Carl M. Levin

Nota: Este archivo abarca los artículos publicados por el autor desde el 1 de enero de 2009. Para fechas anteriores realice una búsqueda entrecomillando su nombre.

When Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko spoke to a joint session of Congress last month, he thanked the United States for its assistance in confronting Russian aggression, and indeed, our country, along with our NATO allies, has done much. But Poroshenko asked us for more. “Blankets, night-vision goggles are also important,” he said, “but one cannot win the war with blankets.”

We believe now is the time to add defensive military aid, including weapons, to our support of Ukraine.

This is a cause worth supporting. The Ukrainian people face a heavily armed insurgent force — equipped , trained and supported by Russia — and, more recently, Russia’s own military forces, seeking to establish by force the political and economic dominance Vladimir Putin desires.…  Seguir leyendo »

There are only two ways to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon: negotiations or military action.

Amazingly, after 34 years of mostly diplomatic silence between Iran and the United States, we are in the midst of just such negotiations, with the potential to eliminate the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.

Instead of cautiously welcoming this development and letting these talks play out over the next six months, however, proposals are circulating in Congress that seek to impose additional sanctions in the middle of the negotiations. This step, we fear, risks scuttling the process and could have damaging ramifications for the United States as well as our regional allies and partners, especially Israel.…  Seguir leyendo »

As members of the Senate Armed Services and intelligence committees, we knew much about the horrors in Syria before our recent visit to the region. But reading briefing slides in Washington is very different from meeting some of the hundreds of thousands of civilians who have fled for their lives to camps across the border.

They told us heartbreaking stories of how they sought shelter in mosques and schools, how Bashar al-Assad’s government targeted civilian neighborhoods for destruction, how their children still quake at harmless noises that remind them of the violence they sought to escape.

We believe the United States should join with its partners and allies in the region and elsewhere to pursue an end to the bloodshed.…  Seguir leyendo »

A now-discredited report in Rolling Stone alleged that U.S. military officials in Afghanistan used inappropriate information operations techniques to try to persuade us, as well as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and others, to support additional resources to train more Afghan troops.

The truth is, we have long argued that the best way to bring our troops home sooner while succeeding in Afghanistan is to build a stronger Afghan military and government. We’ve been making that case because the facts support it – which is why the president and the majority of the American people do, too.

We saw during a trip to Afghanistan in January that the United States, our Afghan allies and our NATO partners have made significant progress in reversing the momentum of the insurgents, seizing the initiative and helping Afghans secure their future.…  Seguir leyendo »

The Post asked foreign policy experts whether President Obama should maintain a focus on protecting the population and rebuilding the country, or on striking terrorists. Below are contributions from Jane Harman, Kurt Volker, Gilles Dorronsoro, John Nagl, Ronald E. Neumann, Meghan O’Sullivan and Carl M. Levin.

Jane Harman, Democratic representative from California and former ranking member of the House intelligence committee.

It’s too early to abandon a strategy focused on protecting the population and rebuilding the country, a key part of which is Afghan buy-in. We should aim to shrink our ground footprint and focus on training a growing army of willing and courageous Afghans.…  Seguir leyendo »