Time for Americans to line up – Behind Zelensky

In advance of the now infamous meeting with Trump and Zelensky on February 28, I didn’t want Zelensky to come. I was fearful that Trump would bully Zelensky into signing away significant amount of his country’s wealth, without getting the security guarantees to assure against future Russian incursions. Since those guarantees seemed to be off the table, I was relieved when that meeting fell apart. Good for you, Volodymyr, you did the right thing! You’re the hero in this story and Trump and J.D. Vance were the unabashed villains.

Zelensky’s insistence that any deal contain security guarantees was more than appropriate – it’s essential. Without such guarantees any deal would deserve to be soundly rejected. From what I saw, Zelensky handled himself with the utmost respect and composure. Whatever disrespect displayed at that meeting was shown by Trump and Vance. Besides condescendingly lectured Zelensky for not showing sufficient deference and gratitude to “our great leader,” Vance had the temerity to lambast Zelensky for “campaigning with the opposition” (which, from what I can gather appears not to be true) – this from a man who snubbed the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz when he recently visited Germany and instead met with Alice Weidel, the leader of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD). If we ever needed lessons in hypocrisy and irony, look no further.

The expectation that Zelensky should embrace such a one-sided offer as being the one being crammed down his throat is ridiculous and offensive. Accommodating to it would have been a sell out on a massive scale. Trump’s beautiful deal reminds me of the kind of agreement that Haiti made to pay France onerous reparations as part of their negotiations leading to Haiti’s independence – obligations often cited as being a major factor contributing to Haiti’s being among the poorest nations in the world.

The second parallel I see is the replay of “peace in our time,” with Trump playing the role of Neville Chamberlain. The idea that Zelensky, or anyone else, should trust that a ceasefire will lead to a lasting peace in the absence of security guarantees is preposterous. Lasting peace between Russia and Ukraine will come only when Putin disavows his claims on Ukraine, and we could expect that to happen only if and when Putin assesses the cost of continuing his aggression as being too high. A ceasefire without the commitment of security guarantees is a recipe for Putin to use the ceasefire as an opportunity to regroup, regenerate his forces, and try again on another day. How is that not patently obvious?

It’s perverse to make future support for Ukraine conditional upon Zelensky prostrating himself before Trump and showering him with pronouncements of gratitude. That support isn’t some kind of favor that we’d be extending to Zelensky. Rather, it’s in our interest to provide it. Our strong stance in this regard would deter future imperialistic aggressions, not only by Russia, but by China, as well – or North Korea, or Iran, for that matter, or any other adventurous despot that might come along. This fight is our fight as much as it’s Ukraine’s.

With our support, will Ukraine win? Questionable. Ultimately, some of Ukraine’s objectives may not be realized, but strengthening Ukraine’s positions on the battlefield will certainly put Zelensky in a better bargaining position, and the additional cost to Russia under that scenario would likely alter Putin’s calculus in consideration of future incursions either in Ukraine or elsewhere. On the other hand, withdrawing support now would embolden Putin and others of like ilk.

Did we learn nothing from the war in Afghanistan? We spent 20 years over there fighting the Taliban. Early in 2020, Trump negotiated and made public a deal with the Taliban that committed the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan by May of 2021. Biden executed that withdrawal, but it was Trump’s policy. The advance knowledge of our pending departure reinforced the Taliban’s resolve; and, once again, they’re in control of the country. How many times do we need to see this movie?

The tragedy we currently find ourselves in is that Zelensky is critically dependent on US military hardware; and because of that, he’ll undoubtedly have to find some way to come back to the table and offer an olive branch to get back into Trump’s good graces. Even if Zelensky does that, it’s really incumbent upon Trump to do the right thing and offer the kind of security guarantees that are necessary. Unfortunately, Trump can’t be trusted to do the right thing. That much should be clear for all to see. Congress needs to take control. Congress needs to appropriate the funds and oversee the administration’s actions to make sure those funds are spent in a way that best serves our national interests. Congress needs to do its job.