Walter Russell Mead argues American and European aid for Ukraine is neither “a charity project,” nor a distraction from the even-more-important Indo-Pacific region.[1]  Instead, it is “a golden opportunity” that we should seize “with both hands.”  He spells out some of what he means and leaves it to readers to understand other parts.  Not all of his argument is persuasive, but it is worth considering. 

Mead argues that Putin’s war against Ukraine “has ignited a national awakening.”  Post-war Ukraine, he predicts, “will be a formidable new force in Europe whose interests and outlook place it firmly in alignment with the U.S.”  Maybe, but also maybe not. 

            He seems to be on target about the “national awakening.”  Two qualifications need to be made.  First, that revival began well before the Russian invasion in February 2022.  The 2013-2014 “Euromaidan” grass-roots protests evicted the pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych.[2]  Russia’s reoccupation of Crimea and its sponsorship of pro-Russian movements in the Donbas followed.  Second, that revival has two fronts.  In 2019, voters elected Volodymyr Zelensky as President in a revolt against the endemic corruption in post-Soviet Ukraine.  Russia’s out-right invasion has diverted attention from the corruption issue, but some Ukrainian oligarchs don’t seem to have felt the same nationalist pride coursing through the veins of ordinary Ukrainians. 

            Mead may or may not be on target about a “formidable” post-war Ukraine.  He foresees a country with a “battle-tested army” that will “join Poland, the Baltic republics, and the Scandinavian countries” in a barricade against Russian expansion. 

Any future event can become the focus of present hopes and fears.  So all predictions should be taken with a grain of salt.  In the case of a formidable post-war Ukraine, other examples drawn from history urge caution.  In 1783, the new United States emerged from the War for Independence exhausted and with its people eager to turn their attention to other pressing concerns.  After the Second World War, the British people voted for domestic reforms, rather than the preservation of empire.  Defense spending fell sharply.  “Battle-tested armies” shrank mightily in both cases. 

Ukraine’s army largely consists of patriotic volunteers who rushed to the colors when Russia attacked.  They’re going to want to go back to civilian life when the war ends.  Americans estimate Ukrainian military casualties at 20,000 killed and 130,000 wounded; civilian deaths are estimated above 40,000.[3]  Much of the country has been physically devastated into the bargain.  Bouncing back from such losses will not be easy. 

            How will this redound to the benefit of the West elsewhere?  In two ways.  First, an exhausted, perhaps even defeated Russia will be no useful partner to Xi Jinping.  Mead argues that the Eastern bloc in NATO and the European Union will resist any post-war (or wartime, come to that) appeasement of Russia by the Western Europeans. 

            A defeat for Russia will revive the credibility of an American alliance, eroded by decades of mismanagement.  South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, and countries in Southeast Asia may all take heart in facing the Chinese danger.  Americans shouldn’t take a victory lap.  We’re just starting. 

[1] Walter Russell Mead, “Putin’s War Is America’s Opportunity,” WSJ, 30 May 2023. 

[2] See: “Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom” (dir. Evgeny Afineevsky, 2015).  Excellent documentary. 

[3] See: Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian War – Wikipedia