We independently select these products—if you buy from one of our links, we may earn a commission. All prices were accurate at the time of publishing.
As a former professional chef and a long-time equipment tester, I have an arsenal of kitchen knives of all kinds, brands, and price points. And I have to admit: I’m partial to ones that cost upwards of $100. So, when I tested chef’s knives that sell for $25 or less, my main concern was that I wasn’t going to like any of them. Turns out, I liked three of them — and would even go as far as to say I loved one of them.
I rounded up a sampling of 10 inexpensive knives from popular and reputable manufacturers, and put them to the test: slicing ripe tomatoes, chopping onion, mincing garlic, fileting steak, and more! Here are the ones I liked best.
Do you have an inexpensive chef’s knife that you love? Tell us about it in the comments below.
Amelia is a Filipino-American food and travel writer, food stylist, recipe developer, and video host based in Brooklyn, NY. She graduated from the Institute of Culinary Education and worked in kitchens under Jean-Georges Vongerichten at ABC Kitchen and Nougatine at Jean-Georges. She is a former contributing food editor at Bon Appétit Magazine and former Senior Recipe Editor at thekitchn.com. Her recipes have been published by Food52, Bon Appetit, Washington Post and more.
It’s the job of a governor to play adult supervisor and not give adolescent state legislators all the spending money they’d like. Otherwise, they’d break the family bank.
All modern California governors have performed this role, often in different ways and frequently with relish.
Many, especially Republicans, have loved to use their “blue pencil,” striking individual spending items from the annual state budget before signing it. That’s a potent power California governors enjoy that U.S. presidents don’t even have.
Gov. Ronald Reagan cherished the “line item veto” and often lamented not possessing the tool as president.
Gov. Gavin Newsom, however, hardly ever picks up his blue pencil. He barely touches a spending plan before signing what he’s sent by the Democratic-controlled Legislature. That’s because he and legislative leaders already have negotiated the final version of the budget before lawmakers pass it.
It’s in legislators’ DNA to try to squeeze more dollars out of the state kitty after there’s already a spending plan in place for the year.
“They’re always asking for more,” Brown once said. “There’s no natural limit. There’s no predator for this species of budgetary activity except the governor.”
Lawmakers — Democrats, anyway — counter that it’s their constitutional right to keep dipping into the pot.
“Many of my colleagues have important issues they’re trying to tackle on behalf of their constituents and they have costs,” Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell) told me. “Just as the governor has the right to veto bills, it is the Legislature’s right to send him bills as part of our democratic process.”
But Newsom’s admonition to legislators — implanted in veto messages on dozens of spending bills he recently rejected — is that if they want to tap into the state vault, they’d better follow a protocol. They need to seek approval through the annual budget process that’s supposed to end on June 30.
Otherwise, spending veers out of control.
This was Newsom’s basic boilerplate lecture that he tucked into spending vetoes:
“We enacted a budget that closed a shortfall of more than $30 billion through balanced solutions that avoided deep program cuts…
“This year, however, the Legislature sent me bills outside of this budget process that, if all enacted, would add nearly $19 billion of unaccounted costs in the budget…
“With our state facing continuing economic risks and revenue uncertainty, it is important to remain disciplined.”
It was a strong message. But a little humor now and then wouldn’t have hurt. Previous governors showed some occasional wit in their bill signing or veto messages.
In inking a bill to legalize the stuffing and display of dead mountain lions, Brown wrote: “This presumably important bill earned overwhelming support by both Republicans and Democrats. If only that same energetic bipartisan spirit could be applied to creating clean energy jobs and ending tax laws that send jobs out of state.”
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger used a vulgar acrostic to veto a bill by an assemblyman who had heckled the Republican governor when he crashed a Democratic fundraiser. The second line of the message began with the letter “F” and lines six through eight started with the letters “y,” “o” and “u.”
Gov. Pete Wilson enjoyed vetoing a bill that called for a state study of how best to dispose of discarded fluorescent light tubes. “Question: How many new legislative bills does it take to study the disposal of light bulbs?” Wilson wrote. “Answer: One less than you think.”
Newsom recently signed 890 bills and vetoed 156 — a mediocre veto rate of 15%.
In 2008, Schwarzenegger vetoed a record 35% of the bills lawmakers sent him, calling it collateral damage for them being 85 days late passing a budget. That was when budgets required a two-thirds legislative vote. In 2011, it was lowered to a simple majority.
That year, tightwad Brown vetoed the entire budget. He complained it added billions of dollars in new debt to already red ink spending. It’s the only time an entire spending plan has been vetoed.
Regardless of Newsom’s tough veto message — and his restriction on when spending can be approved — he’s hardly a piker.
In his less than five years as governor, state spending has jumped by 53% — more than $100 billion, from the $203-billion budget Brown left him to $311 billion currently.
The governor’s office would not provide a total amount of spending that Newsom vetoed. His boilerplate language was used in 64 vetoes.
Neither would his spokespeople elaborate on the governor’s veto messages. Was it just about saving money? Or was that sometimes merely a cover for blocking policy he disliked?.
“Just about every bill that is on the governor’s desk has some cost to it,” says Assembly Budget Committee Chairman Philip Ting (D-San Francisco). “Most of the time the governor has a reason other than the spending [for a veto]. Sometimes he gives the budget excuse.”
One example: He vetoed a bill requiring high schools to provide free condoms for students. Was that just because of the “unfunded mandate” he cited? Or does the father of four children also question the policy?
Another: He vetoed a measure that would have provided unemployment insurance benefits for striking union members. He said the unemployment fund was already $20 billion in debt. But did he also think it was nuts to subsidize strikers who voluntarily walk off their jobs?
He vetoed a lot of spending bills that amounted to pocket change. And he was right.
Once there’s an agreed-upon budget, lawmakers shouldn’t squeeze taxpayers for more money except in a dire emergency.
We independently select these products—if you buy from one of our links, we may earn a commission. All prices were accurate at the time of publishing.
Glazed carrots are a classic side dish that will never go out of style. This simple recipe comes together in 20 minutes or less and delivers a sweet and savory vegetable that pairs well with just about anything, from your weeknight chicken to your Thanksgiving turkey.
Key Ingredients for Glazed Carrots
These glazed carrots are a simple, three-ingredient (not including salt, pepper, and water) affair. You’ll need the following:
How to Make Glazed Carrots
Making glazed carrots is super simple and only requires two steps (after you peel and cut them).
What to Serve with Glazed Carrots
Glazed carrots are a versatile side dish. Here are a few of our favorite mains to pair with them.
Financial literacy peaks at age 54, according to a 2022 study. That’s around the time you’ve gained enough knowledge and experience to make sound money decisions — and before your cognitive ability might start to ebb.
“As we get older, we seem to rely more on past experience, rules of thumb, and intuitive knowledge about which products and strategies are better,” said Rafal Chomik, an economist in Australia who led the study.
If people in their mid-50s tend to make smart financial moves, where does that leave younger generations?
Advisers often educate clients at different stages of life to avoid money mistakes. While those in their 50s usually demonstrate optimal prudence in navigating investments and savings, advisers keep busy helping others — from twentysomethings to mid-career professionals — avoid costly financial blunders:
Navigate your 20s
Perhaps the biggest blunder for young earners is spending too much and saving too little. They may also lack the long-term perspective that encourages long-range planning.
“The mistake is not establishing the saving habit early, and not appreciating the power of compounding” over time, said Mark Kravietz, a certified financial planner in Melville, N.Y.
Similarly, it’s common for young workers to delay enrolling in an employer-sponsored retirement plan. Not participating from the get-go comes with a steep long-term cost.
“ Better to prioritize debt with the highest interest rate, which can result in paying less interest over the long run. ”
People in their 20s process incoming information quickly. But their high level of fluid intelligence can work against them. Cursory research into a consumer trend or hot sector of the stock market can spur them to make rash investments. Such impulsive moves might backfire.
“It’s important to resist the hype,” Kravietz said. “Don’t chase fads or try to make fast money” by timing the market.
Many young adults with student debt juggle multiple loans. Eager to chip away at their debt, they fall into the trap of choosing the wrong loan to tackle first, says Megan Kowalski, an adviser in Boca Raton, Fla.
Rather than pay off the highest-interest rate loan first (so-called avalanche debt), they mistakenly focus on the smallest loan (a.k.a. snowball debt). It’s better to prioritize debt with the highest interest rate, which can result in paying less interest over the long run.
Navigate your 30s
“ Resist the temptation to lower your 401(k) contribution to boost your take-home pay. ”
By your 30s, insurance grows in importance. You want to protect what you have — now and in the future. But many people in this age group neglect their insurance needs. Or they misunderstand which coverages matter most.
“If you have a life partner and kids, get the proper life insurance while in your 30s,” Kravietz said.
It’s easy to get caught up in your career and assume you can put off life insurance. But even low odds of your untimely death doesn’t mean you can ignore the risk of leaving your loved ones without a cash cushion.
Another common blunder involves disability insurance. If your employer offers short-term disability insurance as an employee perk, you may think you’re all set.
However, the real risk is how you’d earn income if you suffer a serious and lasting illness or injury. Don’t confuse short-term disability insurance (which might cover you for as long as one year) with long-term disability coverage that pays benefits for many years.
Assuming you were wise enough to enroll in your employer-sponsored retirement plan from the outset, don’t slough off in your 30s. Resist the temptation to lower your 401(k) contribution to boost your take-home pay.
“You want to give till it hurts,” Kravietz said. “Keep putting money away” in your 401(k) or other tax-advantaged plan until you feel a sting. Weigh the minor pain you feel now against the major relief of having a much bigger nest egg decades from now.
Navigate your 40s
“ ‘The 40s are often the most expensive in anyone’s life. Life is getting more complicated.’”
For Kravietz, the 40s represent a decade of heavy spending pressures. Mid-career professionals face a mortgage and mounting tuition bills for their children.
“The 40s are often the most expensive in anyone’s life,” he said. “Life is getting more complicated.”
As a result, it’s easy to overlook seemingly minor financial matters like updating beneficiaries on your 401(k) plan or completing all the appropriate estate documents such as a will.
“People in their 40s sometimes fail to update beneficiaries,” Kravietz said. For example, a new marriage might mean changing the beneficiary from a prior partner or current parent to the new spouse.
It’s also easy to get complacent about your investments, especially if you’re the conservative type who favors a set-it-and-forget-it strategy. Instead, think in terms of tax optimization.
“In your 40s, you want to take advantage of what the government gives you,” Kravietz said. “If you have a lot of money in a bank money market account and you’re in a top tax bracket, shifting some of that money into municipal bonds can make sense” depending on your state of residence and other factors.
If you’re saving for a child’s college tuition using a 529 plan — and you have parents who also want to chip in — work together to strategize. Don’t make assumptions about how much (or how little) your parents might contribute to your kid’s education.
“Rather than assume you’ll have to pay a certain amount for educational expenses, coordinate between generations of parents and grandparents” on how much they intend to give, Kowalski said. “That way, you’re not duplicating efforts and you won’t put extra funds in a 529 plan.”
Financial literacy peaks at age 54, according to a 2022 study. That’s around the time you’ve gained enough knowledge and experience to make sound money decisions — and before your cognitive ability might start to ebb.
“As we get older, we seem to rely more on past experience, rules of thumb, and intuitive knowledge about which products and strategies are better,” said Rafal Chomik, an economist in Australia who led the study.
If people in their mid-50s tend to make smart financial moves, where does that leave younger generations?
Advisers often educate clients at different stages of life to avoid money mistakes. While those in their 50s usually demonstrate optimal prudence in navigating investments and savings, advisers keep busy helping others — from twentysomethings to mid-career professionals — avoid costly financial blunders:
Navigate your 20s
Perhaps the biggest blunder for young earners is spending too much and saving too little. They may also lack the long-term perspective that encourages long-range planning.
“The mistake is not establishing the saving habit early, and not appreciating the power of compounding” over time, said Mark Kravietz, a certified financial planner in Melville, N.Y.
Similarly, it’s common for young workers to delay enrolling in an employer-sponsored retirement plan. Not participating from the get-go comes with a steep long-term cost.
“ Better to prioritize debt with the highest interest rate, which can result in paying less interest over the long run. ”
People in their 20s process incoming information quickly. But their high level of fluid intelligence can work against them. Cursory research into a consumer trend or hot sector of the stock market can spur them to make rash investments. Such impulsive moves might backfire.
“It’s important to resist the hype,” Kravietz said. “Don’t chase fads or try to make fast money” by timing the market.
Many young adults with student debt juggle multiple loans. Eager to chip away at their debt, they fall into the trap of choosing the wrong loan to tackle first, says Megan Kowalski, an adviser in Boca Raton, Fla.
Rather than pay off the highest-interest rate loan first (so-called avalanche debt), they mistakenly focus on the smallest loan (a.k.a. snowball debt). It’s better to prioritize debt with the highest interest rate, which can result in paying less interest over the long run.
Navigate your 30s
“ Resist the temptation to lower your 401(k) contribution to boost your take-home pay. ”
By your 30s, insurance grows in importance. You want to protect what you have — now and in the future. But many people in this age group neglect their insurance needs. Or they misunderstand which coverages matter most.
“If you have a life partner and kids, get the proper life insurance while in your 30s,” Kravietz said.
It’s easy to get caught up in your career and assume you can put off life insurance. But even low odds of your untimely death doesn’t mean you can ignore the risk of leaving your loved ones without a cash cushion.
Another common blunder involves disability insurance. If your employer offers short-term disability insurance as an employee perk, you may think you’re all set.
However, the real risk is how you’d earn income if you suffer a serious and lasting illness or injury. Don’t confuse short-term disability insurance (which might cover you for as long as one year) with long-term disability coverage that pays benefits for many years.
Assuming you were wise enough to enroll in your employer-sponsored retirement plan from the outset, don’t slough off in your 30s. Resist the temptation to lower your 401(k) contribution to boost your take-home pay.
“You want to give till it hurts,” Kravietz said. “Keep putting money away” in your 401(k) or other tax-advantaged plan until you feel a sting. Weigh the minor pain you feel now against the major relief of having a much bigger nest egg decades from now.
Navigate your 40s
“ ‘The 40s are often the most expensive in anyone’s life. Life is getting more complicated.’”
For Kravietz, the 40s represent a decade of heavy spending pressures. Mid-career professionals face a mortgage and mounting tuition bills for their children.
“The 40s are often the most expensive in anyone’s life,” he said. “Life is getting more complicated.”
As a result, it’s easy to overlook seemingly minor financial matters like updating beneficiaries on your 401(k) plan or completing all the appropriate estate documents such as a will.
“People in their 40s sometimes fail to update beneficiaries,” Kravietz said. For example, a new marriage might mean changing the beneficiary from a prior partner or current parent to the new spouse.
It’s also easy to get complacent about your investments, especially if you’re the conservative type who favors a set-it-and-forget-it strategy. Instead, think in terms of tax optimization.
“In your 40s, you want to take advantage of what the government gives you,” Kravietz said. “If you have a lot of money in a bank money market account and you’re in a top tax bracket, shifting some of that money into municipal bonds can make sense” depending on your state of residence and other factors.
If you’re saving for a child’s college tuition using a 529 plan — and you have parents who also want to chip in — work together to strategize. Don’t make assumptions about how much (or how little) your parents might contribute to your kid’s education.
“Rather than assume you’ll have to pay a certain amount for educational expenses, coordinate between generations of parents and grandparents” on how much they intend to give, Kowalski said. “That way, you’re not duplicating efforts and you won’t put extra funds in a 529 plan.”
This is dedicated to those out there working to create a stylish wardrobe while on a budget, myself included. With the continual rise in the cost of living, I find serious comfort in coming across fashionable yet affordable pieces. With fall underway and the winter months on the horizon, there’s no better time to give your closet a refresh with some cool options. Thankfully, I came across a selection of finds that are incredibly stylish without breaking the bank.
During my latest online shopping excursion, I was laser-focused on finding pieces that were chic and priced under $100. My virtual carts at each of my favorite retailers are now overflowing with a great selection of elevated basics, including timeless shirts, stylish sweaters, trendy shoes (the embellished flats are too cool), and much more. Scroll on to shop 30 of my top affordable and chic picks this season.
There’s no denying that Amazon is an endless pit of products, and it can be extremely overwhelming to dig up some great fashion finds. Time-consuming is an understatement. Thankfully, Who What Wear editors are masters at online shopping and know exactly how to dig up some stylish gems from the site. In this case, I was able to find a plethora of trending pieces that are spot-on for this season and beyond. The best part is that all the pieces are budget friendly, coming in at under $100.
This particular haul is comprised of a mix of timeless trends (think luxe-looking sweaters, modern-cut basics, and cool coats) along with some of the standout trends of the season. I personally had a hard time not adding every last piece to my virtual cart, especially since a lot of these items can easily be mixed and matched. Keep scrolling to do some perusing and outfit planning of your own.
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
“I’ve just wrapped up a meeting with our marketing agency, and I must admit, I was taken aback by their charges given the somewhat underwhelming results we’ve seen,” a sentiment shared in a social media group for marketing professionals, echoed by others. It’s a refrain I encounter frequently. As the owner of a marketing and public relations agency, I often hear stories from new or potential clients recounting how their previous agencies fell short in delivering results that justified the cost. Therefore, it’s no surprise that a 2023 global report highlighted businesses’ reluctance to invest in marketing.
I can’t blame business leaders or marketing professionals for approaching agency partnerships with caution. Having previously held a senior marketing role in-house, I understand firsthand the pressure of reporting to the C-suite or board. It involves the delicate balance of budget allocation and making decisions that guarantee marketing generates more revenue than it costs — a challenging position to be in. This underscores the importance of marketing and public relations agencies not only comprehending but also empowering their clients to reach their goals, entering board meetings armed with compelling results and feeling like rockstars.
The challenge in achieving a scope of work that both the client and company leadership deem worthwhile often stems from ambiguity. In today’s digital age, ambiguity should be avoidable, right? With tools like GA4 and various software programs for tracking metrics and attribution, results are at our fingertips in real-time. ROI, a buzzword agencies love to tout, is on everyone’s wish list. However, ROI, sophisticated metrics and the agency’s interpretation of results or deliverables are just that — an interpretation — and may not align with the client’s true expectations or what they find meaningful for their investment.
To combat ambiguity and ensure that the agency-client relationship delivers results that bolster the company’s performance, financials and stability (in other words, success), the following best practices lay a solid foundation, promoting transparency, setting clear expectations and, most importantly, ensuring both the client and agency are on the same page regarding what success entails.
1. Set the right budget expectations
Clients have the prerogative to set the budget, but it falls on the marketing or PR agency to provide counsel on whether it aligns with the desired goals. Results and budget often correlate, especially in digital marketing’s context. Integrating marketing tactics like social media, SEO, Google Ads and email marketing can yield better results than pursuing them individually. This synergy should be communicated effectively to clients who may have ambitious goals but limited budgets.
2. Pinpoint and agree on goals and metrics
SMART goals, while often met with a sigh, and as overused as the concept of “smart, measurable, achievable, relatable and time-bound” might be, SMART goals work and are essential to the relationship. The agency and client must collaboratively define the goals, metrics and timeframes that translate into measurable revenue growth. The client’s input is vital in this process to ensure alignment with their objectives. We describe this to clients as how we’ll agree on what success looks like.
Agencies that don’t provide outcome projections are simply lazy or not qualified.
Agencies should have the confidence to specify the results they can deliver based on their track record, experience and industry benchmarks. Agreements should outline minimum expectations for media placements, lead generation or social media growth, for instance. While many agencies avoid this due to the risk, an agency should be capable and bold enough to stand behind their ability and skill set. Transparency on the specified results is key to avoiding miscommunication.
4. Conduct ongoing, consistent communication
Nothing good ever comes from information voids. Regular meetings and frequent results reporting foster trust and eliminate surprises. Transparency extends to addressing issues promptly and suggesting solutions when goals aren’t being met.
I stress to my team that hiding behind constant email communication can be detrimental to the relationship. Pick up the phone or meet in person on a regular basis. There’s still a lot to be said for face-to-face collaboration.
Agencies should view their clients’ success as their own. They should provide well-researched, thoughtful recommendations and actively problem-solve to ensure the client’s money is being spent in the most productive way possible. A successful agency serves as a guide, recognizing that the client is the hero of their business’s story.
Ultimately, the path to success in agency-client relationships hinges on clarity, transparency and a shared commitment to achieving meaningful results.
Agencies can be successful, but it requires transparent communication, a commitment from the client side and continuous assessment of business outcomes related to the scope of work.
The West’s united front on Ukraine is showing more cracks than ever — and Kyiv has little choice but to grin and bear it.
More than 500 days into Russia’s full-scale invasion, Republican lawmakers in Washington DC on Saturday derailed an effort to unleash a major tranche of aid for the war-torn country.
Coming just nine days after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited Washington to plead for continued support, the blockage underscored a hardening of attitudes among congressional Republicans who want to end Washington’s assistance for Kyiv.
At the same time as Republicans were voting ‘no’ on Capitol Hill, voters in Slovakia elected a pro-Russian prime minister, Robert Fico, who vows not to send a “single round” of ammunition to Ukraine, and looks set to team up with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbàn to oppose further European support for Kyiv. Poland, once the most dependable of Kyiv’s allies, made the shock announcement on September 20 that it would no longer send weapons.
These warning signs don’t amount to a profound policy shift in Washington or Brussels. U.S. President Joe Biden has vowed to stand by Ukraine despite the budget fiasco. And most European leaders remain staunchly supportive of Ukraine, with some €50 billion in continued support for the country due to be signed off in coming months, according to two EU diplomats who were granted anonymity to talk about the non-public deliberations.
Asked to comment on the fact that the U.S. stopgap bill lacks any funding for Ukraine, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said: “The president has built a coalition of more than 50 countries to provide aid to support Ukraine … There is very strong international coalition behind Ukraine and if Putin thinks he can outlast us, he’s wrong.”
Josep Borrell, the EU’s top diplomat, said he was “sure” the decision to block funding would be reconsidered. “We’ll continue to be on your side,” he told reporters in Kyiv Monday when asked how the U.S. budget shortfall would affect Ukraine.
Ukrainian politicians — who’ve faced criticism from the United States and United Kingdom for appearing insufficiently “grateful” for Western aid — sounded similarly upbeat. “We’re working with both sides of the Congress to ensure it doesn’t repeat again, under any circumstances,” said Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba, appearing next to Borrell.
‘Words of gratitude’
But despite these attempts to put a positive spin on the situation, open criticism of aid among senior Western politicians — coupled with Elon Musk’s online attacks against Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy — sends a chilling message to Kyiv.
The message that the U.S. and Europe will stick with Kyiv — no matter what — is starting to ring hollow.
Ukraine remains heavily dependent on Western support not just to fuel its battle against Russia, but also to keep its public administration ticking over. According to its projected budget for 2024, Ukraine expects to receive $42.8 billion from international donors in the coming year, a big chunk of which would come from the United States. In June, Ukraine’s finance minister, Serhiy Marchenko, told POLITICO that the U.S. should “step in and at least provide us mid-term relief.”
At the same time as Republicans were voting ‘no’ on Capitol Hill, voters in Slovakia elected a pro-Russian prime minister, Robert Fico, who vows not to send a “single round” of ammunition to Ukraine | Janos Kummer/Getty Images
Asked whether the holdup on Capitol Hill now leaves Kyiv with a budget shortfall, a spokesperson for Marchenko declined to comment.
Europe is also worried about what to expect from Washington. While most EU countries agree on supporting Ukraine, aid for Kyiv is tied to a broader review of the EU’s long-term budget on which there is no agreement. And since all EU27 countries need to back the deal, it may prove difficult to pass by year-end, which is when the EU’s current support for Ukraine runs out.
“There is not much political discussion on the financial support for Ukraine. That is not the difficult piece of the puzzle. But the puzzle overall is very hard, that no one dares to predict anything,” said an EU diplomat who asked not to be named to discuss the confidential budget talks.
Indeed, Hungary’s Orbán has already said he’s not prepared to finance Ukraine unless it reviews its treatment of Hungarian minorities living in the country. Although critics describe this stance as a tactical veto meant to unlock funds that Brussels is withholding from Budapest over a separate rule-of-law dispute, Orbán may use the election of his like-minded Slovakian peer to toughen his negotiating tactics.
“Member states remain broadly supportive of aid for Ukraine,” said a second EU diplomat. “Of course the big elephant in the room is, ‘What if this is the precursor to the U.S. just abandoning Ukraine?’ While it’s in the back of everyone’s minds, I just don’t think that’s going to happen now or anytime soon.”
Amid uncertainty about whether Ukraine will be able to finance its budget and keep its war effort going, Ukrainian officials are trying hard to put on a brave face and appear thankful. Speaking to POLITICO last week, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal insisted on his “gratitude” toward Poland, an ally that has been locked in a dispute with Kyiv over grain exports, and has now vowed not to send any more weapons.
“I would like to express the words of gratitude to the Polish nation and all Polish families for the support that they have given and have provided to Ukrainian refugees,” he said.
Gregorio Sorgi and Suzanne Lynch contributed reporting in Brussels and Eun Kim in Washington DC.
[ad_2]
Nicholas Vinocur, Paola Tamma and Veronika Melkozerova
WASHINGTON — With House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s latest funding plan in ruins and lawmakers leaving town for the weekend, there’s no endgame in sight as hard-right Republicans push closer to a federal government shutdown.
The White House will tell federal agencies on Friday to prepare for a shutdown, according to an official with the Office of Management and Budget who insisted on anonymity to discuss the upcoming instructions.
That’s a standard seven days out from a federal disruption.
“ ‘This is a whole new concept of individuals who just want to burn the whole place down.’ ”
— Kevin McCarthy on his intraparty Republican critics
In a crushing defeat for McCarthy on Thursday, a handful of Republican hardliners blocked a typically popular defense bill from advancing — the second time this week it was set back, an unheard-of loss for a House speaker.
Even a stopgap bill to keep government funding past the Sept. 30 deadline, called a continuing resolution, or CR, is a nonstarter for some on the right flank who have essentially seized control of the House.
“This is a whole new concept of individuals who just want to burn the whole place down,” McCarthy said after Thursday’s vote, acknowledging he was frustrated. “It doesn’t work.”
The open revolt was further evidence that McCarthy’s strategy of repeatedly giving in to the conservatives — in evidence as early as January when McCarthy is believed to have made undisclosed concessions to secure holdout GOP votes for his long-desired speakership — is seemingly only emboldening them, allowing them to run roughshod over their own House majority. Their far-right bills have almost no chances in the Senate.
Trump urged the hardliners to hold the line against the higher funding levels McCarthy had agreed to with President Joe Biden earlier this year and to end the federal criminal indictments against him.
“This is also the last chance to defund these political prosecutions against me and other Patriots,” Trump wrote on social media.
“They failed on the debt limit, but they must not fail now. Use the power of the purse and defend the Country!” the former president wrote.
The White House and Democrats, along with some Republicans, warn that a shutdown would be devastating for people who rely on their government for everyday services and would undermine America’s standing in the world.
Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat, observed Friday on the MSNBC program “Morning Joe” that investigations into, and prosecutions of, Trump are funded by continuing, indefinite appropriations and thus would be unaffected by a federal government shutdown.
“We need the extreme MAGA Republicans to get their act together,” said House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, referring to Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan.
“End the civil war,” Jeffries urged the Republicans. “Get your act together.”
But one of Trump’s top allies, Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Florida Republican, who is leading the hard-right flank in the current skirmish, said the House Republicans now have almost no choices left but to spend the time it takes to pass each of the 12 spending bills needed to fund the government — typically a laborious process — even if it means going into a shutdown.
Or they can join with Democrats to pass a CR, putting McCarthy at risk.
What Gaetz said he, and several others, would not do is vote for a continuing resolution that fails to slash spending. “I’m giving a eulogy for the CR right now,” Gaetz told reporters after a late afternoon meeting Thursday at the Capitol.
“I represent Florida’s First Congressional District, where, during the shutdown, tens of thousands of people will go without a paycheck, and so I know the impact of a shutdown,” Gaetz said. “So it may get worse before it gets better, and I have little to offer but blood, sweat, toil and tears, but that may be what it takes.”
A government closure is increasingly likely as time runs out for Congress to act.
McCarthy’s bid to move ahead with a traditionally popular defense funding bill as a first step toward keeping the government running was shattered, on a vote of 216-212. Five Republicans refused to vote with the increasingly endangered speaker. A sixth Republican voted no on procedural grounds so the bill could be reconsidered.
Moving forward with the defense bill was supposed to be a way for McCarthy to build goodwill among the GOP House majority as he tries to pass a temporary measure just to keep government running for another month. It, too, had catered to other hard-right priorities, such as slashing spending by 8% from many services and earmarking further funds for security at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Many on the right flank opposed the deal McCarthy struck with Biden this year over the spending levels and are trying to dismantle it now. They want to see progress on the individual appropriations bills that would fund the various federal departments at the lower levels these lawmakers are demanding.
The morning test vote on Thursday shattered a McCarthy strategy that had emerged just the night before. Republicans had appeared on track, in a tight roll call, to advancing the measure. Then the Democrats who had not yet voted began rushing into the chamber.
New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and fellow Democrats yelled out to hold open the vote. She was a “no.” A few others came in behind her and tipped the tally toward defeat.
The Democrats oppose the military bill on many fronts, including Republican provisions that would gut diversity programs at the Pentagon.
As passage appeared doomed, attention turned to the five Republican holdouts to switch their votes.
GOP leaders spent more than an hour on the floor trying to recruit one of them, Rep. Dan Bishop of North Carolina, to vote “yes.”
“Every time there’s the slightest relief of the pressure, the movement goes away from completing the work,” Bishop said.
When asked what it would take to gain his vote, Bishop said, “I think a schedule of appropriations bills over Kevin McCarthy signature would be meaningful to you, to me.”
Others were dug in, including some who had supported advancing the defense bill just two days ago when it first failed.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Georgia Republican and a clamorous opponent of more aid for Ukraine in its defense against the unprovoked Russian invasion, said she voted against the defense bill this time because her party’s leadership refused to separate out war money.
McCarthy had pledged to keep House lawmakers in session this weekend for as long as it took to finish their work. But they were sent home and told they could be called back on ample notice.
Many Republicans were starting to speak up more forcefully against their hard-right colleagues.
Mike Lawler, who represents a swing district in New York carried handily by Joe Biden in 2020, said he would not “be party to a shutdown.”
“There needs to be a realization that you’re not going to get everything you want,” he said. “Just throwing a temper tantrum and stomping your feet — frankly, not only is it wrong — it’s just pathetic.”
Lawler had said in an interview with CNN earlier in the week that barreling toward a shutdown was not Republican conservatism but “stupidity.”
LYON, France — A century after it was founded, the world’s only global crime-fighting organization faces an existential question: Does the world still need it?
Rising geopolitical tensions including between the United States and Russia and China are challenging the agency’s operating model, which relies on voluntary information-sharing among its members’ police forces.
Add to that persistent claims that its famed Red Notice alert system is subject to political manipulation and accusations of complicity in torture against Interpol’s Emirati president, Ahmed Naser Al-Raisi, and the crime-fighting organization faces a perfect storm.
In an interview with POLITICO, Interpol Secretary General Jürgen Stock said the institution faces numerous difficulties, including over its funding situation. But he argued an agency that spans the globe is needed now more than ever amid international child sexual abuse, environmental crime andmafia groups like Italy’s ‘Ndrangheta.
“The challenges are huge. I cannot say we are sufficiently resourced,” Stock said as the agency marks 100 years since it was founded in Vienna.
“We are overwhelmed by cases of online child sexual exploitation. We are overwhelmed by cases of cybercrime … We are overwhelmed by drug trafficking,” he said. Such international operations are extremely resource-intensive, added the German former high-ranking police official.
His pitch is that the global community can only tackle these kind of crimes through cooperation. “That is why a global platform is more important than ever. Can you consider if Interpol would not exist? People would say, we need such an agency.”
He cited looming recession and the energy crisis as the main drags on Interpol’s funding push. Asked how much Interpol seeks, Stock did not name a figure, but said tens of millions of euros would be needed to sustain new systems for data and biometric analysis that have not been fully funded.
With 195 member countries as of 2022, the agency’s total revenue in 2022 was €195 million, of which €86 million was “voluntary contributions” — money that member countries contribute to support certain projects.
One of the complaints dogging Interpol is that its funding model is heavily reliant on members’ goodwill. Corporations including Philip Morris and associations like FIFA used to also donate large sums until Stock put an end to the practice in 2014 — a decision he said led to a “difficult couple of years.”
Yet Interpol remains beholden to its government donors including the European Union, its largest single contributor, to pony up cash to support projects or bolster the agency’s capacity to analyze large data sets, for example.
In March 2017, the agency received €50 million from the United Arab Emirates. Months later, its members elected as its president Emirati Major General Ahmed Nasser al-Raisi, who faced complaints lodged in France and Turkey a few months before his nomination over accusations of torture, which allegedly took place in 2018. The UAE’s foreign ministry rejected the complaints as “without foundation.”
Asked about the claims against al-Raisi, Stock said they “are aware of the accusation,” adding that it is an “ongoing matter” and that it would be “inappropriate and immature” to comment further. He also defended the UAE donation, saying Interpol was “not a rich organization” and that the UAE did not decide precisely how the money would be spent.
In March 2017, the agency received €50 million from the United Arab Emirates | Warren Little/Getty Images for XCAT
In addition, Red Notices — which signal that a person is wanted by a member country, but is not an arrest warrant — face criticism that they can be manipulated by repressive regimes pursuing political opponents. A 2022 report from the European Parliament said political use of Red Notices was a persistent “problem,” citing the example of a Ukrainian opera director who was arrested in Italy following a Red Notice issued by Russia.
Stock acknowledged that Russia’s war against Ukraine has “had an impact on police cooperation,” but argued the Red Notice system was sound. “We are checking intensively whether the request is in line with Interpol’s procedures,” he said, adding that Interpol is not a “quasi-court.”
While critics say Interpol is hamstrung by its inability to pursue state-backed criminals and terrorists, Stock argued that it’s precisely the agency’s studied neutrality — which does not allow any member to compel any other to do anything — that allows it to be effective in what it can do.
Stock’s term as Interpol secretary-general, essentially its chief executive, ends in late 2024. Stephen Kavanagh, Interpol’s executive director for police services and, as of Wednesday, a candidate to be Stock’s successor, argued that Interpol’s staying power through 100 years was due to its low profile.
“The reason we are surviving despite the scale of global conflict is because we don’t try to exert power over our members. We can’t order countries to investigate or not investigate — which allows us to be effective in bolstering cooperation,” Kavanagh said.
KYIV — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s choice for the country’s new defense minister sends two clear signals to Ukraine’s allies and adversaries: Kyiv is serious about cleaning up corruption, and steadfast about regaining Crimea from Russian control.
Rustem Umerov, whom Zelenskyy has put forward to replace Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov, is a Crimean Tatar with deep business and political experience, including chairing Ukraine’s commission monitoring international financial and military aid to the country’s war effort. As head of the State Property Fund since last year, he has revitalized the country’s privatization efforts.
The defense ministry “needs new approaches,” Zelenskyy said in dismissing Reznikov, whose ministry has been plagued by corruption allegations. Reznikov himself hasn’t been implicated, but the controversy has tainted the ministry.
Umerov, 41, will become the first Muslim and Crimean Tatar to gain such a high post in the Ukrainian government. In addition to his financial acumen, Umerov’s appointment will mean a deeper integration of the Crimean Tatar community into decision-making in Kyiv. It also clearly indicates Ukraine’s adamant determination to take Crimea back.
The planned change is the highest-level shake-up in Zelenskyy’s administration since Russia launched its all-out invasion in February 2022. Zelenskyy called on the Ukrainian legislature to approve the decision as soon as possible.
“The ministry needs new approaches and other formats of interaction with both the military and society at large,” Zelenskyy said late Sunday. “Autumn is a time for strengthening,” he added.
Umerov, founder of investment company ASTEM and a Ukrainian MP, has been one of the most prominent advocates of Ukraine’s re-occupation of Crimea, illegally annexed by Russia in 2014. In addition to working as a head of the State Property Fund since 2022, he has been actively taking part in international negotiations, including with Russia.
“He is a strong manager with a strategic vision, who has well-established international connections in the U.S., the European Union, the Arab world, Turkey, and the countries of Central Asia,” said Refat Chubarov, chairman of the Mejlis, the political representative body of the Crimean Tatars in exile.
“Such a high appointment is a good signal for Crimean Tatars’ integration into Ukrainian government structures, and also a great responsibility for the native community,” Chubarov told POLITICO.
Umerov’s prospective appointment was praised by anti-corruption advocates, who have been critical of Reznikov for a string of army procurement corruption scandals at the defense ministry.
“I was pleasantly surprised by Rustem’s role in non-public advocacy of weapons for Ukraine. He often very quietly did the things that had failed in the Defense Ministry during the last year and a half,” Daria Kaleniuk, acting director of the Anti-Corruption Action Center, a Kyiv-based watchdog, said in a statement.
Kaleniuk also praised Umerov’s performance as the head of the State Property Fund. Kyiv raised record proceeds from selling small state assets in the first quarter of 2023 despite Moscow’s invasion, Umerov said in May. So far this year, “more than 2,000 entrepreneurs got the opportunity for business development,” Umerov said in a report in late August.
“We saw only positive results in one of the country’s once most corrupt sewers,” Kaleniuk added.
When it comes to the most fashionable sister duo in modern history there really is only one name that comes to mind: The Olsen Twins. These two have been the fashion crowd’s obsession for decades now, and with the rise in everyones obsession with quiet luxury – a term these two basically defined- they’re back at the top of everyone’s mind when it comes to looking seriously rich and also seriously minimal.
Their designer label The Row has become not only basically the uniform for both Mary-Kate and Ashely but it’s a major hit with the celebrities Gen Z worships like Hailey Bieber, Lori Harvey, and Sofia Richie Grainge. While The Row may be a fan favorite with celebs and fashion people it’s not exactly the most affordable brand out there. But not to worry, I went on a deep dive for chic items that totally embody that stylish, cool, minimal, new york city vibe that The Olsen Twins are known for. After searching through tons of basics on Reformation, Net-a-Porter, Shopbop, and H&M I found 30 items that are guaranteed to give you that stealth wealth look.
Keep scrolling to see which 30 items I’m ordering next to get me that much closer to looking like an Olsen.
Hear me out for a second: I love trying out the latest makeup looks and beauty trends, but since I live in an extremely expensive city, my budget is quite limited. If you can relate, I highly suggest running to your local CVS ASAP—it’s having a major sale that every beauty lover needs to know about. Here’s the gist: Now through September 16, countless ride-or-die drugstore brands including Revlon, E.l.f. Cosmetics, Milani, Kitsch, and more are discounted during CVS’s Epic Beauty Sale. As if you need another reason to participate, you could earn over $100 in ExtraBucks Rewards for shopping the sale (on top of your savings). If you’re not sure where to start, let’s pretend we’re walking through CVS together. Keep scrolling for my breakdown of four beauty trends and a list of gems I’m picking up to achieve each look.
As a shopping editor, I am constantly checking up on the latest arrivals from the most stylish corners of the internet. One thing that has often boggled my mind during my years in this industry is that the interest is vastly more oriented to chic clothing and that it often feels as though accessories get completely overlooked. I know full well of the tremendous power that accessories hold in transforming an outfit, so I always make sure to pay particular attention to finding the best of the best when doing my regular shopping deep dives.
During my recent perusals at some of my favorite online haunts like Nordstrom, J.Crew, and Shopbop, I made sure to spend some extra time on the accessories sections. I found an affordable plethora of insanely cool jewelry and other standout hats, bags, and more that span from classic to trendy (some a mix of both). Keep scrolling to shop 30 of my top accessory picks of the moment—Did I mention they are all under $100? You’re welcome.
Ben Cohen wasn’t talking about ice cream. He was talking about American militarism.
At 72, the co-founder of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream is bald and bespectacled. He looks fit, cherubic even, but when he got going on what it was like to grow up during the Cold War, his tone became less playful and more assertive — almost defiant.
“I had this image of these two countries facing each other, and each one had this huge pile of shiny, state-of-the-art weapons in front of them,” he said, his arms waving above his head. “And behind them are the people in their countries that are suffering from lack of health care, not enough to eat, not enough housing.”
“It’s just crazy,” he added. “Approaching relationships with other countries based on threats of annihilating them, it’s just a pretty stupid way to go.”
It wasn’t a new subject for the famously socially conscious ice cream mogul; Cohen has been leading a crusade against what he sees as Washington’s bellicosity for decades. It’s just that with the war in Ukraine, his position has taken on a new — morally questionable — relevance.
Cohen, who no longer sits on the board of Ben & Jerry’s, isn’t just one of the most successful marketers of the last century. He’s a leading figure in a small but vocal part of the American left that has stood steadfast in opposition to the United States’ involvement in the war in Ukraine.
When Russian President Vladimir Putin sent tanks rolling on Kyiv, Cohen didn’t focus his ire on the Kremlin; a group he funds published a full-page ad in the New York Times blaming the act of aggression on “deliberate provocations” by the U.S. and NATO.
Following months of Russian missile strikes on residential apartment blocks, and after evidence of street executions by Russian troops in the Ukrainian city of Bucha, he funded a 2022 journalism prize that praised its winner for reporting on “Washington’s true objectives in the Ukraine war, such as urging regime change in Russia.”
In May, Cohen tweeted approvingly of an op-ed by the academic Jeffrey Sachs that argued “the war in Ukraine was provoked” and called for “negotiations based on Ukraine’s neutrality and NATO non-enlargement.”
Ben Cohen outside the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington this month, before getting arrested | Win McNamee/Getty Images
I set up a video call with Cohen not because I can’t sympathize with his mistrust of U.S. adventurism, nor because I couldn’t follow the argument that U.S. foreign policy spurred Russia to attack. I called to try to understand how he has maintained his stance even as the Kremlin abducts children, tortures and kills Ukrainians and sends thousands of Russian troops to their deaths in human wave attacks.
It’s one thing to warn of NATO expansion in peacetime, or to call for a negotiated settlement that leaves Ukrainian citizens safe from further aggression. It’s another to ignore one party’s atrocities and agitate for an outcome that would almost certainly leave millions of people at the mercy of a regime that has demonstrated callousness and cruelty.
Given the scale of Russia’s brutality in Ukraine, I wanted to understand: How does one justify focusing one’s energies on stopping the efforts to bring it to a halt?
Masters of war
Cohen’s political awakening took place against the background of the Cold War and the political upheaval caused by Washington’s involvement in Vietnam.
He was 11 during the Cuban missile crisis that brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Part of the reason he enrolled in college was to avoid being drafted and sent to the jungle to fight the Viet Cong.
When I asked how he first became interested in politics, he cited Bob Dylan’s 1963 protest song “Masters of War,” which takes aim at the political leaders and weapons makers who benefit from conflicts and culminates with the singer standing over their graves until he’s sure they’re dead.
“That was kind of a revelation to me,” Cohen said. Behind him, the sun filtered past a cardboard Ben & Jerry’s sign propped against a window. “I hadn’t understood that, you know, there were these masters of war — essentially I guess what we would now call the military-industrial-congressional complex — that profit from war.”
Cohen saw people from his high school get drafted and never come back from a war that “wasn’t justified.” As he graduated in the summer of 1969, around half a million U.S. troops were stationed in ‘Nam. Later that year, hundreds of thousands of protesters marched on Washington, D.C. to demand peace.
It was only much later, while doing “a lot of research” into the “tradeoffs between military spending and spending for human needs,” that Cohen came across a 1953 speech by Dwight D. Eisenhower, which foreshadowed the U.S. president’s 1961 farewell address in which he coined the phrase “military-industrial complex.”
A Republican president who had served as the supreme allied commander in Europe during World War II, Eisenhower warned against tumbling into an arms race. “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed,” he said.
“That is a foundational thing for me, very inspiring for me, and captures the essence of what I believe,” Cohen said.
“If we weren’t wasting all of our money on preparing to kill people, we would actually be able to save and help a lot of people,” he added with a chuckle. “That goes for how we approach the world internationally as well,” he added — including the war in Ukraine.
Pierre Ferrari, a former Ben & Jerry’s board member who was with the company from 1997 to 2020, said Cohen’s view of the world was shaped by the events of his youth.
“We were brought up at a time when the military, the government was just completely out of control,” he said. “We’re both children of the sixties, the Vietnam War and the new futility of war and the way war is used by the military-industrial complex and politics,” Ferrari added, pointing to the peace symbol he wore around his neck.
Jeff Furman, who has known Cohen for nearly 50 years and once served as Ben & Jerry’s in-house legal counsel, acknowledged that his generation’s views on Ukraine were informed by America’s misadventures in Vietnam.
“There’s a history of why this war is happening that’s a little bit more complex than who Putin is,” he said. “When you’ve been misled so many times in the past, you have to take this into consideration when you think about it, and really, really try to know what’s happening.”
Ice-cold activism
Politics has been a part of the Ben & Jerry’s brand since Cohen and his partner Jerry Greenfield started selling ice cream out of an abandoned gas station in 1978.
The company’s look and ethos were pure 1960s; they named one of their early flavors, Cherry Garcia, after the lead guitarist of the Grateful Dead, Jerry Garcia, whose psychedelic riffs formed the soundtrack of the hippy counterculture.
Social justice was one of the duo’s secret ingredients. For the first-year anniversary of the gas station shop’s opening, they gave away free ice cream for a day. On the flyers printed to promote the event was a quote from Cohen: “Business has a responsibility to give back to the community from which it draws its support.”
In 1985, after the company went public, they used some of the shares to endow a foundation working for progressive social change and committed Ben & Jerry’s to spend 7.5 percent of its pretax profits on philanthropy.
In the early years, the company instituted a five-to-one cap on the ratio between the salary of the highest-earning executive and its lowest-paid worker, dropping it only when Cohen was about to step down as CEO in the mid-1990sand they were struggling to find a successor willing to work for what they were offering.
Most companies try to separate politics and business. Cohen and Greenfield cheerfully mixed them up and served them in a tub of creamy deliciousness (the company’s rich, fatty flavors were in part driven by Cohen’s sinus problems, which dulls his taste).
In 1988, Cohen founded 1% for Peace, a nonprofit organization seeking to “redirect one percent of the national defense budget to fund peace-promoting activities and projects.” The project was funded in part through sales of a vanilla and dark-chocolate popsicle they called the Peace Pop.
It was around this time that Cohen opened Ben & Jerry’s in Russia, as “an effort to build a bridge between Communism and capitalism with locally produced Cherry Garcia,” according to a write-up in the New York Times. After years of planning, the outlet opened in the northwestern city of Petrozavodsk in 1992. (The company shut the shop down five years later to prioritize growth in the U.S., and also because of the involvement of local mobsters, said Furman, who was involved in the project.)
Cohen, with co-founder Jerry Greenfield, actress Jane Fonda and other climate activists, in front of the Capitol in 2019 | Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images
Even after Ben & Jerry’s was bought by Unilever in 2000, there were few progressive causes the company wasn’t eager to wade into with a campaign or a fancy new flavor.
The ice cream maker has marketed “Rainforest Crunch” in defense of the Amazon forest, sold “Empower Mint” to combat voter suppression, promoted “Pecan Resist” in opposition to then-U.S. President Donald Trump and launched “Change the Whirled” in partnership with Colin Kaepernick, the American football quarterback whose sports career ended after he started taking a knee during the national anthem in protest of police brutality.
More recently, however, the relationship between Cohen, Greenfield and Unilever has been rockier. In 2021, Ben & Jerry’s announced it would stop doing business in the Palestinian territories. Cohen and Greenfield, who are Jewish, defended the company’s decision in an op-ed in the New York Times.
After the move sparked political backlash, Unilever transferred its license to a local producer, only to be sued by Ben & Jerry’s. In December 2022, Unilever announced in a one-sentence statement that its litigation with its subsidiary “has been resolved.”Ben & Jerry’s ice cream continues to be sold throughout Israel and the West Bank, according to a Unilever spokesperson.
Cohen himself is no stranger to activism: Earlier this month, he was arrested and detained for a few hours for taking part in a sit-in in front of the U.S. Department of Justice, where he was protesting the prosecution of the activist and WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange.
Unilever declined to comment on Cohen’s views. “Ben Cohen no longer has an operational role in Ben & Jerry’s, and his comments are made in a personal capacity,” a spokesperson said.
Ben & Jerry’s did not respond to a request for comment.
The world according to Ben
For Cohen, the war in Ukraine wasn’t just a tragedy. It was, in a sense, a vindication. In 1998, a group he created called Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities published a full-page ad in the New York Times titled “Hey, let’s scare the Russians.”
The target of the ad was a proposal to expand NATO “toward Russia’s very borders,” with the inclusion of Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic. Doing so, the ad asserted, would provide Russians with “the same feeling of peace and security Americans would have if Russia were in a military alliance with Canada and Mexico, armed to the teeth.”
Cohen is by no means alone in this view of recent history. The American scholar John Mearsheimer, a prominent expert in international relations, has argued that the “trouble over Ukraine” started after the 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest when the alliance opened the door to membership for Ukraine and Georgia.
In the U.S., this point has been echoed by progressive outlets and thinkers, such as Jeffrey Sachs, the linguist Noam Chomsky, or most recently by the American philosopher, activist and longest-of-long-shots, third-party presidential candidate Cornel West.
“We told them after they disbanded the Warsaw Pact that we could not expand NATO, not one inch. And we did that, we lied,” said Dennis Fritz, a retired U.S. Air Force official and the head of the Eisenhower Media Network — which describes itself as a group of “National Security Veteran experts, who’ve been there, done that and have an independent, alternative story to tell.”
It was Fritz’s organization that argued in a May 2023 ad in the New York Times that although the “immediate cause” of the “disastrous” war in Ukraine was Russia’s invasion, “the plans and actions to expand NATO to Russia’s borders served to provoke Russian fears.”
The ad noted that American foreign policy heavyweights, including Robert Gates and Henry Kissinger, had warned of the dangers of NATO expansion. “Why did the U.S. persist in expanding NATO despite such warnings?” it asked. “Profit from weapons sales was a major factor.”
Cohen andGreenfield announce a new flavor, Justice Remix’d, in 2019 | Win McNamee/Getty Images
When I spoke to Cohen, the group’s primary donor, according to Fritz, he echoed the ad’s key points, saying U.S. arms manufacturers saw NATO’s expansion as a “financial bonanza.”
“In the end, money won,” he said with a resigned tone. “And today, not only are they providing weapons to all the new NATO countries, but they’re providing weapons to Ukraine.”
I told Cohen I could understand his opposition to the war and follow his critique of U.S. foreign policy, but I couldn’t grasp how he could take a position that put him in the same corner as a government that is bombing civilians. He refused to be drawn in.
“I’m not supporting Russia, I’m not supporting Ukraine,” he said. “I’m supporting negotiations to end the war instead of providing more weapons to continue the war.”
The Grayzone
I tried to get a better answer when I spoke to Aaron Maté, the Canadian-born journalist who won the award for “defense reporting and analysis” that Cohen was instrumental in funding.
Named after the late Pierre Sprey, a defense analyst who campaigned against the development of F-35 fighter jets as overly complex and expensive, the award recognized Maté’s “continued work dissecting establishment propaganda on issues such as Russian interference in U.S. politics, or the war in Syria.”
Maté, who was photographed with Cohen’s arm around his shoulders at the awards ceremony in March, writes for the Grayzone, a far-left website that has acquired a reputation for publishing stories backing the narratives of authoritarian regimes like Putin’s Russia or Bashar al-Assad’s Syria. His reports deny the use of chemical weapons against civilians in Syria, and he has briefed the U.N. Security Council at Moscow’s invitation.
When I spoke to Maté, he was friendly but guarded. (The Pierre Sprey award noted that “his empiricist reporting give the lie to the charge of ‘disinformation’ routinely leveled by those whose nostrums he challenges.”)
He was happy however to walk me through his claims that, based on statements by U.S. officials since the start of the war, Washington is using Kyiv to wage a “proxy war” against Moscow. Much of his information, he said, came from Western journalism. “I point out examples where, buried at the bottom of articles, sometimes the truth is admitted,” he explained.
He declined to be described as pro-Putin. “That kind of ‘guilt-by-association’ reasoning is not serious thinking,” he said. “It’s not how adults think about things.” When I asked if he believed that Russia had committed war crimes in Ukraine, he answered: “I’m sure they have. I’ve never heard of a war where war crimes are not committed.”
Still, he said, the U.S. was responsible for “prolonging” the war and “sabotaging the diplomacy that could have ended it.”
‘Come to Ukraine’
The best answer I got to my question came not from Cohen or others in his circle but from a fellow traveler who hasn’t chosen to follow critics of NATO on their latest journey.
A self-described “radical anti-imperialist,” Gilbert Achcar is a professor of development studies and international relations at SOAS University of London. He has described the expansion of NATO in the 1990s as a decision that “laid the ground for a new cold war” pitting the West against Russia and China.
But while he sees the war in Ukraine as the latest chapter in this showdown, he has warned against calls for a rush to the negotiating table. Instead, he has advocated for the complete withdrawal of Russia from Ukraine and “the delivery of defensive weapons to the victims of aggression with no strings attached.”
“To give those who are fighting a just war the means to fight against a much more powerful aggressor is an elementary internationalist duty,” he wrote three days after Russia launched its attack on Kyiv, comparing the invasion to the U.S.’s intervention in Vietnam.
Achcar said he understood the conclusions being drawn by people like Cohen about Washington’s interventions in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. But, he said, “it leads a lot of people on the left into … [a] knee-jerk opposition to anything the United States does.”
What they fail to account for, however, is the Ukrainian people.
“In a way, part of the Western left is ethnocentric,” said Achcar, who was born in Senegal and grew up in Lebanon. “They look at the whole world just by their opposition to their own government and therefore forget about other people’s rights.”
Cohen, with late-night TV host Jimmy Fallon in 2011 | Mike Coppola/Getty Images for Ben & Jerry’s
His point was echoed in the last conversation I had when researching this article, with Tymofiy Mylovanov, president of the Kyiv School of Economics and a former economy minister.
“It doesn’t really matter who promised what to whom in the 1990s,” Mylovanov said. “What matters is that there was Mariupol and Bucha, where tens of thousands of people were killed.”
Mylovanov taught economics at the University of Pittsburgh until he returned to Ukraine four days before Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
“Things like war are difficult to understand unless you experience them,” he said. “This is very easy to get confused when you are sitting, you know, somewhere far from the facts and you have surrounded yourself by an echo chamber of people and sources that you agree with.”
“In that sense,” he added. “I invite these people to come to Ukraine and judge for themselves what the truth is.”
If you’ve happened upon any clothing stores in the last month, whether in-person or digitally, you’ll know that the summer sale season is well underway. As we speak, practically every retailer on the planet is marking down whatever last-season product they have left in order to make room for all of the new arrivals they invested in for fall. That is why we, too, are scrambling, but not to get rid of things. Instead, we’re on the hunt for new (to us) finds, all of which are being sold for a fraction of what we would have paid for them just a few weeks ago.
To get a handle on this season’s sale selection, I took on the task of scouring the marked-down items at every retailer, from Zara and Mango to Net-a-Porter and Nordstrom. One too many personal shopping breaks and about a thousand product pages later, I curated the wishlist of all wish lists, which I conveniently laid out below. I’ll go ahead and consider your forthcoming purchases a thank you.
