Moreover, the American and European peoples are growing more reluctant to continue their governments’ open-ended financial and military commitment to Ukraine. This very hesitation, contend Kiev’s propaganda stalwarts, is placing the otherwise inevitable Ukrainian victory in doubt. Indeed, if only Washington had not been so hesitant to join the European murderfest, Zelensky might even now have been enjoying a victory parade through his capital’s Independence Square.
Wrote the Financial Times’ Martin Sandbu: Ukraine’s “concrete shortcomings are the result of western leaders’ early denial of Kyiv’s appeal for fighter jets or their failure to match a promise of ammunition with the urgent action needed to produce it.” He accused “Ukraine’s Western friends” of maintaining “a timidity that all the support and contributions they have extended are insufficient to hide.” Indeed, he insisted, “more decisive action two years ago would have left Ukraine, and the west, in a much better position today.” So too with sanctions: “Earlier enforcement would have been better.” Finally, Russian financial reserves should have been confiscated and sent to Kiev.
Western timidity. That’s the problem! Wrote Sanbu, “The lesson on both the military and the economic side is the danger of believing in the virtue of caution when that in practice means delay.” It’s time for bold action! Don’t look before you leap! “Evil benefits, too, when good people are too cautious. Don’t keep making that mistake.” Forward, march, irrespective of the consequences!
Passion on Ukraine’s behalf is understandable. Although the allies did much to trigger the current conflict—recklessly expanding NATO to Russia’s border despite a multitude of warnings against doing so—Putin’s aggressive war is monstrous morally and horrendous practically. Ukrainians are entitled to choose their own future.
Nevertheless, neither the devastation nor the injustice of the Russo-Ukraine war is unique. The Saudis and Emiratis spent years killing tens or hundreds of thousands of Yemeni civilians, with U.S. assistance. The Western world ignored years of war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which may have killed more than 5 million people. Washington’s own illegal invasion of Iraq based on false WMD claims resulted in hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths. American attempts to overthrow Syria’s President Bashar al Assad aided radical jihadists of various stripes, while current sanctions policy impoverishes the Syrian people for no good reason. There’s a lot of villainy to go around, often worsened by Western—and especially American—action as well as inaction.
Moreover, no war should be casually fought. The list of expected quick victories that turned into lengthy catastrophes is long. All the major powers expected the First World War to be short, “over by Christmas.” Both North and South thought the Civil War would be settled by a quick decisive battle or two. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq planned to make short work of Iran’s revolutionary regime. America’s invasion of Iraq was to be a cakewalk. The allies’ Afghan campaign was “won” in a few weeks. The list goes on.
Ukraine is far more dangerous. None of these other campaigns were waged against a nuclear power. Today, Washington is leading the Europeans in a brutal proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. The fight could get worse—much worse. Moscow views Kiev’s status as a vital interest, one obviously important enough to justify war. Indeed, over the last two decades numerous American officials, including then-ambassador William Burns, current head of the CIA, warned successive administrations that turning Ukraine into a NATO outpost could lead to war.
With so many nations stirring the geopolitical pot, a broader war could result from accident, carelessness, or design. For instance, the Putin government might expand or escalate. Tens or hundreds of thousands of Russians are believed to have died so far. American and allied weapons, meaning the U.S. and European governments, are responsible for many of these deaths. Moscow would be fully entitled to retaliate against the West for making the conflict its own. Remember how Russia’s domestic critics, led by presidential candidate Joe Biden, demanded a response to what turned out to be the false claim that Moscow was paying the Taliban to kill U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan? Russians probably want to exact a much greater price.
So long as Moscow believes that it is winning, it has reason not to act on threats to strike NATO members or use nuclear weapons. Should momentum shift, however, so might the former’s policy, especially if Russian territory is threatened. Moreover, Ukraine wants America and European nations in. Zelensky desperately attempted to lie NATO into the war by claiming that a Ukrainian missile strike on Poland came from Russia. Western officials collectively held their breath until Kiev’s responsibility was established.
Yet Sandbu dismisses Western “timidity” before jumping into the Ukrainian imbroglio.
