian military, most of the UAVs launched on Wednesday night targeted Odesa, and three managed to strike dormitories at an “educational institution” in the city but caused no casualties. Unconfirmed reports from Russian sources show a large pillar of smoke rising from what they claim is the Odesa Military Academy.

A spokeswoman from Ukraine’s Operational Command “South” said the drone strikes aimed to reveal the positions of Ukrainian air defense systems. According to the Ukrainian military, Russia has recently begun using Shahed drones to draw out Ukrainian air defenses and then target them using Lancet loitering munitions.

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

Alleged Leaker Arrested

Federal authorities on Thursday arrested a 21-year-old U.S. servicemember believed to be responsible for leaking hundreds of classified documents pertaining to the Russia-Ukraine war and other international issues. The leak has left Washington scrambling to address the fallout, including frustrations in Kyiv.

A researcher from the investigative outlet Bellingcat first traced the leak to an obscure chatgroup on Discord, a messaging platform popular with video gamers, where someone posted photos of classified documents over the last few months. Some of the documents later surfaced on the website 4Chan before circulating on the Russian social media app Telegram last week. After the initial leak, a portion of one document, concerning U.S. estimates of the number of Russian and Ukrainian troops killed in action, was sloppily altered to reduce Russia’s casualties and inflate Ukraine’s. So far, however, there’s been no evidence that other documents were altered or forged.

Once the leak came to light, the Pentagon and Justice Department launched investigations to determine its culprit, scope, and impact. Some of the documents are just over a month old, making their disclosure especially risky. Many contain potentially compromising information about intelligence sources and methods.

On Wednesday, The Washington Post, citing members of the Discord chatgroup, reported that the leaker, who administrated the chatgroup, works at an American military base. The leaker, whom The New York Times later identified as part of the Massachusetts Air National Guard’s intelligence wing, reportedly resented what he characterized as shadowy U.S. government operations. He allegedly shared transcriptions and eventually photos of hundreds of classified documents, posted in a private channel within the Discord chatgroup.

That channel reportedly comprised around 25 active members, roughly half of them foreigners, including from Russia and Ukraine. A senior U.S. official cited by The Post, along with Microsoft’s CEO, asserted that Russian intelligence operatives have previously sought to infiltrate gaming platforms such as Discord. But there’s been no public evidence thus far of Russian government involvement in the initial leak.

Kyiv Frustrated by Leak

The breach has frustrated Kyiv and could undermine its willingness to share sensitive information with the United States. Even after Russia’s invasion last year, the Ukrainians remained reluctant to share details regarding their operational plans, although they eventually grew more forthcoming.

Following the leak, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the rest of Ukraine’s Stavka, or high command, discussed measures to prevent further leaks, according to a press release from the president’s office. CNN later cited a source close to Zelenskyy as saying Ukraine had already altered some of its military plans due to the security breach.

Perhaps most damaging: One of the leaked documents, produced in early February, assessed that Ukraine’s spring offensive would likely achieve only “modest territorial gains.” The document pointed to Ukrainian shortages of equipment, ammunition, and well-trained troops, as well as to extensive fortified defensive lines Russia has built since last year. This revelation could provide fodder to American critics of U.S. aid for Ukraine.

But while it’s true that Kyiv will face daunting challenges in its spring counteroffensive and beyond, these obstacles are not insurmountable. Indeed, Ukraine’s battlefield prospects depend largely on whether the United States and its allies provide sufficient assistance. Kyiv needs additional armored fighting vehicles, plus mine-clearing and bridging equipment. To ease Ukraine’s shortage of artillery ammunition, Washington could send Kyiv DPICM artillery-fired cluster munitions.

The Ukrainian military also needs better long-range strike capabilities — something the country’s prime minister raised during a meeting with Pentagon chief Lloyd Austin on Wednesday. ATACMS missiles would enable Ukraine to hit key logistics nodes, command-and-control posts, and other high-value targets beyond the range of its current Western-supplied rocket artillery, thereby softening up Russian defenses.

Russia Gains Ground in Bakhmut

Moscow’s Wagner paramilitary group continues to push deeper into the eastern Ukrainian city of Bakhmut, while Russian Airborne elements support Wagner on city’s northern and southern flanks, according to the Russian Defense Ministry and Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin. Prigozhin claimed on Tuesday that Russia had taken 80 percent of Bakhmut, leaving just a western chunk of the city in Ukraine’s hands.

Russian forces indeed seem to have advanced around a kilometer in parts of central Bakhmut over the last week or so. Russian Telegram channels on Tuesday shared footage of Wagner fighters at a stadium near the center of the city, allegedly captured days earlier. A Ukrainian soldier in Bakhmut said on Thursday that Russian forces were assaulting a nearby rail station while Russian artillery and aircraft pound adjacent buildings.

The previous day, the soldier admitted he doesn’t know much longer Ukraine can continue to “fight the math” in Bakhmut, noting that Russian forces there “have many times more resources.” Another soldier said that despite repeated Russian assaults, Ukrainian troops continued to hold a key supply route into Bakhmut, dubbed the “road of life.”

It remains unclear how Ukraine will respond to Russia’s gains in Bakhmut, which has little inherent strategic value but has taken on symbolic importance for both sides. When Russia appeared poised to encircle Bakhmut earlier this year, Kyiv deployed reinforcements to hold the line. But continuing that strategy could hurt Ukraine in the long run, since Kyiv needs to husband its resources for the spring counteroffensive.

Florida governor Ron DeSantis, a shadow presidential candidate, recently minimized the salience of continued U.S. support to Ukraine, portraying the Russian invasion of that country as a “territorial dispute” and claiming that it was not among “vital national interests” for the United States. He was roundly pilloried by other Republican candidates, hawkish Republican establishment politicians and, of course, Democrats as a rube, know-nothing governor with no foreign policy experience. 

Yet DeSantis’ position has some merit.

Although DeSantis is technically correct that the conflict between Ukraine and Russia has devolved into a “territorial dispute,” that was not Vladimir Putin’s original intention. He intended for his military to waltz into Kyiv, take the country quickly and make Ukraine a puppet state, somewhat like he has with Belarus to its north. However, the Ukrainians chose to stymie that goal, fighting tenaciously and skillfully to repel grossly incompetent Russian forces. As a result, Putin has had to settle into what likely will be a protracted conflict in Ukraine’s east and southeast to salvage what territory the Russian invasion initially grabbed as Ukraine tries to claw it back.

However, DeSantis’ minimization of the brutal Russian invasion and current large-scale conflagration as a mere “territorial dispute,” although technically correct, is a gross underplaying of what is happening to the hundreds of thousands on both sides who have already died or been wounded. In short, the war in Ukraine is the largest conflict in Europe since World War II and thus could have important ramifications — although not necessarily for the United States.

Although the focus of the outrage was in reaction to DeSantis’ minimization of the conflict as a mere “territorial dispute,” his comment about the conflict not being among U.S. “vital national interests” was a more important point — because it is correct.

This is not 1945, in which Europe and East Asia smoldered in ruin after World War II, thus leaving the largely untouched United States representing half of the world’s gross domestic product. Now the overstretched United States accounts for less than 16 percent of the world’s GDP, yet 38 percent of global military spending; it has accumulated almost $32 trillion in national debt — a not insignificant part of which has been incurred in policing the world, including the long and largely unneeded wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia and others as part of the excessive global “war on terror.”

With China continuing to rise, the United States should not again get distracted — as it has been for almost two decades in the greater Middle East — on Ukraine.

Russia, as demonstrated by its massive bungling in Ukraine, is far less of a long-term conventional threat to the faraway United States than it is to the much closer countries of Europe. The wealthy Europeans, who combined have a larger GDP than the United States, should take over the military support for Ukraine — either by providing arms or funding their purchase — against a relatively poor Russia, which has a GDP less than that of Germany alone.

Because the United States can no longer afford to police the world, it should regard Europe as an “economy of force” theater, let the rich Europeans do more for their own security, and redirect even more attention and resources to Asia. The United States has been trying to “pivot to Asia” since the Obama administration, but it always gets distracted by the latest flare-ups elsewhere.

Although the Europeans will argue that they provide more economic aid to Ukraine than the United States, the United States is outstripping all the Europeans combined in military aid to that country. That is fine for the Europeans because temporary economic aid to Ukraine is cheaper than permanently building up their security capabilities to contain even a severely weakened Russia. Why increase spending on security when the United States is providing it?

Contrary to hysteria in the pundit class, DeSantis is correct that even if all of Ukraine fell to Russia, it would not affect vital U.S. security interests — during the Cold War, the United States lived with a Soviet Union that contained Ukraine — although it might make Europe very nervous. Even then, the Russian military had already been so depleted and exhausted by the Ukrainians that it should give the Europeans time to build up their militaries. Because Ukraine is not a vital U.S. security interest, the United States should at least demand that the Europeans take over the supply of military and economic aid to the Ukrainians.

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

Fresh off a surprise visit to Kyiv, President Biden vowed Tuesday that America “will not tire” in its support for Ukraine. To deliver on that commitment, Biden must hold together the bipartisan coalition that’s given Ukraine generous military assistance. Immediately granting Kyiv’s requests for ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile System) missiles could help Ukraine retake additional territory and show Congress that U.S. assistance is paying dividends.

Despite Russia’s battlefield failures, Putin remains determined. He has mobilized hundreds of thousands of troops and appointed a new commander tasked with taking the rest of Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region. The early stages of that offensive are underway.

Kyiv is planning its own counteroffensive, widely expected to occur this spring. To help, the West has stepped up training for Ukrainian troops and pledged additional tanks, armored vehicles and materiel, while Kyiv is mobilizing more soldiers and building additional units.

The good news: Russia’s battered military, increasingly reliant on poorly trained troops, probably can’t pull off large-scale offensive operations — a fact perhaps lost on Putin, who seems impatient for success.

The bad news: That’s not the only way Moscow could potentially salvage the war. Putin likely predicts that if Ukraine’s counteroffensive fails and the conflict grinds on with no end in sight, Western resolve will wane — and with it, the money and materiel on which Kyiv’s war effort depends.

Ukraine has solid prospects for success. Its military has proven it can achieve results when adequately resourced.

Ukraine’s previous counteroffensives in the country’s south and east capitalized on Russian manpower shortages. But Russia’s forces in Ukraine have roughly doubled, thanks to mobilization, and now have considerably less territory to defend following Russia’s retreats last year. Meanwhile, Russia has built fortified defensive lines stretching across the battlefield.

The war will likely drag on through 2023 and beyond. If so, Ukraine’s Western support will face two interrelated threats.

The first concerns the availability of military aid, particularly artillery ammunition. For all the attention on tanks and fighter jets, artillery remains central to this war. With its stocks of Soviet-made munitions largely exhausted and its defense industry decimated, Kyiv depends on Western supplies. But Western stockpiles are dwindling, and Ukrainian artillery shell consumption far outstrips Western production. All told, annual U.S. and European production would last Ukraine about three months.

Washington is working to increase output, and the EU is mulling similar measures. But production won’t increase significantly until next year, meaning the West must dig deep over the medium term. Although Moscow faces its challenges with ammunition stocks and production, Russia’s defense industrial base is running on a war footing and doesn’t face commercial and regulatory constraints that impede Western industry.

The Pentagon hopes that helping Ukraine’s military transition to a style of fighting that emphasizes maneuver rather than artillery-centric attritional warfare will reduce artillery consumption. Ukraine has conducted successful maneuvers only where Russian lines were weak. Kyiv will likely enjoy no such luxury going forward.

The second threat concerns political support. Most American lawmakers recognize that aid for Ukraine represents a cost-effective investment in U.S. security. Yet a small but vocal minority staunchly opposes further assistance. A growing number of voters, particularly conservatives, similarly question whether to continue aiding Kyiv.

Funding from the Ukraine aid bill Congress passed in December will run out as early as this summer, meaning lawmakers must agree on another one. As U.S. officials have warned Kyiv, that bill will be tougher to pass.

If Ukraine’s counteroffensive stalls, these challenges could compound. Western policymakers may be reluctant to invest in what many will wrongly diagnose as a stalemate. In fact, the conflict will remain an intense war of attrition; Ukraine’s military will need a steady supply of aid lest Russia gradually grinds it down. Some will be tempted to push Kyiv toward peace talks, even though Putin has shown no interest in peace and would likely exploit a potential ceasefire to gather Russia’s strength for a follow-on war.

Biden can get ahead by immediately granting Kyiv’s repeated requests for ATACMS missiles. This system, whose range far exceeds Ukraine’s current Western-supplied rocket artillery, can help blunt Moscow’s offensive and weaken Russia’s ability to resist Ukrainian advances. Also, ATACMS can help reduce Kyiv’s artillery shell consumption by facilitating maneuver while facilitating Ukrainian gains that inspire further Western support.

In Kyiv, Biden reiterated his pledge to support Ukraine “for as long as it takes.” What he does now will go a long way toward determining how long that is.

For an alternate view see: “Counterpoint: U.S. Should Turn Ukraine War Over to Its European Allies”

War, it is rightly said, is the realm of uncertainty. This mantra is worth chanting on the looming first anniversary of Russia’s renewed invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. The ways in which Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the Ukrainian army have defied predictions have been well cataloged, though perhaps not fully digested in some Western quarters. So, instead of imagining how and when the war will end, it is far better to ask the right questions than to guess at answers.

The most important question is: How should we define this war? Properly understood, the defense of Ukraine is a war cocooned in a larger war to contain Russian imperialist aggression. Should the “hot” Ukrainian war end with Kyiv’s original borders reclaimed, a “colder” contest still would have to be fought in the “gray zones” of information, ideology and influence. It would long continue as the antagonism between liberal Western societies and Russian autocracy is fundamental. Anticipating a “frozen conflict” is wise, although it very much matters where the iceberg begins and whether it continues to shrink or grows again.

Even in the Ukrainian context, a chill has set in that will likely last through the year, as Ukrainians have begun to look past 2023 in their desire to regain full sovereignty. To start with, they realize that modern Western weaponry, though imparting a critical qualitative advantage, will arrive slower, or in sufficient quantity, for a genuinely decisive counteroffensive. While one may hope that President Biden and his cautious advisers have learned that there is a real prospect of Ukrainian success, they have taken too long to do so and still lack the needed sense of urgency in providing the Ukrainian army with the tools required.

By contrast, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has reacted with greater agility to the opportunity offered by the winter pause on the battlefield. While his tactics have been gruesome — throwing conscripts and convict infantry against Ukrainian lines in the Donbas near the town of Bahkmut — they have exacted a heavy price in Ukrainian manpower. Another Russian innovation has been waves of drone and missile attacks on power grids, other infrastructure and civilian targets. None of these represents a path to the complete victory Putin desires, that being the re-absorption of Ukraine into a revived Russian empire. But he has taken the bloom off the rose of triumphalism that flowered in the wake of the Kharkiv counteroffensive last fall.

Having painted this current dark and bloody portrait, the prospect of a Ukrainian victory seems more distant, but it remains, in fact, real and realizable. The Ukrainian military has lost some of its best and most experienced fighters, but those who come next, with cadres increasingly trained in the West to execute more complex combined-arms campaigns, will arguably enjoy a greater tactical advantage over their enemies. The Russians cannot recruit, equip or train enough competent soldiers and pilots. There is also a widening morale and motivation gap. For Ukraine, this is undeniably a great patriotic war, while despite Putin’s propaganda efforts, it is not that for Russia. Putin cannot overcome his “Fatherland Deficit.”

Ukrainian victory is also highly dependent on continued Western support, and that means, first and foremost, American support. Biden has thus far paced U.S. weapons transfers to remain more or less in step with America’s European allies; he has been especially deferential to the Hamlet-like doubts of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.

That’s going to be increasingly difficult to do: the Eastern European states who have been most generous in donating their own stocks of Warsaw Pact-era equipment don’t have much more to give, and, as the late kerfuffle over German-made Leopard tanks has shown, neither do the West Europeans.

The European cupboard is bare, and only the United States retains the kind of stockpiles and defense industrial capacity to sustain the effort to build up Ukrainian capability and capacity.

Many critics of Biden’s policy have made a zero-sum argument: support for Ukraine comes at the expense of U.S. interests in East Asia. This is not only a military misunderstanding — the kinds of forces needed for a land war in central Europe differ from those optimal for air-sea operations in the western Pacific — but also a misunderstanding of American strategy. In the realm of uncertainty, this remains a constant: superpowers cannot “pivot,” but must act globally and in the long run.

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

Late last year, the Pennsylvania Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee held a hearing in Philadelphia about the city’s critical role in boosting liquified natural gas exports – and the positive geopolitical and climate impacts that come along with it.

Nobody knew, however, because no reporters in the region bothered to show up. Aside from a few costumed protestors who would clearly favor Russian domination over the global energy market and the continued pollution and warmongering their LNG offers, no one came to hear what labor unions, gas companies and European business and climate experts had to say.

This is strange considering the overwhelming support for aiding Ukraine and stopping Russia’s totalitarian advances. It’s even more unusual considering the overwhelming scientific evidence illustrating a direct correlation between LNG and lowered greenhouse gas emissions worldwide over the next decade.

But that’s okay. I’ll tell you what they had to say. EQT, the nation’s largest producer of natural gas, told the committee they are just 26 months away from net zero status. This is critical since the energy crisis – looming over us for years, but exacerbated by inflation, the invasion of Ukraine and the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline – will reverse, at an unprecedented level, two decades of emissions decline.

You see, the United States doesn’t exist in a vacuum and so, every investment in wind and solar energy we’ve made since 2007 proves insufficient to offset even one year of fossil fuel emissions from the rest of the world. Boosting American LNG exports – of which a Philadelphia port makes entirely possible – has the potential to reduce these harmful emissions at a rate equivalent to electrifying every car in the country, installing solar on every home and doubling our wind capacity, combined.

We’ve seen it firsthand stateside. From 2005 to 2019, 61 percent of our emissions reduction came from our cleaner, more efficient production of natural gas. Our gas transition reduced more pollution than the other top five countries combined. It’s simple to extrapolate from there.

Pennsylvania produces roughly 22 percent of all domestic natural gas production and could replace nearly three-quarters of Russian gas currently imported into Europe. China, as it makes its own gas transition in the coming decade, would likewise turn to us for LNG, further immobilizing Russia’s war machine and any further turmoil President Vladimir Putin may cause.

That’s what central and eastern Europe need most, Ivo Konstanitov told us. He’s the U.S. Office Director for the American Chamber of Commerce in Bulgaria and knows firsthand the devastation of weaponized LNG. He advocated for America – particularly Pennsylvania and nearby states – to extend necessary infrastructure to share its plentiful natural gas supply with Europe.

This aid alone, he said, would better protect Ukraine and other vulnerable countries from tyrannical governments. Fortunately, last year, the Biden administration said it will send an additional 15 billion cubic tons of LNG to Europe to see it through at least the end of 2022, staving off the worst impacts of Russia turning off the proverbial tap. Unfortunately, it’s clear Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is continuing.

So is record inflation and, as Konstanitov told us, demand for energy – both domestically and globally. That’s where Pennsylvania – rich in natural gas, pipelines and the necessary workforce – comes into the picture.

President Biden is going to need help if the United States is to continue propping up the European energy market. An LNG terminal in Philadelphia would connect Pennsylvania LNG to the world, fully unleashing the potential beneath our feet and restoring energy independence to this country.

Last session, state Rep. Martina White (R-Philadelphia) authored legislation, House Bill 2458 (Act 133 of 2022), that would create a task force to study making the Port of Philadelphia an export terminal for LNG. The task force, which includes members of the General Assembly, natural gas industry, Philadelphia building trades and other leaders in the region, is expected to produce a report by November 2023.

Jim Snell, business manager for the Steamfitters Local 420, serves on the newly created task force. He told us recent international affairs have silenced some LNG opponents, many of whom once allowed their ideology to blind them to the reality that a rush to renewables creates: higher prices and weakened domestic and international security.

And although building infrastructure to meet this demand won’t be easy, Snell said, the several hundred members of Steamfitters Local 420 have the expertise and skills necessary to do the job. They already service Pennsylvania’s existing pipeline distribution system and the organization, itself, boasts nearly 120 years of experience constructing, installing and maintaining mechanical systems.

The union believes so much in the power of LNG that it offered to host our Senate hearing last year. Snell said himself there could be no more appropriate venue than it’s Philadelphia headquarters. It’s not just the steamfitters that have jobs tied to LNG expansion.

EQT estimates building out our infrastructure would create an additional 200,000 high-paying jobs across Appalachia, generating both global decarbonization and an economic boom bolstered by tens of billions in royalty payments to landowners. All of that could be achieved without costing taxpayers a single dime. So now you know what’s at stake and how solutions exist that don’t require more government spending and regulation.

Now you know that carbon neutrality and the renewable revolution can’t be reached without an LNG transition. And maybe, just maybe, the institutions responsible for sharing the bigger picture won’t get sidetracked by the narrow lens through which they view progress.

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

From a press release

Wednesday, Representative Chrissy Houlahan (D-Chester/Berks) returned from a 6-day congressional delegation to Finland and Norway where she and other members of Congress met with European security officials. The bipartisan meetings occurred amidst Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine, which was a central focus of the discussions. During the trip, which Houlahan organized, the group met with U.S. Marines stationed in Norway.

“As President Biden prepares to sign the annual defense bill into law and welcomes Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to our nation’s capital, the congressional delegation happened at a pivotal moment for U.S. national security,” said Houlahan. “I’m a proud and active member of the House Armed Services Committee, and I owe it to our service members, their families, and the American people to better understand the very real global threats we face and how best to confront those threats. I organized this bipartisan trip to fulfill that responsibility. Traveling to Finland, whose accession to NATO is currently pending, and Norway was a remarkable opportunity to hear directly from our allies who have a front row seat to Putin’s aggression. I will take all that I’ve learned and return to Congress to share my experiences with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle.”

Houlahan added: “When our allies are fighting for democracy, we are, too. I’ve been a vocal supporter of aid to Ukraine, and, as a veteran, I know that our support should not be split along political lines. I was glad to again have the partnership of Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.), whom I previously traveled to Ukraine with just weeks before Russia’s invasion.”

In addition to Green, the Republican co-lead for the trip, Houlahan was joined by colleagues Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), and Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.), House Armed Services Committee staff, and official representatives from the U.S. Department of Defense.

“The Arctic region is critical to countering Russian and Chinese aggression, which is why it’s imperative that we continue to work together with our allies to ensure peace and prosperity in the region,” said Green. “Our bipartisan House Armed Services Committee delegation to Finland and Norway participated in key meetings with government officials and our partners in the Arctic Council. It was also imperative for us to hear from those on the ground firsthand the impacts—both short and long term—of the U.S. Coast Guard’s lack of adequate icebreakers. I’m grateful for my committee colleagues, including Rep. Houlahan, for their continued commitment to stymie malign influence and strengthen the US-Finland-Norway relations.”

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

Andriy Putilov is lucky to be alive.

Putilov, a Ukrainian politician, survived hardship and loss since the Russian invasion of Ukraine. After enduring 70 days of torture and abuse as a Russian political prisoner, he brought his story to the Ukrainian Cultural Center in Jenkintown recently.

Speaking to an audience with many fluent in Ukrainian and Russian, the former governor and member of Ukraine’s parliament detailed his April 9 capture and detainment for 70 days in a small, earthen cell. He had successfully moved his family out of the violence that engulfed the Kherson province in Eastern Ukraine. Still, he was captured when he returned to the family home after days of hiding in various safe apartments.

“They beat us with sticks,” Putilov said of his captors through translator Nadia Gordynksy. “Those people who watched us, they were like very elaborate Gestapo forces.”

Putilov claimed the Russians view Ukrainians as “subhumans” and marveled at their cruelty. He also claimed the invaders attempted to create and use biological weapons against the Ukrainians. Reports from the invasion, now in its eighth month, have cataloged numerous war crimes and other despicable acts.

“They hate us on a molecular level,” Putilov said of the Russians.

During his capture, Putilov underwent some profound changes. Despite serving in the national parliament, he was used to speaking a blend of Russian and Ukrainian, more familiar to Eastern Ukraine, as he did during the speech Saturday. Since the invasion, he has made an effort to improve his fluency in Ukrainian.

He also had a spiritual awakening. Eastern Ukraine is more multi-faith and less religious than the country’s western region. Putilov said he prayed for the first time on his knees while imprisoned, praying as much as 10 times a day. He credits his “faith in God” for helping him get through his captivity.

The Russians offered Putilov a position in the occupying government, based on his experience in administration, using what he described as KGB tactics to persuade him. He refused, saying he would prefer to die than aid his captors. After what Putilov called a “show trial” for actions against occupied areas of Ukraine and terrorism charges, he was finally freed as part of a prisoner exchange.

After his release, Putilov traveled to the United States, where he has family, and asked the state government for assistance. He met with Gov. Tom Wolf (D) to discuss an “agreement of friendship” and creating a sister-state relationship with Kherson. As of March, Pennsylvania has 122,000 residents of Ukrainian descent, the second highest in the U.S.

Toward the end of the talk, U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Bucks/Montgomery) stopped by. The Ukraine and Ukrainian American Caucus co-chair acknowledged that “war fatigue” has set in as the invasion has gone on. The ranking member of the Foreign Affairs subcommittee that covers Europe admitted war fatigue is slowing further aid to the resistance.

“[The invasion] goes from the front page to the back page of the news,” Fitzpatrick said. “That’s the problem. We’re trying to keep it front and center, also to educate my colleagues and the people of America why it is so important to support the people of Ukraine and protect freedom against dictatorship.”

Cultural Center president Eugene A. Luciw also discussed the importance of backing the Ukrainians. Before the invasion, the country enjoyed progress toward more technology. Many residents who left Ukraine to live in Europe are now moving back.

“[Putilov gave us] a revitalized view of our mission,” Luciw said afterward. “It is not only to sustain, which is extremely important, the approximately 12 to 13 million displaced Ukrainians in Europe and even here in the United States, but sustain them in a way that creates the steps that Ukraine will win the war and ultimately restore itself so the people have hope and prayer that they can return to their homes and live a very fruitful life.”

The Ukrainian Cultural Center has helped refugees coming to the area since the invasion started in February. Those services have been offered in addition to their regular actions in the community, from dinners to operating a credit union. Members have also sent clothing, medical items, and other supplies to embattled Ukraine.

The Biden administration is doing what every administration pre-Trump has done: Get enamored and entangled in matters of foreign intrigue preferred by the intelligence community and defense contractors. While leaving the country to the whims of the market, a market that increasingly follows the whims of Washington. We’ve gone from America First to America Last.

Ukraine first!

The U.S. government has easily found over $42 billion and counting to send to war torn, bankrupt Ukraine. Both parties agreed to this in what basically amounted to an overnight session of Congress. The decision was made in a matter of days.

By comparison, the $50 billion we are supposed to give to the U.S. semiconductor industry in tax breaks and other incentives to manufacture chips here instead of Asia languishes in Congress. It is part of the Bipartisan Innovation Act (BIA), which will take a back seat to more funding and more votes on throwing money into Ukraine. This thing is lost.

Global Foundries, Intel, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing have all put plans to boost their semiconductor manufacturing here on hold because the CHIPS for America Act, part of the House and Senate’s so-called “China competition bill” (officially the BIA) is going nowhere fast, Nikkei Asia reported on July 5.

The war in Ukraine has caused commodity prices to rise. The market is speculating on shortages caused by shipping delays. Commodity traders from New York to Hong Kong are all pushing those prices higher based on assessed geopolitical risks.

China second!

Biden thinks rolling back tariffs on China will help. His team is actively in talks with the Chinese about which Trump-era tariffs to lower. They believe if they reduce tariffs on China imports, stubborn inflation will come down.

Apparently, the experts that are in charge now believe we import oil and gas from China, along with steaks and milk. Please don’t bother telling them, they’ll ignore you. They’re smarter than you.

They’ll also ignored the Peterson Institute for International Economics, no fan of the China tariffs. One would think the Biden administration would listen to them at least. Peterson economists wrote in a report dated June 3 that “the direct effect of removing tariffs on imports from China could lower consumer price index inflation by 0.26 percentage points —only marginally reducing inflation.”

That “marginally reducing inflation” assumes housing, food, and gasoline prices fall. If they rise, there goes your 0.26 percent win.

America last!

Because of these policies, a whopping 88 percent of Americans polled by Monmouth University say the U.S. is heading in the wrong direction.

Some 42 percent say they are struggling to remain where they are financially.

It’s fine, we can afford to send our oil and gas to the rich Europeans and a few billion to the Ukrainians, one of the most corrupt countries in the world, based on Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index. (It’s ranked lower than Russia.) I am certain the Ukrainians will be good stewards of our gifts.  They want even more, by the way, so how about making that $65 billion?

Polls also show American voters are fine with China tariffs. The White House, and its cheerleaders at Bloomberg which has been advocating for a return to the status quo with China since Biden beat Trump, aren’t interested.

In April, a poll by the Coalition for a Prosperous America, conducted by Morning Consult, showed that 73 percent of American voters supported tough trade policies with China to protect U.S. industries and American workers. Biden then ignored them and removed tariffs on Southeast Asian solar producers, mostly all of them Chinese multinationals who have relocated there to avoid tariffs.

A high 71 percent of voters support tariffs on China. And 61 percent of them said increased imports have caused the U.S. to become dependent on China for goods that are critical to the U.S. economy and U.S. national security.

In May, a separate poll by Morning Consult said that Democrats supported tariffs on China in line with Republican voters. Democrat support was increasing. Biden’s support is waning. Who are this man’s voters again?

Morning Consult said, “Democrats now find themselves aligned with the plurality of Republicans who prefer to keep the tariffs in place, even if doing so means prices will stay high.”

There is a chance “only some” tariffs will be removed. But it is the trend that is the problem. It is chipping away at what U.S. trade representative Katherine Tai has repeatedly called our biggest leverage on China.

If China was smart, it would keep its retaliatory tariffs on the U.S. At this point, what is Washington going to do about it? In a policy of Ukraine first, China second, and the U.S. last, the answer should be obvious to Beijing–it will do absolutely nothing.

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

Dear Friends,

A lot has changed from the last time we talked. What putin* planned to accomplish in less than a week turned into four months of an atrocious war with almost 1 million Ukrainians losing their homes, over 7 million refugees fleeing the country, and almost 3,000 missile strikes on different regions of Ukraine—what russians claimed to be attacks on military facilities, now turned into the blunt and vicious bombings of civilians, with hundreds of innocent people burned and killed, 344 of those – children.

Four months and counting.

They don’t give up on the idea of capturing the south of Ukraine and controlling both Azov and the Black Sea, and if all goes well, they move further. Meaning they want to capture the whole of Ukraine. At the same time, they spread the Ukraine fatigue rhetoric in Europe, lie about attacking “only military objects,” threaten with global hunger, call foreign politicians names, and leave all their dead on the battlefield. When it seems like they’ve reached the bottom, we see them reaching and breaking new limits again and again.

You asked what actions the U.S. could take to help. I will name a few not only for America but for the whole world.

Number one – boycott. You mentioned russian vodka. Well, their vodka is the easiest product the world can boycott. Oil and gas, other commodities, food, cars, arts, and literature – I could continue the list, but I guess you’ve got the idea. Boycotting literally everything of russian origin speeds up their complete isolation and turns the aggressor into a pariah. Governments across the world should accelerate action to make large businesses leave russia and impose stricter trade limitations (if not bans).

By the way, Belarus joined the club long ago and deserves serious response and sanctions too.

Number two – #ArmUkraineNow. We deeply appreciate the collective response of the West to the russian aggression in Ukraine. What we need now is the West holding the line. Continue standing with Ukraine and helping us resist. Ukraine fatigue is a sinister media narrative, especially considering the russian threats to Poland and the Baltics, which could unleash World War III. Weapons and financial aid that Ukraine already received or expects to receive have been unprecedented. However, we continue losing thousands of our men and women every day while the decisions in the cabinets are being made. Whenever possible, faster decision-making should be considered – it literally saves lives.

Number three – help us punish the killers for the thousands of their war crimes. I mean the international levers of influence enabling Ukraine to claim and recover damages done to our infrastructure, housing stock, people, and cultural heritage. Recently, Canada has become the first country to adopt legislation that allows seizing Russian assets and transferring them to Ukraine. Large global economies should do the same. We know it can take decades to make russia liable for its crimes, just as it was with the fascists in the Nuremberg process or with the genocide architects in the former Yugoslavia. To elaborate the mechanism for the liability of russia, the world has to start now.

Number four – russians came to exterminate us, to break our backbone. Please help us make the russian state liable for the thousands of forcible deportations for the way they treat Ukrainian captives. What they do is deliberate extermination. All our people must be returned home. Take five minutes to read the interview with Yuliya Payevska; a Ukrainian paramedic recently saved from russian captivity. Isn’t that genocide?

They came to break the backbones not only of the Ukrainian people but even of our pets. Yesterday I read the news about a dog named Lys (Fox in English) found in Kyiv region in a trash pit. Although alive, he had a vertebrae fracture, russian soldiers also broke his feet and then mined him. What kind of a creature is capable of that hatred? Would you sit to negotiate peace and then shake hands over the agreement with barbarians?

And number five –donate. Did you hear about Ukrainians donating around $ 20 million to buy 4 Bayraktars (unmanned aerial vehicles) in 3 days? Be like us, stand with us, and help us prevail.

*EDITOR’S NOTE: putin and russia are not capitalized to show her disdain for the aggressors.

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