“Ukraine Aid Package Puts America Last,” said Heritage Action. There is a lot of that talk around: “America First,” “America Last.” It is immature. You might argue against aid to Ukraine, for various reasons — but “Puts America Last”? Who can take seriously someone who talks that way? It is sloganeering, rather than argument.
As some of us see it, U.S. aid to Ukraine is not only right from a moral point of view, it is also in the U.S. interest. To help the Ukrainians save themselves is costly, yes. A wider war would be costlier still. Russian victory in Ukraine would impose great costs for years. The administration’s aid package, large as it is, is a pittance compared with what we might have to pay, and not just in treasure.
The old lessons never stick. (That is an old lesson itself!) They are perpetually forgotten, having to be relearned. Strength is expensive. Weakness can be more so. Deterrence is expensive. War a lot more so.
Sounds like sloganeering, perhaps! But these truths, or truisms, have been proven with a terrible and bloody redundancy.
Things are connected in this fragile world. The Ukrainians are fighting and dying for more than their own country. They are on the front line, unlucky people. In my view, we should be grateful to them, in addition to admiring of them. The least we can do is support them to the hilt. If you think Putin’s Russia would be sated, once having swallowed Ukraine — think again.
The original America Firsters, in the 1930s and ’40s, were wrong, tragically wrong. So are today’s America Firsters, with much less excuse.
• “Statement on Russia’s War against Ukraine.” Whose statement? That of the foreign ministers of the G-7. It is a good and strong statement, too.
The G-7 is composed of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States (observing alphabetical order). The ministers state that they “are steadfast in our solidarity with and our support for Ukraine as it defends itself against Russia’s unjustifiable, unprovoked, and illegal war of aggression, a war in which Belarus is complicit.” They further state, “This war of aggression has reaffirmed our determination to reject outright attempts to redraw borders by force in violation of sovereignty and territorial integrity.”
In 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and launched the war in the Donbass, the G-8 (as it was then) suspended Russia’s membership (making the group the G-7). During his presidency, Donald Trump repeatedly called for the readmission of Russia to the group, though the facts on the ground — the facts in Ukraine — had not changed at all. The other members would not go along.
Which I think was right.
• “Finland and Sweden know what we all know now,” writes Julia Ioffe. “If Ukraine had been in NATO, Putin would have never invaded.”
• Here is Alexander Stubb, a former prime minister of Finland:
Detecting some noise in international media about Russia cutting off electricity and/or gas from Finland.
Relax, we got this. There is a reason we have diversified our energy portfolio. This is it. Easy transition to alternative sources.
Next, please.
• Turkey is making noise about blocking the admission of Finland and Sweden to NATO. Why is Turkey in NATO (still) anyway? Can the other members expel Turkey? Would it be wise to do so?
I explored this in a piece a few years ago: “Turkey, NATO, and a Shifting World.”
• In the past, I have had occasion to quote Midge Decter, who wrote, “Peace prizes are a kind of abomination, as if peace were a primary value when evil is stalking the world.” You could say that neutrality is a kind of abomination too. And Putin, in one of his accomplishments, has wrecked neutrality in Europe. This article from the Associated Press is highly interesting: “‘Neutral’ Europe recedes as NATO set to expand.”
• Here is an article from Politico:
French President Emmanuel Macron asked Ukraine to make concessions on its sovereignty to help Russian leader Vladimir Putin save face, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said.
In an interview with Italian TV channel RAI’s “Porta a Porta” talk show broadcast Thursday evening, Zelenskyy was asked about Macron’s comments on Monday, in which he warned Europe must avoid humiliating Putin.
“We want the Russian army to leave our land — we aren’t on Russian soil,” Zelenskyy replied. “We won’t help Putin save face by paying with our territory. That would be unjust.”
• Let me further recommend a piece by Sergey Radchenko, in The Spectator. I don’t believe I’ve ever read one quite like it. Russia’s humiliation in Ukraine, writes Radchenko, would have “untold benefits, not least for Russia itself.” I will quote some more:
We have heard it said for years that Russia must be indulged and humoured because, if not, it will resent having lost its great power status. The Soviet collapse, we were told, was a terrible catastrophe from which aggrieved, embittered Russians never recovered. So they need to be respected. They need to stand tall and proud. God forbid if they are humiliated because who knows what they will do.
I witnessed the Soviet collapse first-hand. It was, without doubt, a traumatic experience.
And here is how Radchenko ends his piece:
The real source of Russia’s humiliation has always been Russia itself: its arrogant, autocratic rulers and the chauvinistic populace that slavishly worship them. Russia’s defeat in this unjust, criminal war against Ukraine may help shift the domestic narrative in Russia towards accepting the country for what it really is, rather than what it has vainly pretended to be. It is only then that Russia can, finally, be at peace with itself and with its neighbours.
Professor Radchenko has provided food for thought, and it is nourishing food, though it may be hard to swallow.
• Mitch McConnell traveled to Kyiv, with three other Republican senators: John Barrasso, Susan Collins, and John Cornyn. To read about this, go here.
• It is not every day that you hear Donald Trump oppose federal spending. So this headline is of note: “Trump criticizes spending for Ukraine.” The article begins,
Former President Trump on Friday criticized lawmakers for working to pass $40 billion in aid for Ukraine, blaming Democrats for advancing the legislation despite it also having support from a majority of House Republicans.
“The Democrats are sending another $40 billion to Ukraine, yet America’s parents are struggling to even feed their children,” Trump said in a statement issued through his Save America PAC.
Yes. There is a lot of that going around.
Donald Trump Jr. tweeted,
Rather than spend $40 Billion of American taxpayer dollars to fund DC’s proxy war with Russia why doesn’t Zelensky just charge these politicians for the obligatory selfie and fund it himself???
An interesting phrase, “DC’s proxy war with Russia.” The term “DC” alone — rather than “the United States,” let’s say — is interesting.
Here is an article about Thomas Massie and his friends, and how they are gaining steam, in their opposition to American support of Ukraine. I believe they will keep gaining and gaining. Initially, the Russian assault on Ukraine was shocking. Even Putin-friendly types were reduced to mumbling for a bit, or even maintaining a silence. But the shock has worn off. Not for the Ukrainians, however.