Have we seen the end of bipartisan foreign policy?

Rep. Greg Meeks is the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, where he previously served as chair from 2021 through 2023. Meeks has increased emphasis on issues related to the global south in U.S. foreign policy, along with addressing issues related to the Trump administration’s cuts to international development and the war in Ukraine. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

You have made increased emphasis on the global south a major part of your approach to the Foreign Affairs Committee. Why is a new emphasis on the global south important to U.S. foreign policy?

When I became the chair of the committee, my priority was to bring (in) historically neglected regions, places like Africa, Central and South America, the Caribbean and some smaller countries. I can recall when I first got elected to Congress, a conversation I had with then-President Bill Clinton and he said that when you treat and engage other countries with respect and purpose in our shared interest that made everybody better closer, and it was an example of what we could do, as opposed to just pure power and dominance. And so that always stuck with me. In that regard, it is what made us help, make us that indispensable nation, because we were all always there. So I think that when you think of how, you know, the planet has shrunk, the planet is smaller than it’s ever been, and what we need to do is to figure out, how do we work with our allies and other countries around the world? We’ve got to work together to try to because what happens in one part of the world inevitably will affect us here in America. You fight disease in one place, it also prevents disease from happening in the United States when you do that. One of the things that I have spent much time focusing on is the crisis in Haiti. I introduced, which was bipartisan, a bill to ensure Haitians have a voice in shaping us policy toward their country, as opposed to us dominating and things of that nature. We’ve got to keep raising attention to, and I keep doing that, the civil war in Sudan, which is the world’s largest humanitarian crisis that we must not forget. I reintroduced comprehensive legislation to address that crisis, including by restricting major U.S. arms sales to any countries who are fueling this conflict. Those are the kinds of things. When we do that, you’re doing the right thing and setting the example for others to follow, so that we can make that opportunity to have a better and united globe. So we need to, need to do more of that and talk about U.S. engagement with the global south and foreign affairs and educate the American people to why it is important for us as Americans to not only be partaking, but to be leading in it with our values.

What is the impact of President Donald Trump’s cuts to foreign aid and the elimination of the U.S. Agency for International Development?

I think what Trump is doing is destroying America’s reputation around the world because it’s plummeting, just go and talk to some of our closest allies. They are now saying, can we trust America? I recall there were big concerns in this regard, when (Trump) lost and Biden became president. I would go back around and say, “OK, now America’s back at the table,” and many of our allies would say, yes, that’s great. And they all applauded that. But they did ask the question, but for how long? Because they knew that Trump would run again. So I do believe that it’s going to take a while for our friends and allies. They will be not just looking up at us and saying that they know that we had their backs, they’re going to be wary, and they’ll be watching to see if the United States will stand and lead globally and stand for the democratic and human rights values, democratic values that we have long stood for. So it was with pride, Democrats and Republicans, we would travel, and all of us had a cap or something that said USAID, from the American people to the world. This was something that we all did as Americans with pride. But now, the State Department has seen thousands of seasoned diplomats have been purged and replaced, bipartisan and inexperienced loyalists. It’s going to take a while for the brain drain that has gone to redevelop, especially in places like the USAID, which was one of our most effective levels of soft power.

The Foreign Affairs Committee has traditionally been one of the more bipartisan committees in Congress. Is this still the case or are you seeing more of the partisanship that’s been creeping into committees like oversight, judiciary and education?

Yeah, so unfortunately that’s where we’re headed. Once upon a time, we would always deal with foreign policy in a bipartisan way. We would always show bipartisan support for NATO, for example, and in our alliances, we also showed bipartisan support for foreign assistance and human rights. But it seems as though that is being abandoned now by my Republican colleagues, and to be honest, I don’t believe it’s because they no longer believe in those issues. I believe it’s because they just simply want to please Donald Trump and not go against him or are afraid of him. Therefore, they won’t go against him, because just last year, we were agreeing on these things. You take foreign assistance, for example, we had made various agreements on assistance. Donald Trump did not like it, and so he had them vote to rescind $8 billion that was going to be utilized in that regard, which had been done in a bipartisan way. So it just seems to me that, yeah, it’s changing, and it has changed, but it’s directly related to the presidency of Donald Trump.

Is partisan politics playing a role with the bill you and Rep. Steny Hoyer introduced to sanction Russia and provide assistance to Ukraine?

What we’re doing is a motion to discharge. Of course, the Republicans don’t want to take it up. All I need is four Republicans to sign my motion to discharge, and we can force this to a vote on the floor. What we wanted to have is a vote on the floor. Let the members of Congress stand up. I believe if we get the vote on the floor, that Democrats and Republicans will vote for it. You know, it wasn’t that long ago when I was first the chair of the committee, and then even when I was the ranking member, where the former chair of the committee was with me, we were standing strong.

Will the U.S. cutbacks to international development impact the power balance among other countries?

We’ve got to acknowledge what we’ve created is China. That’s who’s champing at the bit. Now China wants to see themselves as the beneficiary of getting rid of USAID. China now sees an opportunity on the ground, opening relationships with others, being still silent on people’s human rights, and the administration seems to allow still having a special relationship with China, even with the tariffs, three months extension there too. So I’m concerned. I think that there is repairable damage, but to repair it, it’s going to take some time. 

Do you think Trump will continue to influence Republican behavior on foreign policy after he leaves office in 2029?

When Secretary (of State Marco) Rubio came before the Foreign Affairs Committee, my line of questioning was, who is he? You know what happened to Sen. Rubio? Because he was one who had often advocated for human rights and American foreign policy, and now being the secretary of state to Donald Trump, he seems to have abandoned that. So the question would be, if, in fact, your hypothetical was true, does he revert back to Sen. Rubio and those policies? And I think many of the people on the House side would probably do that, because the fear of Donald Trump should be gone, and hopefully we can go back to who we are and then again, become that indispensable nation. We’re no longer following that path.

What are your thoughts on ways that we can move toward solving the current situation in the Middle East and also addressing the humanitarian issues in Gaza? 

I recently sent President Trump a letter along with three of my fellow ranking members, stating and demanding that he work to secure aid, a permanent ceasefire and releasing the hostages. Seek a political solution that does just that, free the hostages, surge aid into Gaza, remove Hamas from power and return Gaza to a peaceful Palestinian control. We need to work with our allies in the Middle East. This is also really important, they for the first time, many of them, are recognizing Israel's right to exist. You have countries already from the 70s, like Egypt to the 90s, like Jordan, that have moved in the right direction. Recently, you've seen the United Arab Emirates, you've seen Bahrain and others in the region acknowledge. The big one has been Saudi Arabia coming close to that, and they all want to make sure, because they all benefit from having a real peace in the Middle East and a real relationship with Israel. They are ready to get involved, to secure, to make sure that we don't ever have Oct. 7 again, that there is a transfer of leadership in Gaza. There still is the hope of having a two-state solution, which is important. I believe what we're hearing recently about expanding to a full occupation of Gaza City, I don't think that serves Israel's long-term security and you see further harm and death to innocent Palestinian citizens. The only way that ultimately is going to resolve some of this is in a diplomatic way, but we should bring along our other friends in the region, the Arab countries, because for the first time, we have that opportunity to do just that.