Coast Guard Patrols Russia Sea Border To Protect US Interests
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A United States Coast Guard vessel recently concluded a patrol in the Bering Sea—which lies between Alaska and Russia's Far East—protecting the U.S.'s interests in the region.
The 121-day patrol—conducted by the national security cutter USCGC Munro—comes amid Russia's continued military presence near Alaska, including the deployment of aircraft that approached U.S. airspace on Wednesday, even as Moscow engages in a war in Europe.
Newsweek has contacted the Russian defense and foreign ministries for comment via email.
Why It Matters
The Bering Sea serves as the gateway between the Arctic—a key geopolitical and military frontier between the West and Russia, along with China—and the North Pacific. The Bering Strait is 50 miles wide at the narrowest point between the American and Russian mainlands.
The U.S. military has regularly operated near Alaska and Russia's easternmost border to help defend North America, including joint fighter aircraft missions with Canada over the Bering Strait, and naval deployments in the North Pacific in support of homeland defense.
What To Know
The Munro returned to its home port in Alameda, California, on July 16 following its 23,000-mile deployment patrolling the Bering Sea, the U.S. Coast Guard announced on Tuesday.
The Coast Guard ship was deployed in mid-March to provide a U.S. maritime presence in the Bering Sea, patrolling along the U.S.-Russia maritime boundary line, which runs through the Bering Strait between the U.S.'s Little Diomede Island and Russia's Big Diomede Island.
The United States national security cutter USCGC Munro conducts a gunnery exercise with its gun in the Bering Sea on June 23.
The United States national security cutter USCGC Munro conducts a gunnery exercise with its gun in the Bering Sea on June 23.
Lt. j.g. Samika Lewis/U.S. Coast Guard
Photos released by the Coast Guard show the Munro, which was described as "a worldwide deployable cutter," firing its gun during a gunnery exercise in the Bering Sea on June 23.
While operating in the Coast Guard's Arctic District—an area covering more than 47,300 miles of coastline across Alaska and the Arctic—the ship enforced domestic fishery regulations and promoted maritime governance in support of U.S. strategic interests in the North Pacific.
The Munro's crew boarded fishing vessels 32 times to ensure compliance with U.S. law, preserve the integrity of fish stocks, encourage sustainable fishing practices and maintain a level playing field within the U.S. exclusive economic zone, according to the Coast Guard.
An exclusive economic zone extends up to 230 miles from a country's coastline, where the coastal nation has sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve and manage natural resources, according to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
A National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration law enforcement officer was aboard the vessel to enhance enforcement efforts aimed at protecting the $6 billion Alaskan fishery.
A boarding team from the United States national security cutter USCGC Munro conducts a boarding of a fishing vessel in the Aleutian Island chain on June 5.
A boarding team from the United States national security cutter USCGC Munro conducts a boarding of a fishing vessel in the Aleutian Island chain on June 5.
Petty Officer 3rd Class Christopher Visaggio/U.S. Coast Guard
What People Are Saying
The U.S. Coast Guard said in a news release on Tuesday: "The Coast Guard's efforts to secure Arctic waterways aim to ensure American security, prosperity and freedom in the face of evolving Arctic security challenges and risks."
U.S. Coast Guard Captain Jim O'Mara, the commanding officer of USCGC Munro, said in a news release on Tuesday: "Our job in the Bering Sea was to keep U.S. mariners safe, protect the economic integrity of the U.S. exclusive economic zone, and uphold the border control and territorial integrity of the U.S. Arctic."
What Happens Next
Whether the U.S. has deployed the Coast Guard to monitor the Chinese icebreaker Xue Long 2—which was tracked entering the Arctic from East Asia last week—remains unclear.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
3 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
In Epstein furor, Trump struggles to shake off a controversy his allies once stoked
WASHINGTON — Despite the sun bearing down on him and the sweat beading across his face, President Trump still lingered with reporters lined up outside the White House on Friday. He was leaving on a trip to Scotland, where he would visit his golf courses, and he wanted to talk about how his administration just finished 'the best six months ever.' But over and over, the journalists kept asking Trump about the Jeffrey Epstein case and whether he would pardon the disgraced financier's imprisoned accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell. 'People should really focus on how well the country is doing,' Trump insisted. He shut down another question by saying, 'I don't want to talk about that.' It was another example of how the Epstein saga — and his administration's disjointed approach to it — has shadowed Trump when he's otherwise at the height of his influence. He's enacted a vast legislative agenda, reached trade deals with key countries and tightened his grip across the federal government. Yet he's struggled to stamp out the embers of a political crisis that could become a full-on conflagration. The Republican president's supporters want the government to release secret files about Epstein, who authorities say killed himself in his New York jail cell six years ago while awaiting trial for sex trafficking. They believe him to be the nexus of a dark web of powerful people who abused underage girls. Administration officials who once stoked conspiracy theories now insist there's nothing more to disclose, a stance that has stirred skepticism because of Trump's former friendship with Epstein. Trump has repeatedly denied prior knowledge of Epstein's crimes and claimed he cut off their relationship long ago. For a president skilled at manipulating the media and controlling the Republican Party, it has been the most challenging test of his ability to shift the conversation in his second term. 'This is a treadmill to nowhere. How do you get off of it?' said Kevin Madden, a Republican strategist. 'I genuinely don't know the answer to that.' Trump has demanded his supporters drop the matter and urged Republicans to block Democratic requests for documents on Capitol Hill. But he has also directed the Justice Department to divulge some additional information in hopes of satisfying his supporters. A White House official, who insisted on anonymity to discuss internal strategy, said Trump is trying to stay focused on his agenda while also demonstrating some transparency. After facing countless scandals and investigations, the official said, Trump is on guard against the typical playbook of drip-drip disclosures that have plagued him in the past. It's clear Trump sees the Epstein case as a continuation of the 'witch hunts' he's faced over the years, starting with the investigation into Russian interference during his election victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton nearly a decade ago. The sprawling inquiry led to convictions against some top advisors but did not substantiate allegations Trump conspired with Moscow. Trump's opponents, he wrote on social media on Thursday, 'have gone absolutely CRAZY, and are playing another Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax but, this time, under the guise of what we will call the Jeffrey Epstein SCAM.' During the Russia investigation, special counsel Robert Mueller and his team of prosecutors were a straightforward foil for Trump to rail against. Ty Cobb, the lawyer who served as the White House's point person, said the president 'never felt exposed' because 'he thought he had a legitimate gripe.' The situation is different this time now that the Justice Department has been stocked with loyalists. 'The people that he has to get mad at are basically his people as opposed to his inquisitors and adversaries,' Cobb said. In fact, Trump's own officials are the most responsible for bringing the Epstein case back to the forefront. FBI Director Kash Patel and his deputy, Dan Bongino, regularly stoked conspiracy theories about Epstein before assuming their current jobs, floating the idea the government had covered up incriminating and compelling information that needed to be brought to light. 'Put on your big-boy pants and let us know who the pedophiles are,' Patel said in a 2023 podcast. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi played a key role too. She intimated in a Fox News Channel interview in February that an Epstein 'client list' was sitting on her desk for review — she would later say she was referring to the Epstein files more generally — and greeted far-right influencers with binders of records from the case that consisted largely of information already in the public domain. Tensions spiked earlier this month when the FBI and the Justice Department, in an unsigned two-page letter, said that no client list existed, that the evidence was clear Epstein had killed himself and that no additional records from the case would be released to the public. It was a seeming backtrack on the administration's stated commitment to transparency. Amid a fierce backlash from Trump's base and influential conservative personalities, Bongino and Bondi squabbled openly in a tense White House meeting. Since then, the Trump administration has scrambled to appear transparent, including by seeking the unsealing of grand jury transcripts in the case — though it's hardly clear that courts would grant that request or that those records include any eye-catching details anyway. Deputy Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche has taken the unusual step of interviewing the imprisoned Maxwell over the course of two days at a courthouse in Tallahassee, Fla., where her lawyer said she would 'always testify truthfully.' All the while, Trump and his allies have resurfaced the Russia investigation as a rallying cry for a political base that has otherwise been frustrated by the Epstein saga. Trump's director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who just weeks ago appeared on the outs with Trump over comments on Iran's nuclear ambitions, seemed to return to the president's good graces this week following the declassification and release of years-old documents she hoped would discredit long-settled conclusions about Russian interference in the 2016 election. The developments allowed Trump to rehash long-standing grievances against President Obama and his Democratic advisors. Trump's talk of investigations into perceived adversaries from years ago let him, in effect, go back in time to deflect attention from a very current crisis. 'Whether it's right or wrong,' Trump said, 'it's time to go after people.' Megerian and Tucker write for the Associated Press.
San Francisco Chronicle
3 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
FACT FOCUS: Trump claims cashless bail increases crime, but data is inconclusive
As his administration faces mounting pressure to release Justice Department files related the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking case, President Donald Trump is highlighting a different criminal justice issue — cashless bail. He suggested in a Truth Social post this week that eliminating cash bail as a condition of pretrial release from jail has led to rising crime in U.S. cities that have enacted these reforms. However, studies have shown no clear link. Here's a closer look at the facts. TRUMP: 'Crime in American Cities started to significantly rise when they went to CASHLESS BAIL. The WORST criminals are flooding our streets and endangering even our great law enforcement officers. It is a complete disaster, and must be ended, IMMEDIATELY!' THE FACTS: Data has not determined the impact of cashless bail on crime rates. But experts say it is incorrect to claim that there is an adverse connection. 'I don't know of any valid studies corroborating the President's claim and would love to know what the Administration offers in support,' said Kellen Funk, a professor at Columbia Law School who studies pretrial procedure and bail bonding. 'In my professional judgment I'd call the claim demonstrably false and inflammatory.' Jeff Clayton, executive director of the American Bail Coalition, the main lobbying arm of the cash bail industry, also pointed to a lack of evidence. 'Studies are inconclusive in terms of whether bail reforms have had an impact on overall crime numbers,' he said. 'This is due to pretrial crime being a small subset of overall crime. It is also difficult to categorize reforms as being 'cashless' or not, i.e., policies where preventative detention is introduced as an alternative to being held on bail.' Different jurisdictions, different laws In 2023, Illinois became the first state to completely eliminate cash bail when the state Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the law abolishing it. The move was part of an expansive criminal justice overhaul adopted in 2021 known as the SAFE-T Act. Under the change, a judge decides whether to release the defendant prior to their trial, weighing factors such as their criminal charges, if they could pose any danger to others and if they are considered a flight risk. Loyola University of Chicago's Center for Criminal Justice published a 2024 report on Illinois' new cashless bail policy, one year after it went into effect. It acknowledges that there is not yet enough data to know what impact the law has had on crime, but that crime in Illinois did not increase after its implementation. Violent and property crime declined in some counties. A number of other jurisdictions, including New Jersey, New Mexico and Washington, D.C., have nearly eliminated cash bail or limited its use. Many include exceptions for high-level crimes. Proponents of eliminating cash bail describe it as a penalty on poverty, suggesting that the wealthy can pay their way out of jail to await trial while those with fewer financial resources have to sit it out behind bars. Critics have argued that bail is a time-honored way to ensure defendants released from jail show up for court proceedings. They warn that violent criminals will be released pending trial, giving them license to commit other crimes. A lack of consensus Studies have shown mixed results regarding the impact of cashless bail on crime. Many focus on the recidivism of individual defendants rather than overall crime rates. A 2024 report published by the Brennan Center for Justice saw 'no statistically significant relationship' between bail reform and crime rates. It looked at crime rate data from 2015 through 2021 for 33 cities across the U.S., 22 of which had instituted some type of bail reform. Researchers used a statistical method to determine if crime rates had diverged in those with reforms and those without. Ames Grawert, the report's co-author and senior counsel in the Brennan Center's Justice Program, said this conclusion "holds true for trends in crime overall or specifically violent crime.' Similarly, a 2023 paper published in the American Economic Journal found no evidence that cash bail helps ensure defendants will show up in court or prevents crime among those who are released while awaiting trial. The paper evaluated the impact of a 2018 policy instituted by the Philadelphia's district attorney that instructed prosecutors not to set bail for certain offenses. A 2019 court decree in Harris County, Texas, requires most people charged with a misdemeanor to be released without bail while awaiting trial. The latest report from the monitoring team responsible for tracking the impact of this decision, released in 2024, notes that the number of people arrested for misdemeanors has declined by more than 15% since 2015. The number of those rearrested within one year has similarly declined, with rearrest rates remaining stable in recent years. Asked what data Trump was using to support his claim, the White House pointed to a 2022 report from the district attorney's office in Yolo County, California, that looked at how a temporary cashless bail system implemented across the state to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks in courts and jails impacted recidivism. It found that out of 595 individuals released between April 2020 and May 2021 under this system, 70.6% were arrested again after they were released. A little more than half were rearrested more than once. A more recent paper, published in February by the IZA Institute of Labor Economics, also explored the effects of California's decision to suspend most bail during the COVID-19 pandemic. It reports that implementation of this policy 'caused notable increases in both the likelihood and number of rearrests within 30 days.' However, a return to cash bail did not impact the number of rearrests for any type of offense. The paper acknowledges that other factors, such as societal disruption from the pandemic, could have contributed to the initial increase. Many contributing factors It is difficult to pinpoint specific explanations for why crime rises and falls. The American Bail Coalition's Clayton noted that other policies that have had a negative impact on crime, implemented concurrently with bail reforms, make it 'difficult to isolate or elevate one or more causes over the others.' Paul Heaton, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania who studies criminal justice interventions, had a similar outlook. 'Certainly there are some policy levers that people look at — the size of the police force and certain policies around sentencing,' he said. 'But there's a lot of variation in crime that I think even criminologists don't necessarily fully understand.'
Hamilton Spectator
3 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
FACT FOCUS: Trump claims cashless bail increases crime, but data is inconclusive
As his administration faces mounting pressure to release Justice Department files related the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking case, President Donald Trump is highlighting a different criminal justice issue — cashless bail. He suggested in a Truth Social post this week that eliminating cash bail as a condition of pretrial release from jail has led to rising crime in U.S. cities that have enacted these reforms. However, studies have shown no clear link. Here's a closer look at the facts. TRUMP: 'Crime in American Cities started to significantly rise when they went to CASHLESS BAIL. The WORST criminals are flooding our streets and endangering even our great law enforcement officers. It is a complete disaster, and must be ended, IMMEDIATELY!' THE FACTS: Data has not determined the impact of cashless bail on crime rates. But experts say it is incorrect to claim that there is an adverse connection. 'I don't know of any valid studies corroborating the President's claim and would love to know what the Administration offers in support,' said Kellen Funk, a professor at Columbia Law School who studies pretrial procedure and bail bonding. 'In my professional judgment I'd call the claim demonstrably false and inflammatory.' Jeff Clayton, executive director of the American Bail Coalition, the main lobbying arm of the cash bail industry, also pointed to a lack of evidence. 'Studies are inconclusive in terms of whether bail reforms have had an impact on overall crime numbers,' he said. 'This is due to pretrial crime being a small subset of overall crime. It is also difficult to categorize reforms as being 'cashless' or not, i.e., policies where preventative detention is introduced as an alternative to being held on bail.' Different jurisdictions, different laws In 2023, Illinois became the first state to completely eliminate cash bail when the state Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the law abolishing it. The move was part of an expansive criminal justice overhaul adopted in 2021 known as the SAFE-T Act . Under the change, a judge decides whether to release the defendant prior to their trial, weighing factors such as their criminal charges, if they could pose any danger to others and if they are considered a flight risk. Loyola University of Chicago's Center for Criminal Justice published a 2024 report on Illinois' new cashless bail policy, one year after it went into effect. It acknowledges that there is not yet enough data to know what impact the law has had on crime, but that crime in Illinois did not increase after its implementation. Violent and property crime declined in some counties. A number of other jurisdictions , including New Jersey, New Mexico and Washington, D.C., have nearly eliminated cash bail or limited its use. Many include exceptions for high-level crimes. Proponents of eliminating cash bail describe it as a penalty on poverty , suggesting that the wealthy can pay their way out of jail to await trial while those with fewer financial resources have to sit it out behind bars. Critics have argued that bail is a time-honored way to ensure defendants released from jail show up for court proceedings. They warn that violent criminals will be released pending trial, giving them license to commit other crimes. A lack of consensus Studies have shown mixed results regarding the impact of cashless bail on crime. Many focus on the recidivism of individual defendants rather than overall crime rates. A 2024 report published by the Brennan Center for Justice saw 'no statistically significant relationship' between bail reform and crime rates. It looked at crime rate data from 2015 through 2021 for 33 cities across the U.S., 22 of which had instituted some type of bail reform. Researchers used a statistical method to determine if crime rates had diverged in those with reforms and those without. Ames Grawert, the report's co-author and senior counsel in the Brennan Center's Justice Program, said this conclusion 'holds true for trends in crime overall or specifically violent crime.' Similarly, a 2023 paper published in the American Economic Journal found no evidence that cash bail helps ensure defendants will show up in court or prevents crime among those who are released while awaiting trial. The paper evaluated the impact of a 2018 policy instituted by the Philadelphia's district attorney that instructed prosecutors not to set bail for certain offenses. A 2019 court decree in Harris County, Texas, requires most people charged with a misdemeanor to be released without bail while awaiting trial. The latest report from the monitoring team responsible for tracking the impact of this decision, released in 2024, notes that the number of people arrested for misdemeanors has declined by more than 15% since 2015. The number of those rearrested within one year has similarly declined, with rearrest rates remaining stable in recent years. Asked what data Trump was using to support his claim, the White House pointed to a 2022 report from the district attorney's office in Yolo County, California, that looked at how a temporary cashless bail system implemented across the state to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks in courts and jails impacted recidivism. It found that out of 595 individuals released between April 2020 and May 2021 under this system, 70.6% were arrested again after they were released. A little more than half were rearrested more than once. A more recent paper, published in February by the IZA Institute of Labor Economics, also explored the effects of California's decision to suspend most bail during the COVID-19 pandemic. It reports that implementation of this policy 'caused notable increases in both the likelihood and number of rearrests within 30 days.' However, a return to cash bail did not impact the number of rearrests for any type of offense. The paper acknowledges that other factors, such as societal disruption from the pandemic, could have contributed to the initial increase. Many contributing factors It is difficult to pinpoint specific explanations for why crime rises and falls. The American Bail Coalition's Clayton noted that other policies that have had a negative impact on crime, implemented concurrently with bail reforms, make it 'difficult to isolate or elevate one or more causes over the others.' Paul Heaton, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania who studies criminal justice interventions, had a similar outlook. 'Certainly there are some policy levers that people look at — the size of the police force and certain policies around sentencing,' he said. 'But there's a lot of variation in crime that I think even criminologists don't necessarily fully understand.' ___ Find AP Fact Checks here: . Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
