National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan insisted Tuesday that America’s borders “are not open” as the White House moved to try to head off a growing migrant surge that threatens to undermine President Biden’s immigration plans.

In a statement issued in English and Spanish, Mr. Sullivan and Homeland Security Adviser Liz Sherwood-Randall tried to tamp down on expectations of a more lenient posture for both illegal immigrants and future legal migrants eager to come.

Their warning came even as they announced they would allow entry of tens of thousands of migrants who have been mired in Mexico, blocked from entering by the Trump team.

“We caution people seeking to immigrate to the United States that our borders are not open and that this is just the first phase in the administration’s work to reopen access to an orderly asylum process,” the advisers said.

Homeland Security is preparing to admit some 25,000 migrants who were blocked from entry under the Migrant Protection Protocols, better known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy. MPP helped solve the last border surge in 2019, sapping the incentive for illegal immigrants to come by making them wait in Mexico while their cases proceeded in U.S. immigration courts, denying them a foothold here.

But the program was criticized by immigrant-rights advocates who said it left some legitimate asylum-seekers vulnerable in Mexico. Bowing to those concerns, the Biden team has said it is scrapping the MPP and will process those people still stuck in the program for entry over the ensuing weeks.

Mr. Sullivan said the new administration’s leniency only applies to people with active MPP cases.

Source: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/feb/16/biden-national-security-adviser-our-borders-are-no/

The post Biden national security adviser: ‘Our borders are not open’ first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

“I informed John Bolton last night that his services are no longer needed at the White House,” Trump tweeted.

“I disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions, as did others in the Administration, and therefore I asked John for his resignation, which was given to me this morning,” he continued. “I thank John very much for his service. I will be naming a new National Security Advisor next week.”

While Bolton swiftly challenged Trump’s version of events — saying he offered to resign — the two have had well-known disagreements on a range of hot-button national security issues, perhaps most significantly on plans for a troop drawdown in Afghanistan.

BOLTON: A ‘LOT AT STAKE’ IN VENEZUELA

Bolton’s removal comes after the hawkish adviser was reportedly sidelined from high-level discussions about military involvement in Afghanistan, after opposing diplomatic efforts in the region.

“Simply put, many of Bolton’s policy priorities did not align with POTUS,” a White House official told Fox News on Tuesday.

While Trump announced a 4,000-troop increase in 2017 as part of an effort to break the stalemate in the country, he has been moving toward agreeing to a phased withdrawal of troops. Some 14,000 U.S. troops have remained in Afghanistan, advising and assisting Afghan forces and conducting counterterrorism operations.

Inside the administration, Bolton also advocated caution on Trump’s strategy with North Korea and against Trump’s decision last year to pull U.S. troops out of Syria. Bolton also led a quiet effort inside the administration and with allies abroad to convince the president to keep U.S. forces in Syria to counter ISIS and Iranian influence in the region.

Bolton became Trump’s third national security adviser in April 2018, replacing H.R. McMaster, who had been appointed earlier in the administration to replace Michael Flynn.

TRUMP CONFIRMS AFGHANISTAN DRAWDOWN IN WORKS

Bolton fired back Tuesday, tweeting moments after the president’s announcement that he offered his resignation on Monday evening, saying it was not immediately accepted by Trump.

“I offered to resign last night and President Trump said, ‘Let’s talk about it tomorrow,’ Bolton tweeted.

Bolton also told Fox News on Tuesday that he and the president were discussing Afghanistan on Monday evening when he offered to resign.

“I offered to resign last night,” he told Fox News in a text message. “There was no request for a resignation.”

A source also told Fox News that Bolton sent his resignation letter late Tuesday morning, after which Trump tweeted on Bolton’s removal.

The letter, obtained by Fox News, was dated Sept. 10, 2019, and stated: “Dear Mr, President: I hereby resign, effective immediately, as Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. Thank you for having afforded me this opportunity to serve our country.”

Bolton later told Fox News that his “priority has always been policies that make America secure. Nothing more, nothing less.”

Bolton, who previously served as a Fox News contributor, worked in the administrations of former Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush and served as a Bush’s lawyer during the 2000 Florida recount. Bolton also served as a U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations from 2005 to 2006 and as an undersecretary of state for arms control and international security from 2001 to 2005.

One source told Fox News that many in the White House learned of Bolton’s firing from the president’s tweet Tuesday.

Prior to the president’s tweets Tuesday morning, Bolton had been expected to join a national security briefing with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.

At that briefing, meant to discuss a new executive order strengthening the government’s ability to sanction those with terror ties, Pompeo and Mnuchin defended the president.

“The president is entitled to the staff he wants,” Pompeo said.

Pompeo went on to say there were “many times” he and Bolton disagreed but added, “that’s true of a lot of people I interacted with.”

Asked if they had been blindsided by Bolton’s departure, Pompeo replied: “I am never surprised.”

Mnuchin reiterated that, while Bolton may be gone, the administration intends to keep going with its “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran. However, he also stated that Trump is prepared to meet with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani at this month’s U.N. General Assembly without preconditions.

Fox News’ John Roberts and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-fires-national-security-advisor-john-bolton-over-disagreements-on-key-policy-matters

The post Trump ousts National Security Adviser John Bolton, says they ‘disagreed strongly’ on policy first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

US National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster and his team deserve credit for clear expression of the threat to the United States from autocratic, revisionist powers, especially Russia.

Outlining the new National Security Strategy (NSS) to be released today, McMaster last week publicly cited Russia’s “sophisticated campaign of subversion and disinformation and propaganda,” noting that the NSS would spell out this threat, and that the United States would respond accordingly.

Good for him, especially so given the complexities of Russia policy in the administration of US President Donald J. Trump.

On December 12, McMaster previewed the new NSS, saying that the document will take into account Russia’s hybrid threats and widespread propaganda “that attempt to divide our communities within our nations and pit them against each other and try to create crises of confidence.”

He outlined four major threats to US national security, starting with “revisionist powers” such as Russia and China who seek to upend the rules-based world order which the United States has led since 1945.

McMaster’s commentary could prove important because:

It finally acknowledges, in a foundational policy document from the Trump administration, that Russia under its current leadership threatens US interests. McMaster presented the opinion that the Kremlin is at best a challenge, not a misunderstood or ill-treated potential friend; and

His statements indicate a recognition that there is in fact a US-led global order, or at least a vision of one, which the “revisionist” powers, aggressive and authoritarian, seek to undermine.

This latter point is critical. Since its emergence as a world power at the turn of the twentieth century, the United States has believed that its interests were linked to its values; that the nation would prosper and thrive in a rules-based world; and that an open world, rather than one based on spheres of influence, would play to the United States’ natural advantages.

The United States championed these principles through two World Wars and a Cold War, thereby serving itself, and many other nations, well.

During the presidential campaign and after assuming office, Trump and others in his administration questioned this US grand strategy. The alternative to this strategy is a sort of sphere-of-influence world in which the United States retreats to merely grasping for its share, and allows Russia and China to do the same.

Such an alternative would diminish US leadership, and a US recognition of a Russian or Chinese sphere of influence would also dishonor the United States.

No wonder Russia reacted harshly to this report of a more values-based, venerable, and honorable national security strategy document about to emerge. Perhaps frustrated by the failure of their exaggerated hopes for a renewed relationship with the Trump administration, the Kremlin has responded with its usual denial, without, however, its usual pose of conviction or panache.

Reuters reported that on December 13 the Kremlin responded to McMaster’s statements, saying the allegations “were groundless and not backed by facts.”

Further, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said McMaster’s remarks were “extremely and absolutely wrong,” and that Russia “does not indulge in sophisticated subversion in the United States.”

If the new NSS outlines the threats to the United States—and to the democratic, rules-based world order—as clearly as did HR McMaster, and if its policy recommendations are commensurate, it will stand as a worthy document, helping steady this administration’s strategy, policy, and standing as a leader of the free world.

Daniel Fried is a distinguished fellow in the Atlantic Council’s Future Europe Initiative.

Source: http://www.newsweek.com/despite-trump-mcmaster-spells-out-danger-russia-750982

The post Despite Trump, McMaster spells out the danger of Russia first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The Pentagon said it would not alter any operations in response to the threats, and it is unclear if North Korea is capable of downing a stealth American jet, which is capable of evading and jamming enemy radar.

But the earlier incident does highlight the challenges the United States faces in responding to North Korea’s provocations and why the isolated nation feels confident in repeatedly antagonizing Washington.

As bad as the rhetoric may seem, some of North Korea’s brazen attacks in the past have brought the United States even closer to war than the current heated climate, said Sheila Miyoshi Jager, a professor at Oberlin College and author of Brothers at War: The Unending Conflict in Korea.

For decades North Korea has felt free to challenge the U.S., betting that Washington will not react militarily.

In 1994 North Korea shot down an American helicopter when it mistakenly crossed the DMZ during a training mission. One of the two pilots was killed in the attack.

In 1968, North Korea captured the USS Pueblo, a Navy spy ship. One crew member was killed and 82 others were held as prisoners for nearly a year.

The United States returned with a 60-man security platoon and a 16-man tree-cutting detail to remove the tree. B-52s and a South Korean reconnaissance company was positioned to react if North Koreans tried to interfere.

The Americans cut down the tree without incident, but it was tense. The U.S. was prepared to go to war if North Koreans attempted to resist, Jager said.

Today, the stakes are even higher since North Korea has stockpiled nuclear weapons and will soon have the capability to place warheads on missiles that can reach the U.S. mainland, the Pentagon said.

“Whether it’s three months or six months or 18 months, it is soon, and we ought to conduct ourselves as though it is just a matter of time, and a matter of very short time, before North Korea has that capability,” Marine Gen. Joe Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Tuesday.

The relationship between North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and President Trump is also more personal than previous leaders of both countries.

Trump said Tuesday if the U.S. takes a military option in dealing with the threat from North Korea, “it will be devastating.”

“We are totally prepared” for a military option, but it’s not the preferred one, Trump said. “If we have to take it, we will.”

Trump also went on to blame previous U.S. presidents for not dealing with the North Korean threat. “I will fix this mess,” he said.

Trump previously dismissed Kim as “rocket man” and said the North will be met with “fire and fury” if it continues to threaten America. Kim has called Trump a “dotard” and likened him to a scared dog.

Trump’s national security adviser, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, said the president’s comments about Kim have been similar in substance to other American presidents, though he acknowledged the earlier statements “probably don’t include the word, ‘rocket man.’”

McMaster said Trump’s remarks are to make clear how the U.S. would respond to a threat from the North. “I don’t think there is any lack of clarity now,” McMaster said during a conference sponsored by the Institute for the Study of War.

Dunford told Congress Tuesday that North Korea has not altered its military posture despite the heightened rhetoric between Pyongyang and Washington.

“While the political space is clearly very charged right now, we haven’t seen a change in the posture of North Korean forces,” he told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/aerial-journalism/2017/09/26/north-korea-threats-united-states-kim-jong-un/704978001/

The post North Korea has taken provocative actions for decades, but this time could trigger war first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.