US Support of ­­Ukraine: Crucial and Vital

The free world (yes, the term is once again appropriate) is at a decisive turning point. It, and therefore we, face a monumental judgment whether or not to aid a nation and a people whose struggle today is, most assuredly, a harbinger of what we and our allies will likely face tomorrow.

Let Ukraine fall to this unprovoked and brutal Russian aggression, and Finland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, probably Sweden, and yes, Poland, will loom large in Putin’s crosshairs once he has licked his wounds, learned from his mistakes, regrouped, rearmed and repopulated his armed forces. He will not go quietly into the night should he prevail in Ukraine.

Putin has been candid. The current Russian Federation is but the germ cell of the Greater Russia Putin longs (and intends) to father. Make no mistake about that. His role model, indeed, his inspiration, is Peter the Great, who ruled Russia for forty-three years, from 1682 to 1725. Peter, who was only 10 years old at the time of his accession to the throne, ruled jointly with his older brother (by six years) Ivan.  Given that neither Peter nor Ivan were really old enough to reign, the nation was run by Ivan’s sister (Peter’s half-sister) Sophia, who was all of twenty-five at the time. It is Peter who motivates Putin’s aggression and nourishes his exaggerated sense of self-importance and presence on the world stage.  

It is not difficult to understand Putin’s infatuation with Peter the Great. His idol waged war for over two decades, and during that time, he clawed into his domain Sweden, Estonia, Latvia, and Finland. To Vladimir Putin, any land that was once dominated by Russia will always be Russian. That is his justification for trying to grab Ukraine, and it will be his justification, if he succeeds in Ukraine, for setting his sights on the Baltic nations of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, as well as the adjacent lands of Finland and probably Sweden. Poland, should Putin succeed in Ukraine, also has a lot about which to worry. Putin compares himself to Peter the Great in his quest to take back so-called Russian lands. He probably approves of Stalin’s grab of eastern Poland when the Nazis invaded that country from the West.

Putin never talks about conquering other countries, but rather he speaks of “returning” other countries to Russia. Those countries that were ever under Russian control, whether they liked it or not, are, by Putin’s reasoning, always to be part of Russia. Listen to him: “Peter the Great waged the Great Northern War for 21 years. It would seem that he was at war with Sweden; he took something from them. He did not take anything from them; he returned what was Russia’s.” Fortunately, we have the bill of sale for the $7.2 million we paid for Alaska in 1867. Thank you, Tsar Alexander II Nikolaevitch and President Andrew Johnson (perhaps the only thing for which we have to thank Andrew Johnson).

Many Republicans, and some Democrats, bemoan our assistance to Ukraine. According to a recent CNN poll last month, over half of the respondents opposed continued aid to Ukraine, including 71% of Republicans, while over 60% of Democrats supported continued aid to the beleaguered nation.

This shouldn’t be a partisan issue. If Russia isn’t stopped now, it will only be a matter of time before we’re forced to confront a reality in Europe we haven’t seen in eighty years. Putin isn’t going to stop with Ukraine. If he succeeds in clawing back a fiercely independent Ukraine, Putin will see all of the former Soviet captive nations as fair game. Ukraine is a nation whose independence Russia agreed to respect over thirty years ago in return for Ukraine relinquishing the entire nuclear arsenal the former Soviet Union had positioned there.

Putin will conclude that if he succeeds in clawing back Ukraine, we’re not going to stop him, NATO or no NATO, when he focuses on Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, which he will. He knows we will have let him violate one agreement, and he’ll risk the chance that we and our NATO partners will not go to war over lands that will be much harder to defend. Or, perhaps, we will go to war to defend Finland and the Baltic nations, but such a war, should it come, will be the result of our abandonment of Ukraine. Putin will be no more tolerant of a free and westward-leaning Finland or Estonia on his border than he has been of a free and westward-leaning Ukraine.

The Cost of the War

It’s expensive, and while we are contributing the most in raw dollars, other much smaller nations are contributing far more relative to their size. The Council on Foreign Relations estimates the cost of all Ukraine-specific appropriations at around $76.8 billion, with about 60% allocated to military aid. That equates to approximately three-tenths of one percent of our GDP. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Netherlands, the UK, and the Czech Republic have all contributed a greater portion of their GDP than the United States. That’s undoubtedly because they know they are apt to find themselves in Putin’s crosshairs if their allies let Ukraine fall to Russia. As a percent of GDP, we’re contributing a bit more than Bulgaria. But, make no mistake about it, we’re contributing plenty.

It is dicey and dangerous to get involved in foreign wars that do not directly affect us, even if the involvement only involves material support. It is also dicey and dangerous to ignore such blatant heavy-handed aggression when a friendly nation is attacked and when so many of our formal allies who border the fighting believe, with good reason, that they may be next.

And there is the matter of the Budapest Accord of 1994, which the United States, Great Britain, and Russia signed, to induce (indeed to pressure) Ukraine to turn over to Russia the nuclear warheads positioned on its territory in return for Russia’s agreement “to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine” and “to refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine.” Russia, of course, made short shrift of that commitment when it grabbed Crimea in 2014 and again when Russia invaded Ukraine in February of last year.

 And while the agreement is an accord, or an understanding, and not a formal treaty, meaning we are not legally obligated to enforce the agreement, our moral obligation to, at least, help Ukraine defend itself against Russia’s blatant trashing of that accord is immense.  

Republican and Democratic leadership in both houses of Congress generally support our commitment to help Ukraine defend itself. There is, of course, the usual cast of characters and misfits: the Marjorie Taylor Greene’s, the Matt Gaetz’s, the Josh Hawley’s, and others who could care less about any assurances that Russia gave to Ukraine and that Ukraine accepted under great pressure from the United States.

The Republicans who oppose even our material assistance to Ukraine, such as Marjorie Taylor Greene and others, claim they do not want to become involved in foreign wars. Interestingly, they represent the unthinking Republican mentality of 1940 when the Party opposed Lend Lease, and the party’s formal platform began with, “The Republican Party is firmly opposed to involving this Nation in foreign war.”

As the French say, “plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.” The more things change, the more they remain the same.

 While my weekly column is emailed every Sunday morning to our subscribers at no charge, my podcasts and my annual ebook, “Essays For Our Time,” are also distributed to our premium subscribers for just $5/month.

Please consider becoming a Premium subscriber here — https://oftheeising1776.substack.com/subscribe.  

 Recent podcasts have featured my commentary on Brian Kemp and Those Republicans of Georga, the Trump Indictments, the Fox Corp Settlement, The CNN Trump Town Hall, the Hunter Biden plea deal, The New American Cult of Personality, and my interviews with:

William Bratton, Retired Chief of Police, New York City, Los Angeles, and Boston

Rikki Klieman, Attorney, Network News Analyst, and best-selling author

John Thoresen, Executive Director, Barbara Sinatra Children’s Center

Katherine Gehl, co-author of The Politics Industry and founder of the Institute for Political Innovation

Jazz artist Ann Hampton Callaway

Outlander author Diana Gabaldon

AI Data Scientist Lawrence Kite

Ryan Clancy, Chief Strategist of No Labels

Senator Barbara Boxer

Senator Joe Lieberman

Maryland Governor Larry Hogan

 Become a Premium subscriber here: https://oftheeising1776.substack.com/subscribe.