The Washington Post - USA (2022-03-02)

A28 EZ SU THE WASHINGTON POST.WEDNESDAY, MARCH 2 , 2022

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

[email protected]

A

MERICAN HISTORY teaches that every occupant of the White House gets two presidencies: the one he planned for and the one that events thrust upon him. President Biden’s first State of the Union address was his opportunity to lay out how he proposes to lead through the presidency he has been forced to conduct by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s world- c hanging invasion of Ukraine. Mr. Biden came into office amid a pandemic and its economic consequences — as well as domestic political decay that had both produced his predecessor, Donald Trump, and been worsened by him. Mr. Biden set his sights on crushing the pandemic, re- structuring the economy via trillions in new federal spending and unifying the bitterly divided body politic. As the time to give his first State of the Union address Tuesday night ap- proached, the results were mixed. Mr. Biden could boast of declining coronavirus cases and deaths; of a bipartisan $1.2 trillion infrastructure plan; and of restocking the federal judiciary with his appointments, including Ketanji Brown Jackson, newly picked to be the Supreme Court’s next justice — and first Black woman.

Yet the pandemic’s current retreat, which Mr. Biden hailed Tuesday night, came only after two deadly new variants thwarted his promises of a return to normal last summer; opposition from Republicans (plus two key Democratic senators) blocked his most ambitious economic proposals; and inflation has roared back to life — partly because the $1.9 trillion in new deficit spending he succeeded in passing roughly a year ago proved excessive. A bloody and chaotic exit from Afghanistan triggered a de- cline in Mr. Biden’s job approval rating from which he has yet to recover. Now, Mr. Putin’s effort to redraw Europe’s map by force has exploded not only Mr. Biden’s plans for a foreign policy pivot to China but also the entire global balance of power. Dealing with the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its consequences seems likely to consume a large part of this administration’s attention for the next three years. In short, events have thrust historic challenges upon Mr. Biden, but also opportunities. Tuesday night, Mr. Biden rightfully claimed that he had helped maintain, and indeed increase, the unity of Western allies in the face of Russian aggression and that his administration made innovative and subtle public use of

its intelligence. Strong and swift U.S.-led sanctions, widely supported around the world, have indeed isolated the Putin regime and ensured it pays a heavy price. This has aided unity between the two parties; members of both rose to applaud Ukraine and its ambassador, who was present. The Republicans among them were differentiating themselves from the shameful praise for the dictator voiced by their party’s presumed 2024 presidential front- runner, Mr. Trump. Yet Mr. Biden celebrated damage to Russia’s economy without fully saluting the courageous Russians who have pro- tested the war. He did not ask Congress for the greater defense spending it may take to restore world order. He did not offer a vision of how NATO could counter the Russian threat in the longer term. Instead, he pivoted to a long list of familiar domestic proposals. Disap- pointingly, his remarks on inflation basically rehashed spending initiatives and offered the questionable logic that shifting supply chains back to America necessarily cuts costs. The state of the union is understand- ably tense. Mr. Biden’s second presidency must be about credibly addressing all sources of that unease, foreign and domestic.

Mr. Biden’s second presidency

Events have thrust historic challenges upon the president, but also opportunities.

I

N DECEMBER 1974, Hugo Torres helped lead a squad of Nicaraguan guerrillas in a dramatic hostage- t aking that succeeded in winning the release of a key member of the Sandinista National Liberation Front then held in prison by the dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza. Last month, Mr. Tor- res died — as a 73-year-old political prisoner of Nicaragua’s new dictatorship. In one of the awful symmetries that characterize this Central American country’s history, the Sandinista whom Mr. Torres helped liberate in 1974 grew into the dictator in whose custody he died: Daniel Ortega. Having previously been aligned with Mr. Ortega, Mr. Torres was being pun- ished for concluding that the current regime is — as he said in his last public statement before being arrested in June 2021 — “more brutal, more unscrupu- lous, more irrational and more autocrat- ic” than Somoza’s. The Ortega regime is closely aligned with Vladimir Putin’s Russia, which aids Nicaragua’s army and which dispatched two high-level del- egates for talks in Managua during the

week prior to and week of the invasion of Ukraine. Mr. Ortega obediently praised Mr. Putin’s recognition of breakaway Ukrainian provinces. For his dissident position, it seems, Mr. Torres died. Though the government said only that “illnesses he had” caused his death, political allies report that conditions in the jail where he was held are harsh; he was growing steadily un- well in December but was not taken to a hospital until he fell unconscious. There should be an independent investigation. Establishing the truth would be no academic exercise, since there is a real chance of a similar tragedy: Several of the 46 political leaders Mr. Ortega’s regime jailed in 2021 are, like Mr. Torres, people in their 60s or 70s, including Francisco Aguirre Sacasa, 77, a former Nicaraguan foreign minister recently found guilty of trumped-up conspiracy charges in a closed-door proceeding. He could face eight years in prison. In a similar predicament are academic Ar- turo Cruz Sequeira, 68, and Pedro Joaquín Chamorro Barrios, 71. All told, the Ortega regime is holding approxi-

mately 170 political prisoners. The State Department, the Organiza- tion of American States and the Euro- pean Union condemned Mr. Torres’s death in custody. Despite the international outcry, however, it appears that the Managua government is intent on completing sham trials for the entire group of political prisoners. In a month of trials since Feb. 1, at least 26 people have been convicted and eight sen- tenced to prison terms ranging up to 13 years, including, on Feb. 23, three who had tried to challenge Mr. Ortega for the presidency in last November’s election. As the prisoners’ health continues to deteriorate, family members are growing increasingly desperate. Some 72 relatives have signed a document calling for the release of all political detainees as part of a “process of civic unification.” There is a case for the United States relaxing cer- tain of the sanctions it has imposed on the regime in return for their freedom. Yet, like its patron in Moscow, the Ortega government has shown no willingness to engage in meaningful dialogue.

Tyrannical history repeats itself

In pro-Putin Managua, it plays out with a tragic irony.

climate-related diseases. Then there’s the effect climate change will have on wildlife. The report estimates that up to 14 percent of species in terrestrial ecosystems will likely face a “very high risk of extinc- tion” if the globe warms 1.5 degrees Celsius. At 2 degrees, that rises to 18 percent. At 3 degrees, it’s 29 percent. Remember, many of these species are essential to human civilization. If they disappear, so will the pollinators that sustain our agriculture. The report lays out a wide expanse of adaptive strategies to mitigate the effects of climate change, from structural measures, such as levees to hold back floods, to conservation strategies to

protect ecosystems teetering on the brink. But these measures are limited. Many countries will not be able to afford to build adaptive infrastructure. And many fragile ecosystems — such as coral reefs and rainforests — are already nearing “hard limits” as they struggle to cope with warmer oceans or more frequent droughts. It’s typical for reports such as this to be referred to as a “wake-up call.” But there is no excuse for policymakers to be asleep to the threat of climate change at this point. Time is running out to substantially reduce carbon pollution and other greenhouse gases. If we don’t act soon, adaptation will become impos- sible for many of Earth’s inhabitants.

A

DAPTING TO climate change will be an existential impera- tive in the coming decades. That’s a key takeaway from a grim report released this week by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations body dedi- cated to assessing global warming science. At times, the document feels like a surrender to the reality that massive losses from a warming globe are inevitable. Unfortunately, adaption strategies are limited, the report warns. And relying too heavily on reactive strategies will place the greatest burden not only on vulnerable populations lacking the resources to adapt but also on the planet’s biodiversity. That creates an even greater need to double down on reducing greenhouse gas emissions while it is still possible. The more than-3,500-page report is an exhaustive review of the devastating impact that climate change will have on the world — what U.N. Secretary Gener- al António Guterres described as “an atlas of human suffering.” Humans have already increased average global temperatures by 1.1 degrees Celsius (2 degrees Fahrenheit) since pre-industrial time. In the best-case scenario, in which humanity limits further warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit), the number of extreme weather events that a person born in the past decade will experience in their lifetime will increase nearly fourfold. Eight percent of the world’s farmland would become unsuitable for growing crops by the century’s end. The bad news is that the world is on track to blow through that optimistic threshold. If that happens, the effects of climate change will become substantially worse. If, for example, the world warms by nearly 2 more degrees Celsius (3.4 Fahr- enheit), the IPCC reports, tens of millions more people will experience extreme heat waves. Hundreds of millions more will be exposed to water scarcity. And millions more will die due to

B eyond a ‘wake-up call’

Another grim report shows how badly we need to slow — and adapt to — global warming.

Leaks of methane from the gas distribution network are a major problem in D.C. [“Coalition reports finding hundreds of gas leaks,” Metro, Feb. 24]. Not only can it be dangerous, but the methane that leaks out is, pound for pound, 85 times worse than carbon dioxide in its impact on global temperatures (over a 20-year horizon). To stop this, Washington Gas needs to be charged for the damage caused by its fail- ure to stop such leaks. This does not require the wholesale replacement of its pipe network, only fixing leaks where they occur. One can determine how much gas is leaking: It’s the difference between how much gas is sent into the distribution network minus what is metered at the other end. Washington Gas knows both. The charge should reflect the damage. The Biden administration set the social cost of carbon (from its impact on global warming) at $51 per metric ton of CO2. Methane gas is about 85 times worse, or $4,335 per ton. While Washington Gas argues that it already has an incentive to stop leaks — losing revenue from gas that leaks — the cost of that gas (based on the wholesale commodity charge for gas in my January bill here in D.C.) was just $346 per metric ton. Washington Gas will find and stop leaks when it has to pay a $4,335 penalty per ton and not just the $346 cost of the gas. And the $4,335 would not be charge- able against customer bills but rather would come out of corporate profits. That would get Washington Gas’s attention. Frank Lysy, Washington

Solving the leak problem

In her Feb. 25 Friday Opinion column, “Let’s not overlook the other women in the pool,” Megan McArdle hinted that Lia Thomas, a transgender collegiate swim- mer, somehow has an unfair advantage. Ms. McArdle also hinted that more people should be questioning why Ms. Thomas should be allowed to compete as a woman. These comments are driven partially by Ms. Thomas’s 200-yard freestyle victory at Harvard in January (1:47.08). Ms. Thomas also won the Ivy League championship 200-yard free in February with a time of 1:43.12. I’d like to remind everyone about Katie Ledecky, who regularly outswam the men on her team at practices, and whose 200- yard freestyle personal best is 1:40.36, set in 2017 at the NCAA championships. Missy Franklin swam the 200-yard free at the 2015 Division I NCAA championships in 1:39.10, and Simone Manuel came in second at 1:41.45. 2021 NCAA Division I women’s 200 freestyle times are all between about 1:42 and 1:45. Given that Ms. Thomas’s swim times are in the same ballpark as those of her other (presumably cisgender) female competi- tors, I think we need to face the fact that the kerfuffle over Ms. Thomas isn’t about “bio- logical advantage,” nor is it about “fair- ness.” It seems to be about transphobia, pure and simple. Beth Lee-De Amici, C rofton

It’s not p rotecting women

Missing from the Biden administration’s otherwise correct response (economic sanctions, sending troops to East- ern Europe) to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is invoking international law. The events leading to World War II led to establishing a bright-line rule that aggressive war is contrary to international law. The United States enforced this legal principle by the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials in the wake of World War II. The principal indictment against the defendants in those proceedings was “crimes against peace.” This legal injunction is enshrined in the charter of the United Nations. The Biden administration should take the lead to cause NATO to create an international process and an international tri- bunal to carry out a possible prosecution of Russian President Vladimir Putin and oth- ers who planned and carried out the invasion of Ukraine. Because the legal rule against wars of aggression is of universal significance, the United States and NATO should invite all U.N. members to partici- pate in these legal proceedings. Mr. Putin warned that “whoever tries to hinder us” will face “consequences ... never faced in your history.” International law must be employed to give the lie to these threats. Thomas Schoenbaum, Alexandria

This is not an abstract concept. For every human life lost in Ukraine, Russian Presi- dent Vladimir Putin should be held ac- countable for a crime against humanity. Robert Senseney, Gaithersburg

How is it that economic sanctions in response to the Ukraine crisis have not been accompanied by the expulsion of all Russian diplomatic personnel from West- ern capitals? The futility of dialogue is evident. The Russian government de- serves the same embassy presence in Washington that the United States affords North Korea and Iran: none whatsoever. David Leatherwood, Reston

International law and Russia

ABCDE

FREDERICK J. RYAN JR., Publisher and Chief Executive Officer

ABCDE

AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER

EDITORIALS

YVES HERMAN/REUTERS Protesters outside the 2021 U.N. climate conference in Glasgow, Scotland.

News Editorial and opinion SALLY BUZBEE RUTH MARCUS Executive Editor Deputy Editorial Page Editor CAMERON BARR KAREN TUMULTY Senior Managing Editor Deputy Editorial Page Editor KAT DOWNS MULDER JO-ANN ARMAO Chief Product Officer & ME Associate Editorial Page Editor STEVEN GINSBERG Managing Editor TRACY GRANT Managing Editor KRISSAH THOMPSON Managing Editor SHARIF DURHAMS Deputy Managing Editor MONICA NORTON Deputy Managing Editor MARK W. SMITH Deputy Managing Editor SCOTT VANCE Deputy Managing Editor BARBARA VOBEJDA Deputy Managing Editor

Officers JAMES W. COLEY JR.........................................................Production L. WAYNE CONNELL............................................Human Resources KATE M. DAVEY.....................................................Revenue Strategy ELIZABETH H. DIAZ....................Audience Development & Insights GREGG J. FERNANDES..........................Customer Care & Logistics SHANI GEORGE......................................................Communications STEPHEN P. GIBSON.....................................Finance & Operations KRISTINE CORATTI KELLY.....................Communications & Events JOHN B. KENNEDY...................................General Counsel & Labor MIKI TOLIVER KING.................................................................Arc XP SHAILESH PRAKASH....Digital Product Development & Engineering MICHAEL A. RIBERO....................................................Subscriptions JOY ROBINS.........................................................................Revenue

The Washington Post 1301 K St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071 (202) 334-6000

In suggesting that Ahmaud Arbery’s killers’ hate-crime prosecution and ver- dict amounted to “punishment of thought crimes,” George F. Will’s Feb. 25 op-ed, “Bigotry is reprehensible, but it’s not a federal offense,” omitted that our legal punishments are also used as deterrents. Because many Americans are at an increased risk of harassment and violence because of the way they look or pray, for example, our legal system increases the punishment for crimes against them to provide more protection. Benjamin Somers, Washington

George F. Will was correct when he wrote that bigotry is reprehensible, but it’s not a federal offense. The First Amend- ment protects a person’s right to free speech. However, Mr. Will seemed to con- fuse “hate” with “hate crime.” In today’s atmosphere of distrust, hate seems to be a dominant and visible reflec- tion of our differences. However, when it results in the killing of a person because of their race, religion or ethnic background, that motivation is not only despicable, it’s also against the law. And well it should be. No one should be denied federally protected freedoms because of their race. But that’s precisely what happened. Ahmaud Arbery was singled out and killed because he was Black. Laws are meant to protect all of us, especially those at risk. Arbery’s killers deserved to be found guilty of murder. But they also deserved to be found guilty of killing him expressly because he was Black. His killers’ conviction on hate- crimes charges sends the message that we will not tolerate racial violence. A country that protects its most vulnerable is where I want to live. Jeff Gates, Silver Spring

Why we have hate-crime laws

MICHAEL DE ADDER

The Washington Post - USA (2022-03-02)

Get our desktop app

Company

Features

Documentation

Resources