Jacoby for Bulwark: Why Ukraine Fights

By Tamar Jacoby

One of the most popular memes circulating on Ukrainian social media in the past year used an image, first popularized on Russian social media, of a grotesque creature with the body of a fish and the snout of a pig—a shvino karas, or pig fish. “A few decades ago, almost all Ukrainian popular culture was derivative of something Russian,” online meme curator and web developer Bohdan Andrieiev, 32, explained. “Before independence and for more than a decade afterward, we had no popular culture of our own.” This has changed dramatically in recent years, culminating in a burst of new Ukrainian creativity since the Russian invasion in February 2022. Social media, meme culture, pop music, and viral jokes have emerged as powerful tools of national solidarity—the bottom-up, ironic Ukrainian equivalent of old-style totalitarian propaganda.

According to Andrieiev, virtually none of this new popular culture draws on Russian sources—that’s now widely seen as inappropriate. “But this is an exception,” he said, “because we’re inverting the reference. It’s like the word ‘queer.’ What was a slur is now a badge of pride. Russians call Ukrainians pigs and pig fish and look down on us. But if we’re so pathetic, how come we’re beating them on the battlefield?”

Even after a year of intensive media coverage of the war in Ukraine, it’s easy to forget how new the Ukrainian nation is. In 1987, when Ronald Reagan admonished Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to “tear down this wall,” Ukraine was still part of the Soviet Union—the rough political equivalent of a U.S. state. Ukrainians had their own language and folk traditions and there had been a few short-lived attempts over the years to form a Ukrainian government. But not until 1991 did Ukrainians establish an independent nation—and even then, the shadow of the Soviet Union hung heavily over the new country, both politically and culturally.

Read more in Bulwark.

Marshall for The Hill: Dictators stalk the free world again

Almost exactly a century ago, Benito Mussolini seized power in Italy and Joseph Stalin took control of the Soviet Union. These events marked the origins of fascist and communist totalitarianism, which soon gave rise to Adolf Hitler in Germany and lit the fuse for both World War II and the Cold War.

That era seemed to come to an end in 1989, when the Berlin Wall came down and the Soviet Union started to implode. Popular uprisings toppled tyrants, and liberalizing winds swept the globe.

But the totalitarian idea is making a comeback today thanks to Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping. Like their predecessors, these dictators are dangerous because they have designs on others’ territory, few domestic checks on their power and contempt for the resilience and resolve of free societies.

Read more in The Hill.

Jacoby for American Purpose: Safeguarding Ukraine’s Civil Society

By Tamar Jacoby, Director of the New Ukraine Project

Following a wave of Russian attacks, there was no electricity in Kyiv’s Obolonskyi district administration building—essentially a neighborhood town hall—on the day the local council was formed. I had come to Kyiv to explore how the democratic reforms and nation-building so vibrant in Ukraine before the Russian invasion were faring in wartime; this was my first stop. Some three dozen nonprofit volunteers, legal aid lawyers, municipal officials, and people displaced from their homes in other parts of Ukraine—what experts call internally displaced persons or IDPs—sat in the dark in the ornate Soviet-era meeting hall. The wan winter sunshine filtering in past brocade curtains barely cast enough light to see by, but the activists didn’t seem to notice—they were so excited to be moving forward.

This ad hoc coalition of city officials and civil society advocates had gathered to talk about the needs of the estimated 30,000 IDPs who had settled in Obolon in the year since the Russian invasion. Their vision for the “IDP Council” they were launching: that activists would collect information about the migrants’ needs, and government would use it to tailor more effective services. The nonprofit organization spearheading the project, Charity Foundation Stabilization Support Services, was providing humanitarian aid to displaced people across Ukraine. The group says that it has distributed food and other basic supplies to more than 300,000 internal migrants since last February. But this was different, a step up the food chain—humanitarian help combined with grassroots democracy building. The new council’s motto: “Nothing about IDPs without IDPs.”

Read more In American Purpose

Jacoby for New York Post: How Ukrainians are learning to live with the war sirens

By Tamar Jacoby, Director of the New Ukraine Project

 

President Biden’s visit to Kyiv this past week was met with jubilation across Ukraine. Ukrainian friends messaged me with glowing thanks. A bartender who knows I’m American offered me a drink on the house. The president’s trip underscored what Biden has often said – that America will stand by Ukraine “as long as it takes.”

Nothing made this point more viscerally for Ukrainians than the way Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky ignored the air-raid siren screaming in the background as they walked across the square in front of golden-domed St. Michael’s Cathedral on Monday. For Ukrainians, air raid sirens are a weekly if not daily scourge, and everyone knows what it’s like to decide, should I heed this one or not?

Read more In New York Post.

Jacoby to Lead PPI New Ukraine Project from Kyiv

Russia’s illegal invasion and brutal occupation of Ukraine will soon enter its second year. The Progressive Policy Institute is marking the occasion by launching a New Ukraine Project to report on the war, its impact on everyday life in Ukraine, and its wider implications for peace and international security.

Directing the project from Kyiv is Tamar Jacoby, a prominent journalist, author, and thought leader widely respected for her work on immigration, the struggles of working class Americans, and public school reform. In addition to her dispatches from the front lines of the conflict, her work will focus on the social, economic, and political reconstruction of Ukraine, as it seeks to take its place in Europe’s free and democratic community.

“Every American has a stake in Ukraine’s war of independence, which in many ways resembles our own break from a different empire,” said PPI President Will Marshall. “We are fortunate to have in Tamar Jacoby an astute witness to the history that is being made on the ground today in eastern Europe.”

See this dispatch from Jacoby just published in The Washington Monthly on what Ukrainians want to know about America’s support for their cause.

“The war in Ukraine isn’t just another regional conflict,” Tamar Jacoby said. “Everything we hold dear as Americans — our fundamental liberal values — hangs in the balance. Can the international order prevent brutal imperialist aggression? How should the West respond to an emerging nation willing to risk everything to embrace democratic ideals? What are and aren’t we willing to do to protect human rights and human dignity? And then, beyond ideals, there’s the actual threat: If we don’t stop Russia in Ukraine, where will the story end — who will Putin blackmail next, with oil or gas or grain or weapons of mass destruction? It’s a privilege to be on the ground witnessing what’s happening and telling the story for American readers.”

“Having Tamar interpret the daily successes and struggles of Ukrainians during this Putin invasion will help Americans appreciate that our commitment to Ukraine needs to go beyond the battlefields and well after the Russians retreat: helping Ukraine create a sustainable democracy is the victory the people of Ukraine deserve and the defeat that will define Putin failures,” said Lindsay Mark Lewis, Executive Director of the Progressive Policy Institute.

This is the third major international project for PPI, with PPI Brussels established in 2018, and the Project on Center-Left Renewal based in the U.K., established in January of 2023.

Tamar Jacoby is currently based in Kyiv, Ukraine. She is the president of Opportunity America, a Washington-based nonprofit working to promote economic mobility, and a former journalist and author. She was a senior writer and justice editor at Newsweek and, before that, the deputy editor of The New York Times op-ed page. Her articles have appeared in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The Weekly Standard and Foreign Affairs, among other publications. She is the author of “Someone Else’s House: America’s Unfinished Struggle for Integration” and “Displaced: The Ukrainian Refugee Experience.” Her edited volumes include “Reinventing the Melting Pot: The New Immigrants and What It Means To Be American” and “This Way Up: New Thinking About Poverty and Economic Mobility.”

The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.

Follow PPI on Twitter: @ppi

Find an expert at PPI.

###

Media Contact: Aaron White; awhite@ppionline.org

Jacoby for Washington Monthly: After Biden’s Visit to Kyiv, Ukrainians Welcome U.S. Aid but Plead for More

By Tamar Jacoby, Director of the New Ukraine Project

When President Joe Biden touched down in Kyiv on February 20, it was more than another secret presidential trip like the visits Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama made to Afghanistan and Iraq. There was no stealthy meeting with American troops, no photo op on a base in an American theatre of operations. Biden’s goal was to demonstrate American support for a democratic ally fighting the most devastating war in Europe since 1945. Not even Franklin Roosevelt did this. He never visited London during the Blitz, choosing to meet Winston Churchill on safer ground in Washington, Casablanca, Tehran, and Yalta. That Biden’s visit came on the anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine made it all the more significant as a show of determination to halt Vladimir Putin’s push to crush a democratic neighbor. “I thought it was critical that there not be any doubt, none whatsoever, about U.S. support for Ukraine,” Mr. Biden said.

Andrey Dubenko is the co-owner of a small shopping mall on the river between Bucha and Irpin, two of the Kyiv suburbs that saw the worst fighting in the weeks after Russia’s invasion last February. The boundary between the two towns—one was occupied through the next month, the other remained in Ukrainian hands—became the front line. Air strikes, artillery fire, and hand-to-hand combat in the parking lot gutted Dubenko’s mall. Now the 54-year-old investor and developer, a man old enough to have served in the Soviet army in the 1980s, is rebuilding and optimistic. But he is also unflinchingly clear-eyed about who will determine what happens in Ukraine. “When will the war end?” he asks rhetorically. “That will be decided by Americans. The war will end when the U.S. wants it to end – when they stop sending weapons and ammunition.”

Read more in Washington Monthly.

Marshall for The Hill: Ukraine Dispels the Myth of American Decline

By Will Marshall, President of PPI

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s vicious mauling of Ukraine is shattering quite a few grand illusions about the post-post-Cold War world.

For starters, Russia’s failure to defeat its much smaller and poorer neighbor has demolished its image as a military juggernaut. Instead of confirming its status as a great power and pillar of a new, multipolar world order, Putin’s war has exposed Russia as a declining power — at best a junior partner in the new league of autocracies directed from Beijing.

Plagued by old equipment, bad logistics and poor leadership, Russian troops have been outfought by determined Ukrainian defenders. In just under a year, the war has cost Russia “significantly” more than 100,000 casualties, says General Mark Milley, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. That’s more in one year than Russia suffered in a decade of war in Afghanistan.

Read more in The Hill.

Marshall for The Hill: Is Germany ready to lead?

By Will Marshall, President and Founder of PPI.

Maybe Europeans are not from Venus after all. In a rare display of unity and resolve, they are pouring advanced weapons into Ukraine, expanding NATO, kicking their addiction to Russian gas and tightening the economic squeeze on Moscow.

With the reprehensible exception of Viktor Orban’s Hungary, our European allies seem determined to thwart Russian President Vladimir Putin’s brutish attempt to dismember Ukraine if not erase it from the map altogether. To the surprise of many Americans, the creaky old transatlantic alliance is beginning to look like a strategic asset again.

Sweden and Finland, strictly neutral during the Cold War, are joining NATO. That’s confronted Putin with a new, 800-mile northern border with the defensive alliance he loathes and falsely claims poses an offensive threat to Russia.

But the most consequential shift in Europe’s dovish zeitgeist has occurred in Germany. Stung to action by Putin’s second invasion of Ukraine in February, Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced a “Zeitenwende” – turning point – in the quasi-pacifist drift of Germany’s post-Cold War diplomacy. Instead of the usual humanitarian aid, he promised to send Kiev weapons for self-defense and to boost Germany’s military spending by $100 billion a year.

Read the full piece in The Hill. 

Marshall for the Hill: Autocracy won’t make Russia great

By Will Marshall, President of PPI

Since his election as president in 2000, Vladimir Putin has methodically consolidated power in his hands with the expressed aim of making Russia great again. Instead, he’s diminished his country’s power and global standing in every respect but one — Moscow’s ability to threaten its neighbors with nuclear weapons.

Russian observers have characterized Putin’s increasingly autocratic reign as a tacit pact with Russian society: The Kremlin won’t interfere in the everyday lives of citizens if they stay out of politics. It’s a bad bargain for the Russian people.

For one thing, it’s cost them a rare shot at governing themselves after centuries of czarist and totalitarian despotism. Over the past two decades, Putin has steadily snuffed out post-Soviet Russia’s incipient democracy — rigging elections, jailing dissidents and journalists, suppressing independent civic associations and colluding in the assassination of regime critics at home and around the world.

Read the full piece in The Hill. 

Regulating Tech in the Digital Age: Lessons from China


Regulating Tech in the Digital Age: Lessons from China

Wednesday, September 7, 2022

5:30 p.m. — 8:30 p.m.

Open Gov Hub

1100 13th St NW Suite 800, Washington, DC 20005

About this event

How is China approaching tech regulation? What should policymakers and regulators learn from China’s approach? And how should this impact the way the rest of the global community approaches China?

Join us for an expert panel discussion on tech regulation, geopolitics and globalism. Stay for a reception with light bites and beverages as we bring together the DC tech policy community with the Tony Blair Institute’s London, Singapore and San Francisco teams.

The Panel

Max Beverton-Palmer (Moderator) – Director, Internet Policy at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change

Xiaomeng Lu – Director, Geo-technology at Eurasia Group

Matt Nguyen – Policy Lead, Internet Policy at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change

Jordan Shapiro – Economic and Data Policy Analyst at Progressive Policy Institute

Prof. Jing Tsu – Professor at Yale University

 

RSVP here.

Marshall for The Hill: How to Stop Putin in Ukraine

By Will Marshall, President and Founder of PPI

Six months after invading Ukraine, not much has gone right for Russian strongman Vladimir Putin. But it’s dangerous for despots to admit defeat, so he’s doubling down on death and destruction in hopes of salvaging something he can call a win.

Having failed to topple Ukraine’s government or overwhelm its highly motivated defense forces on the ground, Putin is settling into a grinding war of attrition, featuring World War II-style leveling of cities and terror attacks on civilians.

His aim is to seize more land along Ukraine’s eastern and southern borders that adjoins territories already contested by pro-Russian separatists following Putin’s 2014 incursion. U.S. officials expect Moscow to declare its intent to “annex” the conquered terrain, just as it did with Crimea.

In this way, Putin would have something to show Russians for the horrendous butcher’s bill he’s running up. CIA director Bill Burns last week estimated that 15,000 Russian soldiers have been killed so far and as many as 45,000 have been wounded.

Since Ukraine is fiercely resisting its piecemeal dismemberment and occupation by Russia, the fighting could continue indefinitely. Putin shows no interest in negotiating an end to the war, either because he still believes he can break Ukraine, or, more likely, because he thinks a military stalemate works in his favor.

This calculation rests on unflattering assessments of the West’s strategic stamina. As long as the NATO countries keep supplying Kiev with weapons and financial support and enforcing suffocating sanctions on Russia’s economy, Ukraine probably can hold out against its bigger and heavily armed neighbor.

Read the full piece in The Hill.

Marshall for The Hill: Putin sets the stage for NATO’s second act

By Will Marshall, President of PPI

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) – the most successful and enduring mutual security pact in history – is about to start its second act. In Act 1, the United States played the leading role in deterring Russian aggression and keeping the peace in Europe. In Act 2, Europeans will take center stage.

With longtime neutrals Sweden and Finland knocking on its door, NATO likely will grow to 32 members. For the transatlantic allies, however, the wise course isn’t merely to expand NATO, but to reinvent it.

How to seize that opportunity – which goes well beyond hackneyed calls for greater “burden-sharing” – should be the focal point of NATO’s Madrid summit later this month.

NATO should be fundamentally reconfigured to reflect three geopolitical realities. First, since its creation in 1949, the alliance has expanded dramatically as many of Europe’s ancient feuds and rivalries have been subsumed within pan-European values and institutions.

Second, NATO’s 27 European members (excluding Turkey) vastly exceed Russia in economic clout, population and military spending. Third, America inexorably is turning its strategic gaze to China and the balance of power in Asia.

Read the full piece in The Hill. 

The War in Ukraine Highlights a New Era in Information Warfare

The war in Ukraine has relied heavily on information warfare and the struggle to control the global narrative. It has highlighted both the impact that online campaigns can have on international crises, as well as the danger posed by false information on internet platforms. Social media-based disinformation is not the unknown threat it once was, but despite acknowledgement by internet platforms, online users, and American public officials that state-sponsored disinformation was likely to disseminate in the days following the Russian invasion, false claims have succeeded in blunting the world’s overwhelmingly adverse global reaction to Putin’s war. The response to this disinformation makes it clear that while we have learned from some of the mistakes of the past, false claims persist in both online and traditional media. Internet platforms have had to assume a defensive role, and right-leaning American media sources have echoed an online narrative consistent with that of the Russian state, further blurring the line between fact and fiction. Now, as we approach two months since the Russian invasion, it is important to assess what has worked well as a defense against false claims, as well as where state-backed disinformation continues to spread.

Given the familiar history of Russian weaponization of internet platforms for political purposes, the online propaganda offensive is hardly a surprise. In fact, the battle to frame the “special military operation” as essential to Russian security predates the invasion, with the European Expert Association identifying the dissemination of online rumors aimed at justifying the invasion of Ukraine sourced in Russian news media as early as October 2021.

This reality of Russian-backed disinformation on social media is a familiar one for many Americans following the 2016 election, during which at least 10.4 million tweets, 61,500 Facebook posts, and 116,000 Instagram posts were traced back to Russian state actors looking to influence the campaign debate. Since then, the question of how to counter false information online has shaken global politics, from claims of misinformation regarding the pandemic to the question of online censorship. As a result, global governments and online platforms were better prepared to combat disinformation than they have been in past conflicts.

The Biden administration’s decision to get out early and make public intelligence about Putin’s intent to invade Ukraine was hugely successful. It drowned out Russian state propaganda depicting Ukrainian leaders as “Nazis,” threatening Russian security. In early February, President Biden warned of the potential for a false flag operation under which Putin would invade Ukraine in response to some staged provocation. Despite Moscow’s claims that the Ukrainian government had plans to attack separatist regions of the country, the attempts to justify the invasion as a preemptive strike fell flat with a global audience. At the same time, social media posts coming out of Ukraine quickly went viral, leading to an outpouring of international sympathy and solidarity. Russian propagandists could not compete with vivid posts and videos capturing the horrors of war — for example, scenes of conditions in bomb shelters or one video of a Ukrainian vlogger being interrupted by a nearby missile strike. At this point, Russia was clearly losing the “information war.”

However, as the war continues, Russian disinformation has gained more traction online. For example, a map posted on left-wing websites showed recent airstrikes in in Syria, Yemen, and Somalia.  Evidently its purpose was to underscore that all conflicts are deserving of progressives’ attention, not just the war in Ukraine. However, the first iteration of the image was posted by Redfish, a company staffed by former employees of the state-run outlet Russia Today. More recently, Moscow has filled social media with bogus claims that Ukraine is developing biological weapons funded by the United States. In fact, these supposedly sinister “biolabs” are a part of a longstanding U.S. program to support public health infrastructure in former Soviet countries. The story gained mainstream attention in the U.S. after the Russian Defense Ministry put out a statement claiming that funding for the biolabs could be traced back to Hunter Biden and George Soros, a preposterous claim that nonetheless has parroted in the U.S. by Fox News’s Tucker Carlson and some popular conservative podcasts.

This echoing of Kremlin propaganda on the Trumpist right shows that much work remains to be done to combat the deliberate pollution of online discourse with lies. The Biden administration should continue to wield accurate U.S. intelligence on what’s happening in Ukraine and in Putin’s ruling circle in Moscow. Washington should also redouble efforts to counter disinformation in countries friendly to Russia, including China, Brazil, and India. Additionally, while the value of an informed public holds its own weight, the urgency is heightened when one considers how the online narrative around the war has shaped real world outcomes. The early surge of online support for Ukraine unified the Western democracies in condemning and calling for tough economic sanctions on Russia and provoked an outpouring of donations to Ukraine from internet users, including $67 million in cryptocurrency.

Particularly considering these implications, moderation of online content and safeguards against state-sponsored propaganda online are critical in controlling the spread of harmful disinformation. U.S. lawmakers should encourage and support social media platforms in stepping up efforts to filter out lies and propaganda and support an ongoing push for media literacy to equip Americans with tools necessary to defend themselves against online disinformation. The recent proliferation of fables such as the Ukrainian American biolabs show that, although platform companies are more aware of and prepared to deal with disinformation than they were in the past, bogus information and conspiracy theories will still get through. The United States, which led the world into the digital age, must now take the lead in separating fact from fiction online.

Marshall for The Hill: Biden Faces Down Putin

By Will Marshall

Russian President Vladimir Putin has a Siberia-sized chip on his shoulder. He hasn’t gotten over the unraveling of the once-mighty Soviet Union, which he served as a KGB agent, and he doesn’t think the West pays sufficient attention to Russia’s security interests.

What’s a strongman to do? Threaten war, of course. Putin has amassed over 100,000 troops on the border of Ukraine, which Russia already has invaded once (in 2014) to forcibly annex Crimea.

As Ukrainian forces continue to battle pro-Russia separatists in the country’s Donbas region, a second invasion is a plausible threat. To defuse it, the Biden administration dispatched diplomats to meet their Russian counterparts in Geneva Monday. At Russia’s insistence, neither Ukraine nor European nations were invited to this parley, an omission that reflects Putin’s disdain for Europe and nostalgia for Cold War-style summitry.

Here’s the gun-to-the-head deal Russian diplomats put on the table: Russia won’t invade Ukraine if Washington agrees to halt NATO’s eastward expansion, and dismantle military infrastructure in Eastern European countries that have joined the alliance. They presented draft security treaties obliging NATO to rescind its 2008 offer of membership to Ukraine and Georgia.

Read the full piece in The Hill. 

EU’s Reliance on Dirty Russian Gas – a Climate and Geopolitical Crisis

 

Join the Progressive Policy Institute’s Paul Bledsoe for a virtual educational webinar for Congressional staff on how the European Union’s reliance on imports of methane-heavy Russian gas is undermining international climate goals and funding a geopolitical crisis.

The briefing will dive deep into Paul Bledsoe’s recent report, entitled  “The Role of Natural Gas in Limiting European Union Emissions: Key Opportunities to Cut Methane, Coal and CO2.”

The dominance of Russia in the European gas market is troubling — with Russia providing nearly half of total EU gas imports in 2020. This Russian natural gas has extremely high rates of fugitive emissions of methane, a super-potent greenhouse gas, and is a leading factor in Russia being by far the world’s largest methane emitter.

However, the United States can reduce the EU’s reliance on Russian gas. The Biden Administration, Congress, and the U.S. natural gas industry are beginning to undertake a series of strategic steps to make U.S. gas super-low emitting compared to gas from Russia and other major exporters.

WHAT: Virtual Congressional briefing for staff and interns

WHEN: Wednesday, January 26; 1:00-2:00pm ET; Zoom

PANELISTS:
Paul Bledsoe, Senior Advisor to the Progressive Policy Institute and former Communications Director of the Clinton White House Climate Change Task Force
Additional Panelists TBA

Download the Full Report.

RSVP Here.

Please note: This bipartisan briefing is open to all Congressional staff and interns. The panel will share policy proposals to address this issue.

Marshall for The Hill: Can France turn back the nationalist tide?

By Will Marshall

Brexit is done and U.S. voters have fired Donald Trump, but the neo-nationalist uprising that gave rise to both continues to shake up transatlantic politics. No country has seen its traditional political order more thoroughly fractured than France.

President Emmanuel Macron, who is running for reelection next spring, leads a centrist party he created in a tour de force of political improvisation after leaving the Socialist Party shortly before his 2017 election. Long France’s leading party of the left, the Socialists have been decimated. Their presidential candidate, Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo, barely registers in the polls with about 4 percent support.

The wild card in the race is Eric Zemmour, a political neophyte many observers are calling the French Trump. He is a writer and television pundit whose best-selling book, “Le Suicide Francais,” contends that immigration, globalization and a fast-growing Muslim minority represent fundamental threats to French values and culture.

Read the full piece in The Hill.