Differing Attitudes toward the Ukrainian Crisis among Americans
Published in Akhbar al Khalij
(Bahrain) on 15 March 2022
by James Zogby, Ph.D. (link to original)
Vladimir Putin’s Russia has decided to wager on a confrontation with the West, and it seems that it has won its bet.
Contrary to what many on the Democratic left believed, I believed early on that NATO should have sent its forces to Ukraine to clearly establish that it would not tolerate a threat to Ukraine’s sovereignty, even though it is not a NATO member.
Putin has read the West’s reluctance to respond — except with words and now sanctions — as weakness. Words are meaningless, and Russia and its oligarchy have long been resistant to sanctions.
Western countries and NATO, on the other hand, could not meet this direct military challenge. Unfortunately, Russia managed to invade Ukraine without any significant opposition.
For weeks, U.S. leaders and political commentators have debated the appropriate U.S. response to Russia’s threat to Ukraine’s sovereignty, instead of the familiar and predictable disagreements between Republican hawks and Democratic doves. Those [earlier] debates that raged between the parties had focused on important but somewhat marginal matters, but not on the issues now raised by this seizure of power by Russia.
Former President Donald Trump strangely praised Putin as a cunning genius. Many Republicans in his camp are asking, “Why should we defend the Ukrainians? Will they fight to defend us?” And there were some Trump supporters in Congress who ignored the former president's praise for Putin, saying, “If Trump were president, Putin wouldn't have dared to do that.”
Meanwhile, most Democratic leaders lined up behind Joe Biden’s reluctant commitment of troops as he brandished his imposition of sanctions on Russian oligarchs and institutions. Some liberal Democrats and some conservative Republicans have demanded that Biden seek congressional approval before sending military forces to defend Ukraine. And at the same time, even more liberal Democrats involved themselves in the process of self-flagellation, asking, “How can we dare say or do anything, given our history of violating international law and invading sovereign countries?”
And while this talk — portrayed as representing a serious political discussion — continues, the most troubling aspects of the Russian invasion and occupation of Ukraine receive little attention: most importantly, the past and present of the Ukrainian people and their future. Political debate that centers on the confrontation between Russia and NATO, or between Putin and Biden, ignores them.
As the president of a Washington-based think-tank, I work with Ukrainian Americans. I know their history, including the Holodomor famine, a forced starvation imposed by the Soviet Union in the 1930s, and the Great Purge.
Ukrainian Americans are proud of their country, heritage, culture and independence; they are also afraid of the consequences of the Russian invasion and of Putin’s track record, especially regarding the hard-earned independence of Ukraine.
Regardless of political debate regarding Ukraine, it is worth asking, “How did we get here?” For only three decades after the end of the Cold War, the United States emerged victorious over the Soviet Union; policy makers and analysts reported the birth of a “new world order” in which the United States prevailed as the only great world power.
When Saddam Hussein invaded and occupied Kuwait, U.S. President George H.W. Bush adhered to the rules and sought the support of the United Nations for the liberation of Kuwait and established an international coalition to liberate that country.
Subsequent U.S. administrations did not respect the international system, particularly during the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. The Iraq war weakened the United States militarily, made Americans wary and weary of outside interference and damaged the prestige of the United States.
The United States has experienced far-reaching influence on the entire world order.
Our weakness and the setback caused by our arrogance have given rise to a multipolar world in which global and regional powers operate unilaterally to highlight their growing power, and what they now feel they can get away with. “New world order,” the role of the United Nations and the rule of law have disappeared and have been replaced by the law of the jungle since Iraq.
My observations and my commentary about the mistakes in policy pursued by the United States in the past, which contributed to the dismantling of the rule of international law, will in no way make me align with “left-wing isolationists.” Our past sins do not absolve us from facing current responsibilities.
The Ukrainian people deserve more than our prayers and the guilty abstentions. The best course of action would be to acknowledge our past mistakes, commit to restoring respect for the rule of law and act to correct the damage. The immediacy of the needs of a country and a people are more important than being simply Putin’s pawns in an “abominable game of nations.”
President of the Arab American Institute
Contrary to what many on the Democratic left believed, I believed early on that NATO should have sent its forces to Ukraine to clearly establish that it would not tolerate a threat to Ukraine’s sovereignty, even though it is not a NATO member.
Putin has read the West’s reluctance to respond — except with words and now sanctions — as weakness. Words are meaningless, and Russia and its oligarchy have long been resistant to sanctions.
Western countries and NATO, on the other hand, could not meet this direct military challenge. Unfortunately, Russia managed to invade Ukraine without any significant opposition.
For weeks, U.S. leaders and political commentators have debated the appropriate U.S. response to Russia’s threat to Ukraine’s sovereignty, instead of the familiar and predictable disagreements between Republican hawks and Democratic doves. Those [earlier] debates that raged between the parties had focused on important but somewhat marginal matters, but not on the issues now raised by this seizure of power by Russia.
Former President Donald Trump strangely praised Putin as a cunning genius. Many Republicans in his camp are asking, “Why should we defend the Ukrainians? Will they fight to defend us?” And there were some Trump supporters in Congress who ignored the former president's praise for Putin, saying, “If Trump were president, Putin wouldn't have dared to do that.”
Meanwhile, most Democratic leaders lined up behind Joe Biden’s reluctant commitment of troops as he brandished his imposition of sanctions on Russian oligarchs and institutions. Some liberal Democrats and some conservative Republicans have demanded that Biden seek congressional approval before sending military forces to defend Ukraine. And at the same time, even more liberal Democrats involved themselves in the process of self-flagellation, asking, “How can we dare say or do anything, given our history of violating international law and invading sovereign countries?”
And while this talk — portrayed as representing a serious political discussion — continues, the most troubling aspects of the Russian invasion and occupation of Ukraine receive little attention: most importantly, the past and present of the Ukrainian people and their future. Political debate that centers on the confrontation between Russia and NATO, or between Putin and Biden, ignores them.
As the president of a Washington-based think-tank, I work with Ukrainian Americans. I know their history, including the Holodomor famine, a forced starvation imposed by the Soviet Union in the 1930s, and the Great Purge.
Ukrainian Americans are proud of their country, heritage, culture and independence; they are also afraid of the consequences of the Russian invasion and of Putin’s track record, especially regarding the hard-earned independence of Ukraine.
Regardless of political debate regarding Ukraine, it is worth asking, “How did we get here?” For only three decades after the end of the Cold War, the United States emerged victorious over the Soviet Union; policy makers and analysts reported the birth of a “new world order” in which the United States prevailed as the only great world power.
When Saddam Hussein invaded and occupied Kuwait, U.S. President George H.W. Bush adhered to the rules and sought the support of the United Nations for the liberation of Kuwait and established an international coalition to liberate that country.
Subsequent U.S. administrations did not respect the international system, particularly during the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. The Iraq war weakened the United States militarily, made Americans wary and weary of outside interference and damaged the prestige of the United States.
The United States has experienced far-reaching influence on the entire world order.
Our weakness and the setback caused by our arrogance have given rise to a multipolar world in which global and regional powers operate unilaterally to highlight their growing power, and what they now feel they can get away with. “New world order,” the role of the United Nations and the rule of law have disappeared and have been replaced by the law of the jungle since Iraq.
My observations and my commentary about the mistakes in policy pursued by the United States in the past, which contributed to the dismantling of the rule of international law, will in no way make me align with “left-wing isolationists.” Our past sins do not absolve us from facing current responsibilities.
The Ukrainian people deserve more than our prayers and the guilty abstentions. The best course of action would be to acknowledge our past mistakes, commit to restoring respect for the rule of law and act to correct the damage. The immediacy of the needs of a country and a people are more important than being simply Putin’s pawns in an “abominable game of nations.”
President of the Arab American Institute
Previous article![]( "Washington’s Eyes on Venezuela’s Oil")
Next article![]( "Sanctions against Russia: Japan Must Lead International Effort at Solidarity")