Agony over Ukraine

Many Americans, starting with the president, are hostile or churlish toward the Ukrainians and warm toward their invader—a bitter truth to digest.

---

For many years, I asked David Pryce-Jones to write articles on a variety of subjects: historical, political, literary, artistic, etc. We worked at the same magazine. DPJ was an all-purpose intellectual (who died at 89 on November 17).

Only one time did he balk at writing something: when I asked him to write about Vietnam, probably on some anniversary. The “boat people,” the “reeducation” camps, and so on. He asked to be excused from that assignment, for it was too painful to relive all that.

DPJ thought that the United States, and the West generally, had done badly by the people of South Vietnam.

Ukraine is a deeply painful subject for many of us. It is most painful, of course, for the Ukrainians! For long years now, they have endured mass murder, mass torture, mass kidnapping ...

And yet they have made a heroic stand in their own defense.

There are many, many Americans who don’t think the United States should aid the Ukrainians. You can imagine a statement that goes something like this:

“I admire the Ukrainians and I am horrified and sickened by the Russian invasion. I hope the Ukrainians prevail. But I don’t believe that support of them is in the US interest.”

Do you ever hear anyone say that? I do not. Instead, I hear a lot of hostility to the Ukrainians and a lot of sympathy for Putin and the Kremlin.

Someone who is pro-Ukraine but anti-aid is like someone who is anti-Israel but not antisemitic. Imaginable, sure, and maybe even spotted in the wild now and then. But damn rare.

One of the claims that President Trump makes about ... Let me start that sentence over, with more bluntness: One of the lies that President Trump tells about Volodymyr Zelensky and the Ukrainians is that they are ungrateful for the support they have received from the United States so far.

Last Sunday, Trump wrote, “UKRAINE ‘LEADERSHIP’ HAS EXPRESSED ZERO GRATITUDE FOR OUR EFFORTS.” (All-caps in the original, of course.)

This lie is easily disproven, and has been amply disproven, but this seems not to matter. Millions of Americans take Trump’s word as gospel. And he has shaped the way much of the country thinks about Ukraine.

Writing about disinformation, I sometimes quote Jonathan Swift: “Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it, so that when men come to be undeceived, it is too late; the jest is over, and the tale hath had its effect.”

In an attempt to counter Trump, Don Bacon said that he had heard Zelensky “thank America many times for our military aid.” All honor to Republicans such as Bacon.

But Trump is the leader and hero of the party, and of what still calls itself, astonishingly enough, “the conservative movement.” Bacon is a Nebraska House rep who is retiring after the current term.

Last week, a former House rep, Mike Pompeo, tweeted,

Putin cannot be rewarded for slaughtering thousands of people and kidnapping 20,000 Ukrainian children.

Now is the time to increase the pressure—not take our foot off the gas.

Well and good. Pompeo was once secretary of state, in Trump’s previous term. But his like are far from the levers of power now.

Closer is Darren Beattie, an acting assistant secretary of state. I examined some of his handiwork in an article last summer, here. Let me share an example from February 2021: “Putin>>>>>NATO” (wrote Beattie).

Is Putin greater than NATO—to say nothing of five times greater? Is it odd for an official of the US State Department to think so?

To me it is, but I came of age in the Reagan era.

Many times, Steve Witkoff has expressed his affection and respect for Vladimir Putin. Witkoff is not some random Trump voter. He is the president’s personal envoy to Russia.

Last April, Witkoff met Putin for a lengthy talk (four hours). As Putin approached him, to shake his hand, Witkoff put his hand over his heart. (Watch it here.)

That was on Friday the 11th. Two days later, Russian forces committed a massacre in Sumy, Ukraine. They killed at least 36 people and wounded 119. It was Palm Sunday. The Russians struck just as people were going to church.

Unlike other Free World leaders, President Trump issued no official statement. But, questioned by a reporter, he managed to say, “I think it was terrible, and I was told they made a mistake” (“they” meaning the Russians).

In Ukraine, President Zelensky said, “Excuse me, but this is a murder. This strike went to the center, it did not go to the front line. We cannot find excuses when you hit the city center with missiles.”

For years, many Americans have mocked others who have a Ukrainian flag in their social-media bio. I wrote an essay on the subject of solidarity last year: “Blue and Yellow in Our Time.”

These same mockers have mocked Zelensky for the clothes he wears—military attire, or quasi-military attire. He and others think it is appropriate to the situation.

Last February, Trump, Vice President Vance, and their media claque ganged up on Zelensky in the Oval Office. A correspondent for the network that styles itself “Real America’s Voice” had a question for Zelensky: “Why don’t you wear a suit?” And: “Do you own a suit?”

Imagine having a chance to question Zelensky, who will go down as a historic figure, whatever happens in, or to, Ukraine. You could ask him about his decision to stay in Kyiv when Russia launched its full-scale assault. You could ask him about prospects of national survival. You could ask him about corruption in his government.

But “Do you own a suit?” (Months later, again at the White House, the correspondent who had posed that question apologized to Zelensky.)

The February affair left a lot of us sickened. In the House of Lords, Andrew Roberts, the British historian, spoke for many of us: “We must not underestimate the gravity of what has happened, which is that during a war against totalitarian dictatorship, the United States has effectively changed sides.”

Roberts went on to speak of “this startling American defection to the side of a dictator who, throughout his career, has only ever wished America ill.”

Last week, Anders Åslund, the veteran Swedish analyst, had a question: “Trump is successfully destroying the western alliances to Putin’s benefit. Why?!”

One could point to Trump’s desire to do business—personal, lucrative business—with Russia. One could also say this: Trump favors Putin and autocracy over the liberal-democratic West.

Lots of people in the Free World do, you know. It is a sad, outrageous fact of life.

Maybe 20 years ago, I had an argument with Armando Valladares, the Cuban human-rights hero. Not so much an argument as a discussion. Why were so many Americans—in the land of the free and the home of the brave—sympathetic to the Castro dictatorship?

They were ignorant, Armando said. Ill-informed. Later, after the collapse of the regime, when the archives opened up, the scales would fall from their eyes.

I was afraid the truth was bitterer: They liked it, a lot of them (“it’ being the dictatorship).

It has been bitter to see the American Right, much of it, be hostile or churlish toward Ukraine and warm toward Putin and the Kremlin. One of my articles on this subject is titled “Our Political World, Topsy-Turvy.”

A few days ago, I noticed a tweet from Hillary Clinton:

With his ultimatum that Ukraine surrender to Russia, Trump finally wins a prize:

The Neville Chamberlain award for betraying peace, freedom, and justice.

Huh. I remember when Republicans talked that way (rightly or wrongly).

When she was in high school, Hillary Rodham was a “Goldwater Girl”—a supporter of Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential election. Of course, she “evolved” from there. But when I saw her tweet, I could not help thinking: “She has more Goldwater in her today than many Republicans and self-proclaimed conservatives do.”

It has been a strange trip, and a bad one.

---

More From The Next Move:

A Moscow friendly deal and how Trump’s circle is reshaping diplomacy for profit.

---