• For those interested, Canadian essayist Stephen Marche wrote a lengthy piece last November on Canadian exceptionalism — a summary of his nation’s rather unique standing in the world as a cheerful haven of liberalism, largely unscathed by the tide of right-wing nationalism battering other democracies in the West.

He explains how this is the case: “The reason Canada has escaped the populist manias of both the United States and the United Kingdom comes down to some very boring underlying policies. We made multiculturalism a public good and regulated its application assiduously. Our political system is structured to make political insurgency nearly impossible; Canada is inherently anti-revolutionary, from its beginning.”

• Two dramatic acts of dissent rocked Washington on Monday: Sally Yates, the acting attorney general and an Obama appointee, ordered Justice Department lawyers not to defend legal challenges against Trump’s immigration order, saying that the defense of Trump’s edict was not consistent with the department’s “obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right.” Trump had her removed from her post just hours later and issued an angry, alarming statement accusing her of “betraying” the Justice Department.

Meanwhile, a dissent memo circulated among State Department officials objecting to the same order. It was signed by more than 100 U.S. diplomats. Spicer, the White House spokesman, dismissed their concerns at a briefing. “I think they should either get with the program or they can go,” he said.

• In a reflection of the abnormality of this phase in American politics, former President Barack Obama broke a silence of just two weeks and issued a statement supporting protesters, saying through a spokesman that he was “heartened by the level of engagement taking place in communities around the country.”

The statement also pushed back against the Trump administration’s misleading attempt to pin the origin of the immigration ban on Obama:

“With regard to comparisons to President Obama’s foreign policy decisions, as we’ve heard before, the President fundamentally disagrees with the notion of discriminating against individuals because of their faith or religion,” the statement said.

• Protests against Trump also took place in cities across Britain on Monday night. Demonstrators were angry both at the American president’s executive orders and with their own prime minister, Theresa May, who called on Trump in the White House last week and invited him for a state visit to Britain later this year. A petition demanding May rescind the invitation won over a million signatures.

May, as we discussed last week, is caught in an awkward position: She needs American support as she leads her own country out of the European Union. But Trump’s protectionist trade policies and apparent hostility to many Western institutions put her in a bind.

“If Britain had voted to stay inside the EU, the obvious response to the arrival of a pro-Russia protectionist in the Oval Office would be to draw closer to its European allies,” wrote Financial Times columnist Gideon Rachman. “But the Emperor Nero has now taken power in Washington — and the British are having to smile and clap as he sets fires and reaches for his fiddle.”

• Of course, this is hardly the first time the United States has imposed some sort of an immigration ban. P.W. Singer, writing for Popular Science, looks at the case of Qian Xuesan, a Chinese rocketry expert who became a victim of red scares and was deported from the US in the 1950s. He went on to become a national hero in China and the father of a missile program that still makes up the bulk of the country’s strategic arsenal.

“Not every one of the current and future scientists being banned from studying and working in the U.S. will have the impact of Qian, but that doesn't matter,” writes Singer. “Their similarly needless rejection will undoubtedly be a story of lost opportunity that will impact American science and security long into the future.”

 
A soldier of the&nbsp;self-proclaimed pro-Russian&nbsp;Lugansk People&#39;s Republic in eastern Ukraine on Dec. 19. (Alexander Ermochenko/Reuters)</p>

A soldier of the self-proclaimed pro-Russian Lugansk People's Republic in eastern Ukraine on Dec. 19. (Alexander Ermochenko/Reuters)

Red alert?

You'd be forgiven for missing it after the hubbub of this weekend, but the slow-burning conflict in Ukraine seems to be flaring up again.

Officials told the Associated Press on Monday that at least seven Ukrainian soldiers have been killed over the past few days as fighting intensified all along the front line in eastern Ukraine. There were also accounts of at least three pro-Russian separatist fighters killed, as well as two civilians.

The fighting in Ukraine has been simmering on and off since February 2014. So far, almost 10,000 people have been killed, with a sharp uptick coming over the past several days.

The chart below should help put it in context. The situation was serious enough for Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to cut short a working visit to Germany.

What's really noteworthy here is the timing: The renewed fighting coincided with President Donald Trump's first official phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday. During that phone call, Trump raised the possibility of lifting the sanctions against Russia that have been in place over the past few years.

There’s no way to tell for sure if the call and the fighting are directly related; in fact, the official White House readout of the call didn't mention Ukraine at all. But some experts believe Putin would be willing to push the Ukrainian conflict further if he believed Trump wouldn’t react.

"It's absolutely possible that the Kremlin will try to influence Ukraine more if the U.S. distances itself from the country," Igor Sutyagin, a research fellow at the London think tank Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), told NBC News just last week.

There are undoubtedly complicated local factors at work as well. And with Republicans like John McCain still gunning for more sanctions on Russia, you have to wonder if the timing is really so strategic after all. But if the new administration forced the world to react to Trump this past week, Ukraine is a reminder that soon Trump may be called on to react to the world. — Adam Taylor

 

A young boy looks out from his home in the Azraq refugee camp in Jordan. (Charles Ommanney/The Washington Post)</p>

A young boy looks out from his home in the Azraq refugee camp in Jordan. (Charles Ommanney/The Washington Post)

The big question

The United States isn't the only major player in the war in Syria to come under fire for its handling of refugees. Saudi Arabia and the other wealthy countries of the Persian Gulf are often criticized for not admitting more Syrians, leaving Syria’s neighbors to shoulder the burden. So we asked Liz Sly, the Post's Beirut bureau chief: why aren't the Gulf countries doing more?

"The reality is somewhat complicated. None of the six countries comprising the Gulf Cooperation Council are signatories to the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees, so they don’t admit people under the standard international definition of a refugee.

"These countries do admit Syrians, to varying degrees, under normal visa and immigration requirements. Saudi Arabia says it has taken in nearly 2.5 million Syrians since the war there began in 2012.  If true, it would mean Saudi Arabia is hosting nearly as many Syrians as Turkey, which has 2.8 million, the largest number of any individual country.

"Many are in Saudi Arabia on work permits, part of the large expatriate workforce that performs jobs from menial labor to teaching in universities. Since the war began in 2011, the kingdom has relaxed requirements on Syrians bringing in family members, which partly explains the big jump in numbers. They have also turned a blind eye to those who overstay their visas. Syrians who live there say many of their countrymen came on temporary visas to attend the annual hajj, or pilgrimage to Mecca, and simply stayed on.

"But those living in Saudi Arabia are already among the more privileged Syrians, who can at least afford the price of an air ticket. The refugees living in the camps and informal settlements of Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey tend to be the poorest of the poor, who can’t afford to pay for housing or basic services yet aren’t allowed to work. They are the ones who would be targeted for resettlement in the United States under the auspices of the UN refugee agency.

"Other Gulf countries have taken in almost no Syrians, and some have even made it harder for Syrians to get work permits. They have cited in justification their small size and fears of political instability should their populations grow.

"Qatar’s Foreign Minister Khalid al-Attiyah defended Qatar’s refusal to admit Syrian refugees in an interview with the New Statesman in 2015, using language not dissimilar to the Trump administration.

"'The immigration challenges in Qatar are unique,' he said. 'Foreign workers here already outnumber Qataris by about six to one, and a massive influx of refugees would overwhelm our native population.'"

 

Critics of President Trump's executive order referred to it as a "Muslim ban," while the White House insisted it was nothing of kind. But two authors argue that hostility to Islam is a core principle of the new administration, while a third says any true fight against "radical Islamic terrorism" would extend Trump's ban to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Ironically, if the order were a move against Islam writ large, that would likely bar the president from coming to the U.S. under his own American values test for immigrants, which demands religious tolerance.

How war on Islam became central to the Trump doctrine
An apocalyptic view of Islamist terrorism is the thread that connects Trump to key allies in his administration and underpins this weekend’s immigration chaos.
 
Trump’s travel ban isn’t about making America safe. It’s about kicking Muslims around.
The refugee ban and travel restrictions may, in fact, make us less safe.
 
Trump's travel ban 'makes no sense' without Pakistan and Saudi Arabia
President Trump cannot defeat radical Islam by excluding Saudi Arabia and Pakistan from his contentious order.
 
Trump's 'extreme vetting' would ban him from US
You don't need to be a lawyer to see that Donald Trump wouldn't pass muster under the terms of his own executive order.
 

ADVERTISEMENT
 
 

Betsy DeVos, President Trump's highly controversial nominee for education secretary, is up for confirmation today. Over the weekend, demonstrators took to the streets to protest the candidate's anti-public school policies, while ProPublica took the time to outline why she worries some of the country's science educators. But The New York Times also highlighted her seemingly unlikely history of support for LGBTQ rights.

Teachers, parents, kids protest DeVos education nomination ahead of Senate vote
A crowd opposing the Michigan billionaire’s bid to become education secretary gathered at the Capitol on Sunday; more than a million others have written to Congress with concerns.
 
DeVos’ code words for creationism offshoot raise concerns about ‘Junk Science’
Science educators worry that she could use her bully pulpit to undermine the teaching of evolution in public schools.
 
Betsy DeVos, a friend of L.G.B.T. rights? Past colleagues say yes
President Trump’s pick for education secretary has a history of supporting gay and transgender rights that is largely unknown, possibly because it puts her at odds with her family.
 
 

These are some of the 3,500 American soldiers who have been dispatched to Eastern Europe in recent months, hoping to reassure allies on Russia's borders and once again learn to fight on European terrain. “I’ve asked the Army to send over some green paint,” one American general joked to the Post during a joint U.S.-Polish exercise this week, pointing out that his men still drive sand-colored vehicles more appropriate for Iraq. But while the deployment was a welcome sign of unity last year, it's now a source of worry as NATO's easternmost members wonder if the Moscow-friendly Trump administration will pull its troops back out. (Kacper Pempel/Reuters)


ADVERTISEMENT
 
 
Trump fires acting attorney general who refused to defend immigration ban
President Trump named Dana Boente, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, as acting attorney general. He replaces Sally Yates, who the White House said had “betrayed” the Justice Department by refusing to enforce the president’s travel order. Yates, a holdover from the Obama administration, had said she was not convinced that it was “lawful.”
 
Boente, a longtime federal prosecutor, is best known for handling public corruption cases
Dana Boente, a 31-year veteran of the Justice Department, most recently oversaw the prosecution of former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell.
 
Yates spent 27 years at Justice Dept., was days away from stepping down
Justice officials who know Sally Yates said they were not surprised by her decision not to defend the Trump immigration order.
 
 

What's in a name? The Purple Hairy Squat Lobster, that's what.