Receive free updates on U.S. foreign policy
we will send you myFT Daily Digest Email summary of latest news us foreign policy There is news every morning.
Volodymyr Zelensky says there is no “deadline” for Ukraine’s willingness to fight Russia. But it is increasingly difficult to ignore the potential shelf life of U.S. support for its cause.
Matt Gaetz, the ultra-Marx congressman who spearheaded the effort to oust Kevin McCarthy as Republican speaker on Tuesday, cited an alleged secret private agreement McCarthy made with Joe Biden to continue funding Ukraine. This is despite McCarthy providing $6 billion in aid to Ukraine in a deal reached over the weekend to keep the U.S. government open. It’s been a bleak few days for Zelensky. Even assuming the next speaker is sympathetic to Ukraine, their position will be weaker than McCarthy’s.
Republicans have been moving in Russia’s direction for some time.More than 8 in 10 Republican voters now support candidates — Donald Trump, Ron DeSantis and Vivek Ramaswamy — They will cut off aid to Ukraine. About half of Americans similarly want the practice to stop. For the first time since the 1920s, Americans may have the option of putting an isolationist in the White House next year. This will be a fateful choice.
The label “isolationism” is often misused. It does not automatically mean neutrality in battles between foreigners, although this sentiment characterized the birth of the United States of America. It can also mean favoring one side over another. Charles Lindbergh, chairman of the America First Committee in the early years of World War II, made his sympathy for Nazi Germany clear. Supporters of all stripes – pacifists, big business and anti-Semites – flocked to his banner.
Today’s growing isolationism is not about an even-handed relationship between Russia and Ukraine; The impetus comes from Republicans’ sympathy for Russia’s Vladimir Putin. Others are marginalized or excluded. In an effort to save his job, McCarthy turned down Zelensky’s request to address Congress while in Washington two weeks ago. On Saturday, Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell tried to pass a separate bill to restore funding to Ukraine. He faced pushback from his Republican colleagues.
Both parties in the United States generally believe that China is the main challenge to U.S. hegemony. Russia, however, is an instant arsonist among its Western neighbors. The root of American isolationism is to avoid entanglement with Europe. It doesn’t have much to say about the rest of the world. After Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, Lindbergh volunteered for the Pacific. The country’s postwar isolationists, led by Senator Robert Taft, opposed the creation of NATO in 1949 but were angry at the United States’ failure to prevent China’s communist revolution that same year. “Who lost China?” was the isolationist battle cry. A similar pattern can be seen today. Isolationist Republicans say the war in Ukraine is diverting U.S. attention from the real threat from China. Ramaswamy called Zelensky “their pope” – referring to his pro-Ukrainian colleague. On the other hand, Beijing wants to turn Americans into “Chinese serfs.”
Imminent threat assessment points to Moscow.Putin makes clear his plans to rebuild Russian Federation russian mil (Russian World). He dismembered Georgia in 2008, seized Crimea in 2014, launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, and subsequently annexed four Ukrainian regions. The last time Chinese troops invaded another country was Vietnam in 1979; it went badly. Today’s most exaggerated concerns about Chinese design sound more like a replay of the McCarthyist “Red Scare” of the 1950s than a balanced assessment of America’s current risks.
History tells us that isolationists usually fail. But they can change its course at critical times. In 1920, the Senate defeated Woodrow Wilson’s League of Nations, eliminating the United States from the European chessboard for two decades. Regimes that pose serious threats to the United States fill this vacuum. Then, as today, Americans understandably thought Europe should get its own affairs in order. The United States provides Ukraine with much of its Western equipment and intelligence. Yet few would bet on Europe taking over from an isolationist United States.
To keep the United States engaged, Biden must somehow secure enough Republican votes in the coming weeks to replenish Ukraine’s funding. His job is made more difficult by the lack of a major military breakthrough in Ukraine. Today, the Magga base demonizes Zelensky almost as much as it demonizes George Soros. Then there’s next year’s presidential election. The White House’s America First policy could ruin Ukraine’s prospects. Trump, as always, is the Hail Mary Putin seeks.
edward.luce@ft.com
Svlook
