U.S. evaluating what Wagner Group rebellion means for Ukraine war

The whiplash-inducing events in Russia over the few hours have U.S. officials scurrying to understand what the Wagner Group’s now-stalled advance on Moscow means for Ukraine’s chances in its war against Russia.

Yevgeny Prigozhin’s Wagner Group mercenaries had taken the command center of Russia’s war in Ukraine in Rostov-on-Don while a column made its way northward toward the Kremlin. But Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko seemingly brokered an agreement that has the contractors heading back to unspecified “field camps” instead of seeking the overthrow of Russia’s military leadership.

“The moment has come when blood may spill. That’s why, understanding the responsibility for spilling Russian blood on one of the sides, we are turning back our convoys and going back to field camps according to the plan," Prigozhin said in a Saturday statement.

In the hours before the dramatic turnaround, when it seemed the mercenaries were planning for urban combat in Moscow, U.S. officials engaged in multiple interagency meetings Friday night and Saturday morning to assess its potential impact. They arrived at a preliminary consensus that the Wagner mercenary group’s insurrection would occupy the Kremlin’s attention. That would provide Ukraine with a much-needed opportunity to reverse the fortunes of its sputtering counteroffensive.

The Biden administration had yet to draw up a formal assessment and officials then cautioned it was too early for definitive conclusions.

"I don’t see how it could hurt them," said one of the senior administration officials. Others said it was likely to help, especially since Wagner overtook the Southern Military District headquarters, the epicenter of Russia’s operational management for the invasion.

The officials, granted permission to speak anonymously about the greatest challenge to Vladimir Putin in more than 20 years, said they were tracking Wagner forces into Rostov and now as they make their way northward toward the Russian capital. The local governor of the Lipetsk region, roughly six hours from Moscow, said Wagner troops drove through the oblast with armored vehicles Saturday morning. Russian military bloggers indicated that a Wagner advance reached the Moscow region.

Even Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy conceded his country’s counteroffensive hasn’t gone to plan as Russian airpower and dormant mines stalled Kyiv’s advances on multiple fronts. The Biden administration feared that a lack of clear success heading into next month’s NATO summit would erode alliance unity and complicate the politics of continued support for Ukraine. But Prigozhin’s play could change the calculus.

President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris were briefed Saturday by Cabinet-level officials — including Secretary of State Antony Blinken, national security adviser Jake Sullivan and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines — about the Wagner Group’s advances before Prigozhin’s stand down.

Gen. Mark Milley, chair of the Joint Chiefs, spoke with his Ukrainian counterpart, Gen. Valery Zaluzhnyy Saturday.

“I told him about the offensive and offensive actions of our units,” Zaluzhnyy said, according to a readout of the conversation. “I informed him that the operation is going in accordance with the plan.”

Biden also spoke Saturday about the situation in Russia with President Emmanuel Macron of France, Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany and Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of the United Kingdom.

Further, Blinken chatted with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba. “Ukraine remains focused on achieving the goals of its counteroffensive in the territory of Ukraine with the steadfast support of our American allies,” Kuleba said in a Saturday tweet.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin plans to speak to Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov later on Saturday.

A U.S. official said phone calls to European counterparts are focused on the effort to “reassure them” and also reinforce the need to message neutrality. “No one should be spiking the football.”

The general agreement on the calls between the U.S. and its European allies is that Kyiv now has an unprecedented opportunity to advance while a key mercenary force shifts its attention from holding Ukrainian positions to attacking points inside Russia.

Biden was scheduled to travel Saturday to Camp David — which is equipped with resources with which he could monitor the unfolding situation — but his departure for the presidential retreat in the Maryland woods was delayed until early Saturday afternoon.

Even if Putin quashes the rebellion, it could occupy the resources of the Russian military and would likely eliminate the use of the Wagner Group at the front, where it had proven successful against Ukrainian forces.

"Cracks in the Putin regime are wide and bright now. The Kremlin has to put the Prigozhin rebellion down with force to avoid it from threatening regime legitimacy," said Alina Polyakova, president and CEO of the Washington-based Center for European Policy Analysis.

NATO spokesperson Oana Lungescu said the military bloc is “monitoring the situation.” One early complication for NATO is that Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the president of Turkey, a NATO ally, already pledged his “full support” in a call with Putin Saturday.

But the open rebellion — and the ease with which Wagner took the military command center in Rostov, where the Kremlin controls its war on Ukraine — also vividly displayed the weakness of Russia’s military.

Officials cautioned that events over the next few hours and days were difficult to predict, as evidenced by the Lukashenko-brokered arrangement, from Putin swiftly putting down the insurrection to his grip on power slipping, as the myth of his total control over Russia shatters in real time. Administration figures said they couldn’t confirm Putin’s whereabouts.

And while U.S. officials currently believe Putin will remain in charge, there’s quiet fear inside the administration that the Russian leader could reach for the most catastrophic options available to him if he sniffs a challenge to his power.

No one in the White House would miss Putin, but there’s no evidence that Prigozhin — or at least someone aligned with him — would be any less dangerous. Any sort of tumult or coup in the country with the world’s largest nuclear arsenal would be an inherently deep concern, the officials said.

“This sort of instability is dangerous, no matter what the outcome,” said one U.S. official.

Paul McLeary and Myah Ward contributed to this report.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/O4ThWLc
via IFTTT

Read More

Amazon delays virtual care services unveiling after senators raised privacy concerns

Amazon is delaying the launch of a major expansion of its Amazon Clinic telemedicine service due to lawmakers’ concerns about its privacy practices that POLITICO detailed last week.

According to an email from a person with direct knowledge subsequently obtained by POLITICO, Amazon will hold off on a promotional campaign for three weeks, till July 19.

Currently, Amazon Clinic is available in 33 states and leans on asynchronous care, meaning patients fill out a form to get treated for conditions like urinary tract infections, acid reflux and pink eye as well as to receive emergency contraception and birth control.

Amazon had planned to announce a 50-state launch of synchronous care — treatment provided via live video — on Tuesday.

The company did not respond to a request for comment.

But the email says Amazon is delaying promotional activity because of POLITICO reporting on a letter from Sens. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) that raised concerns that the company is “harvesting” health data from patients. In the letter to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy, the lawmakers pointed to recent reporting that Amazon Clinic requires patients to sign a release giving the company “complete” access to their health information.

By signing, customers authorize Amazon to share their data, and acknowledge that it’s not protected by HIPAA, the federal health privacy law.

Sharing data among trusted providers is routine — and a goal of the health industry to promote better care — but lawmakers are concerned about protecting patient information as more of it goes online, data brokers sell it, and hackers try to steal it.

Warren and Welch asked Jassy to explain whether Amazon is using customer data to promote or sell other Amazon products and services, and to be more transparent with consumers about the company’s data practices.

The senators also want Amazon to provide a sample-contract with third-party providers that give care to Amazon Clinic enrollees, and to explain if it shares data with law enforcement.

“Amazon is asking patients to turn over a ton of personal data to use their services,” Welch told POLITICO by email. “It can’t be that Big Tech companies can ask for a treasure trove of personal information to let you use their services but face no accountability for what they’ll do with it.”

In a joint statement, the two senators said Friday they hoped the delay "is a sign that Amazon has taken our concerns about data collection and use practices seriously."

Amazon responds: An Amazon spokesperson previously said that the company complies with HIPAA and “all other applicable laws and regulations” and that it shares data with health providers treating patients to ensure the customers are properly cared for.

“Protecting customer data has always been incredibly important to Amazon, and we take our responsibility for safeguarding Protected Health Information very seriously. Amazon Clinic has stringent customer privacy policies,” the spokesperson said by email.

The planned expansion of virtual care services is Amazon’s latest go at telemedicine. Amazon shut down its Amazon Care business at the end of 2022 after a brief run offering telemedicine and in-home care.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/l3yIugZ
via IFTTT

Read More

Conservative rabble-rouser Matt Rosendale plans rematch against Jon Tester

Conservative Montana Rep. Matt Rosendale is plotting a Senate comeback bid — a move that's bound to revive the GOP's long-running battle over electability in key battleground races.

Rosendale has told lawmakers in both chambers that he plans to run for the nomination to take on Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) next year, according to two people familiar with those interactions who addressed the conversations on condition of anonymity. Conservatives are encouraging a run by Rosendale, who lost to Tester in 2018 and would almost certainly join the party’s right flank if he can topple the incumbent.

His timeline is unclear, but any campaign launch could set him on a collision course with Senate GOP leaders who are working to recruit a fresh face for the must-win contest. If Rosendale jumps in, a brutal primary could complicate the party’s chances of retaking the Senate.

In a statement to POLITICO, Rosendale did not deny telling colleagues about his plans and hinted at them by taking a shot at Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and touting a survey released this week by the Democratic-aligned Public Policy Polling firm. That poll found the congressman with a commanding lead over another prospective candidate.

Rosendale said the Senate race will be decided "by the people across Montana, not Mitch McConnell. This week, PPP released a poll that reflects Montanans took a major step towards that decision."

For now, Senate conservatives are welcoming their House colleague's interest. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said Rosendale would be a “terrific candidate.”

“I sure hope he does,” said Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) of a Rosendale run. “We could certainly use him in the Senate.”

Others in the party, though, are not as eager for a repeat of 2018. The National Republican Senatorial Committee is eyeing a different candidate to take on Tester: Tim Sheehy, a decorated former Navy SEAL who now runs an aerial firefighting company.

Sheehy is a political neophyte with no record to attack; he also boasts great personal wealth that he could inject into a bid.

“He’s taking a look at the race. He’s giving it careful consideration,” said NRSC Chair Steve Daines (R-Mont.), who has been urging Sheehy to run.

As for Rosendale, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said the House member has attended his weekly strategy dinners and “sounds like he’s going to” pursue another bid for the upper chamber. Rosendale, who opposed Kevin McCarthy’s bid for speaker earlier this year, could be a Senate ally for conservatives trying to challenge McConnell.

GOP leaders already have a similar intraparty dispute brewing in West Virginia, where the anti-tax Club for Growth-backed Rep. Alex Mooney (R-W.Va.) is squaring off against McConnell’s pick, Gov. Jim Justice. The popular governor is seen by top Republicans as the far more electable candidate against Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.).

Republicans have gotten mixed news in recent weeks on the recruitment front. While several candidates seen as weak by the party establishment passed on Senate races, Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) — a top NRSC recruit — also declined to run.

That makes Rosendale’s decision even more important in a vital Senate race for both parties. A member of the ultraconservative House Freedom Caucus, Rosendale had backing from the Club for Growth when he ran in 2018. That run was plagued by forceful attacks on him as a carpetbagger, including the moniker "Maryland Matt" that was only reinforced by his noticeable Old Line State accent.

He also proved to be a meager fundraiser, bringing in just $6 million throughout the race compared to Tester’s $23.3 million. It’s not clear whether the Club for Growth would back Rosendale again in a rematch, but their moves in West Virginia signal an intent to buck the party establishment. Club President David McIntosh has praised Rosendale in the past and knocked McConnell for not helping Rosendale enough against Tester in 2018.

Rosendale served in both chambers of the Montana state Legislature before running for state auditor in 2016.

Two years after his Senate flop, Rosendale ran for Montana's open at-large district and won. When the state received a second seat in reapportionment, he then claimed the new eastern district, which strongly favors Republicans.

His colleague in the western district, Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.), was also considering a run for Senate but now sounds much more likely to line up behind Sheehy, whom he frequently praises.

The Public Policy Polling survey found Rosendale leading a potential GOP primary field with 64 percent of the vote compared to Sheehy’s 10 percent. That disparity is not surprising, because Rosendale has run statewide several times and Sheehy is still largely unknown to the electorate.

The congressman was viewed favorably by 67 percent of those polled and unfavorably by just 17 percent.

Rosendale irked Republicans when he took a lead in opposing McCarthy's bid for the speakership. He nominated Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) over McCarthy during one round of voting. Some saw his opposition as a play for anti-establishment credibility ahead of a Senate run, but it could easily backfire, aggravating key donors and outside groups that aid Senate candidates.

And there’s always the question of whom former President Donald Trump will support. Rosendale famously denied a phone conversation with Trump during McCarthy’s run for the speakership.

Olivia Beavers contributed to this report.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/mvzr1On
via IFTTT

Read More

Supreme Court: States cant sue over Bidens immigration policies

States can’t use the federal courts to try to force the federal government to arrest and deport more people who are in the country illegally, the Supreme Court ruled Friday.

The 8-1 decision could cut down on a flood of lawsuits recent administrations have faced from state attorneys general and governors who disagree with Washington on immigration and crime policy.

The high court’s ruling found that Texas and Louisiana lacked standing to pursue litigation challenging immigration enforcement priorities established by President Joe Biden’s administration soon after he took office.

It’s the second decision in eight days in which the Supreme Court has rejected lawsuits from Texas on standing grounds. Last week, the court ruled that the state did not have standing to challenge a federal law that gives preferences to Native American families in the adoptions of Native children.

State standing is a key question in another major issue still awaiting decision from the court in the coming days: the legality of Biden’s decision to wipe out billions of dollars in student debt.

Six states are challenging the debt-relief plan, but it’s not clear if the states have suffered the sort of concrete harm that is typically necessary to challenge a policy in court. (In a separate case, two student-loan borrowers who oppose the plan are also suing. Their legal standing is also contested.)

In the immigration case, critics of the states’ approach said their claim of likely financial injury from unwarranted release of undocumented migrants was murky. But the court’s majority opinion written, by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, took a different tack and said the case was flawed because of a general principle against suits trying to force the executive branch to enforce the law against someone else.

“This Court has consistently recognized that federal courts are generally not the proper forum for resolving claims that the Executive Branch should make more arrests or bring more prosecutions,” Kavanaugh wrote, in an opinion joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s three liberals. “If the Court green-lighted this suit, we could anticipate complaints in future years about alleged Executive Branch under-enforcement of any similarly worded laws — whether they be drug laws, gun laws, obstruction of justice laws, or the like. We decline to start the Federal Judiciary down that uncharted path.”

The states challenged a Biden policy that directed immigration authorities to focus their enforcement efforts on people deemed to pose threats to public safety. Biden’s priorities differ from those of his predecessors, but Kavanaugh noted that, in the 27 years since the relevant immigration-law provisions were passed, the executive branch has never done what Texas and Louisiana sought in this case: the arrest and deportation of all foreigners covered by the language of the provisions.

“All five presidential administrations have determined that resource constraints necessitated prioritizations in making immigration arrests,” noted Kavanaugh, an appointee of President Donald Trump who also worked in the George W. Bush White House early in his career.

Kavanaugh described the decision in the case as “narrow,” and said it would not automatically apply to federal government policies outside the area of arrest and prosecution, where the executive branch has traditionally been granted broad discretion.

Justices Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett agreed that the states lacked standing, but for a different reason. They said Congress specifically barred courts from issuing injunctions related to certain immigration laws.

“The Constitution affords federal courts considerable power, but it does not establish ‘government by lawsuit,’” Gorsuch wrote in an opinion joined by the two other conservatives.

Justice Samuel Alito was the lone dissenter, arguing that the court’s “deeply and dangerously flawed” ruling unwisely gives the executive branch unbridled power. “And it renders States already laboring under the effects of massive illegal immigration even more helpless,” the conservative justice added.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/r4Tlog6
via IFTTT

Read More

Golf worlds two big titans turn to D.C. muscle for help with their marriage

Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund and the PGA Tour have brought in some political heavy hitters as they seek to save their blockbuster deal to join forces from an increasingly hostile Congress.

On Wednesday Paul Keary, co-founder and chief executive of the CEO-consulting giant Teneo, registered as a foreign agent working for the Saudi Public Investment Fund to help sell the deal with the PGA Tour.

Teneo has represented PIF — which bankrolled the upstart LIV Golf and the golf league’s litigation against the PGA Tour until this month’s stunning detente — since 2021. But it’s the first time Keary has registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, DOJ filings show.

At least two other big names in Washington also have registered under FARA to help the Saudi fund on the PGA deal. Among them are Geoff Morrell, whose short lived tenure as chief corporate affairs officer for the Walt Disney Company included the beginnings of Disney’s ongoing brawl with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, and Nate Tamarin, a longtime aide to former President Barack Obama.

The PGA Tour, meanwhile, has retained progressive public affairs firm Bully Pulpit Interactive as its new communications agency following the announcement of the deal. Another firm that had worked with the Tour dropped it as a client in favor of representing the 9/11 victims community, which has steadfastly opposed the deal.

In addition to boasting other corporate clients like Instacart, McDonald’s and Goldman Sachs, Bully Pulpit has also represented political clients like the 2020 Biden campaign, the DNC, the DSCC, the Human Rights Campaign, and Everytown for Gun Safety. Its staff have circled in and out of the Biden White House, including with the recent hiring of Ben LaBolt as White House press secretary.

The ramped up communications support is the latest round of monthslong warfare that previously pitted a small army of lobbying shops and PR firms against one another, fighting over claims that LIV was a Saudi attempt to “sportswash” its poor human rights record on one side and that the PGA Tour was a monopolistic endeavor on the other.

Those battles came to a halt when the LIV-PGA deal was announced. But the partnership has largely fallen flat across Washington.

The bipartisan heads of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations on Wednesday called executives from the PGA, LIV and PIF to testify for the panel’s investigation into its deal, an invite PGA said it looks forward to accepting.

Another Democratic committee chair has launched his own probe into the various tax breaks and exemptions the PIF and PGA Tour claim and pledged to investigate the national security implications of the deal, while a Republican congressmember has introduced legislation to revoke the PGA’s tax-exempt status altogether and other lawmakers have asked the Justice Department to probe whether those working for new golf entity will need to register as foreign agents.

Lawmakers have pointed to the PGA Tour’s own biting criticism of LIV’s ties to Saudi leadership and the kingdom’s human rights record and alleged that the deal amounted to a Saudi takeover of an iconic American sport.

For its part, the PGA Tour pointed fingers back at the Hill, writing in a letter to senators that lawmakers had left the league “on our own to fend off” costly litigation and attacks by its Saudi rivals. The Tour has also maintained that litigation left it little choice financially, and downplayed the control its Saudi financiers will have over day-to-day operations of the new joint venture.

But its rollout of the deal was rocky, with the PGA’s own players caught off guard and outraged, and the Tour walking back its initial framing of the union as a merger when it was already in the midst of a federal antitrust probe. The Tour has begun working to mollify its players, and appears ready to do the same in Washington.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/Rctj45Z
via IFTTT

Read More

Biden touts ties with India but gives only an indirect nudge on human rights

President Joe Biden hailed the country’s deepening relationship with India as he stood alongside its leader Thursday, highlighting the ascendant nation’s strategic importance while making only oblique references to New Delhi’s backsliding democracy.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi heads the world’s largest democracy but has ruled as an autocratic-leaning Hindu nationalist whose government has overseen a crackdown on everyone from journalists to political opposition leaders as part of a larger targeting of Indian Muslims. Despite its wariness of Modi, the U.S. has looked to New Delhi as a rising economic partner and a bulwark against China’s dominance in the region.

Biden did not upbraid Modi in public but gently noted a need for a shared commitment to ‘democratic values.

“Indians and Americans … cherish freedom and celebrate the democratic values of universal human rights,” Biden said during a news conference, “which face challenges around the world and in each of our countries but which remain so vital to the success of each of our nations: press freedoms, religion freedom, tolerance, diversity.”

While standing with his Indian counterpart in the White House East Room, Biden deemed the nations’ partnership "among the most consequential in the world" and "stronger, closer, and more dynamic than at any time in history." Biden brought up human rights concerns behind closed doors, White House aides insisted, although they did not immediately get into details.

Human rights advocates have criticized Biden not just for hosting Modi, but for throwing him a state dinner, a prestigious honor bestowed upon only two other foreign leaders since Biden took office.

Earlier Thursday, Biden welcomed Modi to the White House with a speech touting religious freedom as a “core principle” for both nations, a gentle chiding for the prime minister’s treatment of Muslims.

“Equity under the law, freedom of expression, religious pluralism and diversity of our people — these core principles have endured and evolve,” said Biden in the welcoming ceremony. “Even as they have faced challenges throughout each of our nations’ histories, and will fuel our strength, depth and future.”

Modi, who has not taken a question at a news conference in his nine years as prime minister, flashed some impatience when asked about his nation’s commitment to democracy and human rights, before fiercely declaring that “democracy is in our DNA.”

“We live in democracy,” Modi said as part of a long winded defense. “Regardless of caste, creed, religion and gender, there is absolutely no space for discrimination.”

Modi’s visit to Washington has illustrated his rise. India just became the world’s most populous nation, the nation’s surging economy is drawing foreign investment, and Modi will host the world’s leaders at the G-20 in New Delhi this fall.

The U.S. feels it has no choice but continue to court him as an essential bulwark on the far side of the globe. To the dismay of the White House, India has remained neutral in the war between Russia and Ukraine. And while New Delhi has not offered Moscow any direct assistance, it has continued to purchase its gas, helping Vladimir Putin fund his war efforts. Biden did not publicly push Modi to back Kyiv but Biden said the two spoke about “our shared effort to mitigate humanitarian tragedies unleashed by Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine.”

But India’s biggest role, the administration believes, could be to provide a check on China. India and China share a lengthy border and recent tensions. U.S. has elevated India as part of the Quad alliance — along with Australia and Japan — to reinforce democracy’s position in the Pacific and has pushed New Delhi to act as a buffer against the economic and territorial ambitions of Xi Jinping. And Biden, in response to a reporter’s question, did not back down from his recent characterization of Xi as a “dictator,” a label that was met with fury from Beijing.

Biden administration officials have said they are not blind to India’s faults and troubles. Instead, they say in dealing with a geo-strategically vital country of 1.4 billion people, they prefer to level their criticisms behind the scenes.

But doing so, human rights activists argue, means offering a tacit blessing to the abuses taking place under Modi’s watch — and it forfeits an opportunity to improve the situation. A handful of progressive Democrats boycotted Modi’s speech before a joint session of Congress scheduled for after the news conference.

“A joint address is among the most prestigious invitations and honors the United States Congress can extend,” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), one of those shunning the speech, in a statement. “We should not do so for individuals with deeply troubling human rights records – particularly for individuals whom our own State Department has concluded are engaged in systematic human rights abuses of religious minorities and caste-oppressed communities.”

Human rights advocates cite a litany of abuses by the Modi government, including passage of a law that discriminates against Muslims by making religion a basis of citizenship and the revocation of the autonomy granted to the majority-Muslim Jammu and Kashmir region. Some Indian states also passed “anti-conversion” laws that appear to target Muslim men who marry Hindu women. These and other moves have played out against a backdrop of more violence against religious minorities and crackdowns on government critics and journalists.

Many presidents have had to deal with unsavory foreign elements to advance U.S. political interest. Biden, when he ran for president, trashed Trump’s seeming indifference to suffering around the world, promising to put human rights at the “center” of his foreign policy. But he and his team have also made deals with nations like Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

The White House touted a series of agreements reached at the summit, including new economic deals, climate commitments, and contracts for semiconductors and other technologies. Aides defended the decision to have the state dinner, suggesting it is a representation of the administration’s appreciation of India’s new engagement with the world and, they say, its commitment to be a good global citizen.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/GNdUPZ9
via IFTTT

Read More

India's Modi emphasizes democratic values despite human rights concerns

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Thursday pushed back against questions about his country’s human rights record, in a White House news conference alongside President Joe Biden.

“That is why in India’s democratic values there is absolutely no discrimination, neither on basis of class, creed or age, or any kind of geographic location,” Modi said.

Modi’s visit to the U.S. comes as some Democrats say Biden is turning a blind eye to India’s crackdown on dissent, including the detention of journalists and attacks on religious minorities.

Some lawmakers, including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), plan to boycott Modi’s address to Congress on Thursday afternoon.

The administration has repeatedly said that Modi’s visit would include frank, private discussions about human rights, even as Biden aims to court a vital relationship in the region that could serve as a bulwark against China.

“The prime minister and I had a good discussion about democratic values, and that’s the nature of our relationship,” Biden said on Thursday. “We’re straightforward with each other, and we respect each other.”

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/IEt3pHo
via IFTTT

Read More