Connect with us

World News

Ukraine fears being left in cold as Congress battles over Israel on November 4, 2023 at 10:00 am

Published

on

With the world’s attention shifting to the Israel-Hamas war, Ukraine fears it is being left behind as it continues a costly struggle against Russian forces and anxiously waits on Congress to pass another aid package before the winter sets in. 

Ukraine was already concerned before the Gaza war broke out, after Congress failed to include funding for Kyiv in a temporary government spending bill because a faction of House Republicans fiercely resisted it. 

And the House this week voted to approve a $14 billion package for Israel without Ukraine aid, rejecting a request from President Biden to combine assistance for the two countries in one package, along funds for Taiwan and U.S. border security.

Kira Rudik, a member of Ukraine’s parliament, said she remains hopeful that Congress will ultimately pass new Ukraine funding, but was “worried” as U.S. elections inch closer and complicate the debate.

Advertisement

“I cannot begin to tell you how it feels being here in Ukraine, talking to people whose ability to fight depends on the decisions that are being made somewhere so far away,” she told The Hill. 

“It will have such a huge, gigantic influence on the real life of real people here that have no influence over” Congress, she said of another assistance package, “but whose life will be absolutely changed if the decision will be made late or will not be made at all.” 

Newly elected Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has floated a plan to tie Ukrainian assistance to border security and has expressed a willingness to support Kyiv despite past votes against Ukraine aid. 

But he insists that Israel aid move separately from Ukraine funding, which could complicate its passage given growing GOP skepticism about ongoing support for Kyiv. 

Advertisement

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), an ardent Ukraine supporter who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, backed Johnson’s plan to separate Ukraine aid from Israel assistance, saying a combined package could delay urgent funding for Israel. 

“I’m optimistic we’ll get it done,” Bacon told The Hill. “The more I hear [Johnson] talk, the more confident I am that we can have confidence in him.” 

“Doing it with border security gets more Republicans on board,” he added. “If you just did Ukraine by itself … we would lose about half of Republicans.” 

Johnson has said the Ukraine aid and border security package will move next, following the Israel legislation, which also includes deep cuts to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) budget. 

Advertisement

The Israel package is facing resistance in the Senate, where Democrats want to combine Israel and Ukraine funding and are opposed to cuts to the IRS in the House-passed legislation. 

Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), who for hours held up a vote on the short-term government spending plan in September because it did not include Ukraine aid, said he would not support any legislation that fails to combine Ukraine and Israel. 

“House Republicans are turning their backs on the people of Ukraine,” Bennet said in a statement. “This is a significant test of America’s resolve. This is a moment where the rest of the world is watching how America chooses to lead.” 

The Biden administration has also slammed the House Israel bill and Biden has vowed to veto the legislation, in part because it does not include Ukraine funding. 

Advertisement

“This is an urgent requirement — as Ukraine heads into a winter of unrelenting attacks on its civilian infrastructure, they need air defense to protect their cities,” the Office of Management and Budget said in a statement

With more political roadblocks ahead, existing money for Ukraine is running out fast — just as fears of a stalemate in its was with Russia are rising. 

Winter is coming soon, and troops will need a steady flow of supplies to keep up an ongoing counteroffensive in the south. Ukraine will also struggle to keep its people warm and safe as Russia is expected to continue targeting energy infrastructure. 

European allies can step in to assist, but the U.S. is the largest supporter of Ukraine and would leave an unfillable hole, said Catherine Sendak, director of the Transatlantic Defense and Security program at the Center for European Policy Analysis. 

Advertisement

“The ability for partners to meet that demand is going to be a really, really hard conversation and I really hope we don’t get to that point,” she said.  

Sendak said if Washington fails to step up to the plate, it will also signal to both allies and Russia the pro-Ukraine alliance is cracking. 

“The situation will get very hard because so many look to the U.S. to lead on action,” she added. “It is absolutely prudent upon the U.S. to lead on this effort, which means being out in front of supporting assistance.” 

To help make the case to the American people about why Ukraine matters, Biden delivered an Oval Office address last month and underscored that it was vital for the U.S. to protect its allies in order to keep the peace at home.

Advertisement

Support for Ukraine is still an area of bipartisan agreement, especially among national security experts. More than 300 former secretaries, ambassadors, senior diplomats and military leaders from Republican and Democratic administrations sent a letter last month to Congress urging lawmakers to pass Ukraine aid.

But a growing number of Americans, particularly in the Republican party, are cautious about continued support for Ukraine without a clear objective to end the war. 

Ukraine’s counteroffensive, too, has struggled five months into the operation. Forces have made some progress in the southeast but are largely stuck against a bulwark of Russian lines. 

Russia has launched its own offensives but is also stalled. And both sides are taking enormous losses. 

Advertisement

Ukraine’s military commander, Gen. Valery Zaluzhny, added to the skepticism this week when he warned the war was reaching a “stalemate.” 

“There will most likely be no deep and beautiful breakthrough,” he told The Economist

The failure to make any significant progress also comes as the U.S. and other world powers are focusing attention on Israel, which is ramping up its war against the Palestinian militant group Hamas. 

That divided attention is worrying for Ukraine, which fears that western citizens are growing tired of the war with Russia — as Time Magazine highlighted in an article published this week.

Advertisement

“It’s logical,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told Time. “Of course we lose out from the events in the Middle East. People are dying, and the world’s help is needed there to save lives, to save humanity.”

But Zelensky said he still believes with strong conviction that Ukraine can win.

Anton Gerashchenko, an advisor to the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, said “many Ukrainians treated the article from Time very emotionally.”

“The topic of Ukraine has definitely mostly disappeared from the informational agenda,” he posted on X. “Global media have mostly stopped mentioning us or discussing us. Ukrainian leadership and Ukrainian people see that.”

Advertisement

Rudik, the Ukrainian lawmaker, said the Israel-Hamas war makes it even more vital to keep Kyiv in the fight against Russia.

Echoing Biden’s argument for taking on both fights simultaneously, she described the common enemy as “countries that want to bet on instability and countries that unite to commit terrorist attacks and continue terrorizing democracies.” 

“What we see,” she said, “is the result of a bigger global problem.”

​ With the world’s attention shifting to the Israel-Hamas war, Ukraine fears it is being left behind as it continues a costly struggle against Russian forces and anxiously waits on Congress to pass another aid package before the winter sets in. Ukraine was already concerned before the Gaza war broke out, after Congress failed to include… 

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Will Kim Ju Ae Become North Korea’s First Female Leader?

Published

on

A New Face of Power in Pyongyang

In a country defined by secrecy and dynastic rule, the recent emergence of Kim Ju Ae—the daughter of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un—on the national and international stage has sparked intense speculation about the future of the world’s most isolated regime. For the first time since North Korea’s founding in 1948, the possibility of a female leader is being openly discussed, as state media and public ceremonies increasingly feature the teenage girl at her father’s side.

Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead

Kim Ju Ae’s Rise to Prominence

Kim Ju Ae, believed to be around 12 or 13 years old, first came to the world’s attention in 2013 when former NBA star Dennis Rodman revealed he had held Kim Jong Un’s daughter during a visit to Pyongyang. However, she remained out of the public eye until November 2022, when she appeared beside her father at the launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile—a powerful symbol in North Korean propaganda.

Since then, Ju Ae has become a regular fixture at high-profile events, from military parades and weapons launches to the grand opening of a water park and the unveiling of new naval ships. Her repeated appearances are unprecedented for a member of the Kim family so young, especially a girl, and have led South Korean intelligence officials to suggest she is being groomed as her father’s successor.

The Power of Propaganda

North Korea’s state media has shifted its language regarding Ju Ae, referring to her as “beloved” and, more recently, “respected”—a term previously reserved for the nation’s highest dignitaries. Analysts believe this is part of a carefully orchestrated campaign to build her public profile and legitimize her as a future leader, signaling continuity and stability for the regime.

Presenting Ju Ae as the face of the next generation serves several purposes:

  • Demonstrating dynastic continuity: By showcasing his daughter, Kim Jong Un assures elites and the public that the Kim family’s grip on power will persist.
  • Minimizing internal threats: A young female successor is less likely to attract rival factions or pose an immediate threat to the current leadership.
  • Projecting a modern image: Her presence at both military and civilian events signals adaptability and a potential shift in North Korea’s traditionally patriarchal leadership structure.

Breaking with Tradition?

If Ju Ae is indeed being positioned as the next leader, it would mark a historic break from North Korea’s deeply patriarchal system. The country has never had a female ruler, and its military and political elite remain overwhelmingly male. However, her growing public profile and the respect shown to her by senior officials suggest that the regime is preparing the nation for the possibility of her ascension.

The only other woman with significant visibility and influence in the regime is Kim Yo Jong, Kim Jong Un’s younger sister, who has become a powerful figure in her own right, especially in matters of propaganda and foreign policy.

A Nation Divided, a Dynasty Endures

While the Kim family’s hold on North Korea appears unshakable, the country remains divided from South Korea by a heavily militarized border. Many families have been separated for generations, with little hope for reunification in the near future. As the Kim dynasty prepares its next generation for leadership, the longing for family reunions and peace persists on both sides of the border.

The Road Ahead

Kim Ju Ae’s future remains shrouded in mystery, much like the country she may one day lead. Her carefully managed public appearances, the reverence shown by state media, and her father’s apparent efforts to secure her place in the succession line all point to a regime intent on preserving its legacy while adapting to new realities. Whether North Korea is truly ready for its first female leader is uncertain, but the groundwork is clearly being laid for a new chapter in the Kim dynasty.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Pros and Cons of the Big Beautiful Bill

Published

on

The “Big Beautiful Bill” (officially the One Big Beautiful Bill Act) is a sweeping tax and spending package passed in July 2025. It makes permanent many Trump-era tax cuts, introduces new tax breaks for working Americans, and enacts deep cuts to federal safety-net programs. The bill also increases spending on border security and defense, while rolling back clean energy incentives and tightening requirements for social programs.

Pros

1. Tax Relief for Middle and Working-Class Families

2. Support for Small Businesses and Economic Growth

  • Makes the small business deduction permanent, supporting Main Street businesses.
  • Expands expensing for investment in short-lived assets and domestic R&D, which is considered pro-growth.

3. Increased Spending on Security and Infrastructure

4. Simplification and Fairness in the Tax Code

  • Expands the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and raises marginal rates on individuals earning over $400,000.
  • Closes various deductions and loopholes, especially those benefiting private equity and multinational corporations.

Cons

1. Deep Cuts to Social Safety Net Programs

  • Cuts Medicaid by approximately $930 billion and imposes new work requirements, which could leave millions without health insurance.
  • Tightens eligibility and work requirements for SNAP (food assistance), potentially removing benefits from many low-income families.
  • Rolls back student loan forgiveness and repeals Biden-era subsidies.

2. Increases the Federal Deficit

  • The bill is projected to add $3.3–4 trillion to the federal deficit over 10 years.
  • Critics argue that the combination of tax cuts and increased spending is fiscally irresponsible.

3. Benefits Skewed Toward the Wealthy

  • The largest income gains go to affluent Americans, with top earners seeing significant after-tax increases.
  • Critics describe the bill as the largest upward transfer of wealth in recent U.S. history.

4. Rollback of Clean Energy and Climate Incentives

5. Potential Harm to Healthcare and Rural Hospitals

6. Public and Political Backlash

  • The bill is unpopular in public polls and is seen as a political risk for its supporters.
  • Critics warn it will widen the gap between rich and poor and reverse progress on alternative energy and healthcare.

Summary Table

ProsCons
Permanent middle-class tax cutsDeep Medicaid and SNAP cuts
No tax on tips/overtime for most workersMillions may lose health insurance
Doubled Child Tax CreditAdds $3.3–4T to deficit
Small business supportBenefits skewed to wealthy
Increased border/defense spendingClean energy incentives eliminated
Simplifies some tax provisionsThreatens rural hospitals
Public backlash, political risk

In summary:
The Big Beautiful Bill delivers significant tax relief and new benefits for many working and middle-class Americans, but it does so at the cost of deep cuts to social programs, a higher federal deficit, and reduced support for clean energy and healthcare. The bill is highly polarizing, with supporters touting its pro-growth and pro-family provisions, while critics warn of increased inequality and harm to vulnerable populations.

Continue Reading

Business

Trump Threatens to ‘Take a Look’ at Deporting Elon Musk Amid Explosive Feud

Published

on

The escalating conflict between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk reached a new peak this week, as Trump publicly suggested he would consider deporting the billionaire entrepreneur in response to Musk’s fierce criticism of the president’s signature tax and spending bill.

FILE PHOTO: Tesla CEO Elon Musk arrives on the red carpet for the automobile awards “Das Goldene Lenkrad” (The golden steering wheel) given by a German newspaper in Berlin, Germany, November 12, 2019. REUTERS/Hannibal Hanschke/File Photo

“I don’t know, we’ll have to take a look,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday when asked directly if he would deport Musk, who was born in South Africa but has been a U.S. citizen since 2002.

This threat followed a late-night post on Trump’s Truth Social platform, where he accused Musk of being the largest recipient of government subsidies in U.S. history. Trump claimed that without these supports, Musk “would likely have to shut down operations and return to South Africa,” and that ending such subsidies would mean “no more rocket launches, satellites, or electric vehicle production, and our nation would save a FORTUNE”.

Trump also invoked the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—a federal agency Musk previously led—as a potential tool to scrutinize Musk’s companies. “We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? The DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon,” Trump remarked, further intensifying the feud.

Background to the Feud

The rupture comes after Musk’s repeated attacks on Trump’s so-called “Big, Beautiful Bill,” a comprehensive spending and tax reform proposal that Musk has labeled a “disgusting abomination” and a threat to the nation’s fiscal health. Musk, once a Trump ally who contributed heavily to his election campaign and served as a government advisor, has called for the formation of a new political party, claiming the bill exposes the need for an alternative to the current two-party system.

Advertisement

In response, Trump’s allies have amplified questions about Musk’s citizenship and immigration history, with some suggesting an investigation into his naturalization process. However, legal experts note that deporting a naturalized U.S. citizen like Musk would be extremely difficult. The only path would involve denaturalization—a rare and complex legal process requiring proof of intentional fraud during the citizenship application, a standard typically reserved for the most egregious cases.

Political Fallout

Musk’s criticism has rattled some Republican lawmakers, who fear the feud could undermine their party’s unity ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Meanwhile, Musk has doubled down on his opposition, warning he will support primary challengers against Republicans who back Trump’s bill.

Key Points:

As the dispute continues, it has become a flashpoint in the broader debate over government spending, corporate subsidies, and political loyalty at the highest levels of American power.

Continue Reading

Trending