As the second anniversary of Russia’s February 24 invasion of Ukraine approaches, the United States faces troubling questions about its commitment to upholding democratic values and its continued role as a global leader. A faction of far-right congressional Republicans has signaled its opposition to aid for Ukraine, putting essential funding for the country’s defense, economic, and humanitarian needs at risk. This only plays into the hands of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is counting on Western support for Ukraine to wane over time. On February 13, 2024, the Senate passed a new bipartisan assistance package for Ukraine. That package will now be considered by the House, where Republican leadership has a critical choice to make: uphold the principles of freedom and democracy by approving aid to Ukraine or face a continent fractured by Russian aggression, with all the attendant risks of wider conflict and instability.
The price of inaction is too high
The price of inaction—in both humanitarian and geopolitical terms—far outweighs the costs of investing in aid to Ukraine. To date, the United States has allocated $113 billion to its partners in Ukraine, with the Biden administration proposing an additional $61 billion in support through next year. The $61 billion expenditure is, by any measure, modest; it amounts to less than 1/30th of the federal budget deficit in 2023.
Since the days of the Truman Doctrine, under which the United States committed to ensuring the security of Europe, America has been a cornerstone of peace and stability for its partners and allies across the Atlantic. Throughout this period, both Democrats and Republicans have held the core belief that mutual political and security support between the United States and its allies fundamentally serves American security interests. Abandoning Ukraine now would fundamentally upend this doctrine, jeopardizing not only the immediate stability of the region but also the credibility of the United States as a reliable global ally.
Since the days of the Truman Doctrine, under which the United States committed to ensuring the security of Europe, America has been a cornerstone of peace and stability for its partners and allies across the Atlantic.
U.S. Department of State Office of the Historian, "The Truman Doctrine, 1947."
Russia’s ongoing war against Ukraine is a glaring example of authoritarian aggression and demands a steadfast response from Western allies. Yet some Republicans in Congress have mounted vociferous opposition to critical military aid for Ukraine, with echoes of the isolationist “America First” movement prior to World War II. Such resistance not only compromises immediate battlefield objectives but also empowers adversaries, undermines the rules-based international order, and brings the NATO alliance much closer to direct military confrontation with Russia.
Russia’s extension of its military campaign deeper into Ukraine, and eventually to the borders of NATO, not only would be a serious territorial breach but also would increase the risk of a direct military confrontation with the alliance. In response, NATO has solidified its eastern defenses, particularly in the Baltics and Poland. Approximately 7,700 troops, equipped with tanks, air defenses, and intelligence units, are stationed across Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia. They serve as a tripwire force to trigger a larger response should a Russian incursion occur. The United States has contributed significantly to this multinational presence, rotating roughly 10,000 troops through Poland and stationing more than 100,000 across Europe. Some in NATO openly fear that Russia will seek to test the resolve of the alliance in the coming years by challenging its commitment to collective defense under Article 5.
Such a scenario risks creating an unpredictable nuclear standoff, reminiscent of the darkest days of the Cold War. The mere possibility of nuclear weapons being involved in the conflict raises the urgency for Congress to act now. The logic is clear: An emboldened Putin likely becomes a reckless Putin, and a defeated Ukraine means a far more dangerous world for everyone. The United States can, however, help stop Putin now.
On the battlefield, the consequences of insufficient aid are dire. The recent decline in Ukrainian military capabilities, as highlighted by the Institute for the Study of War, threatens to move the conflict from stalemate to a gradual Ukrainian retreat. Without a steady flow of munitions, weapons, and other supplies, Ukraine’s ability to mount counteroffensives is dwindling, which means it is vulnerable to renewed Russian offensives. At the time of publication, Russia is using its significant advantage in artillery and personnel to grind down Ukraine’s defenses. In the city of Avdiivka, the ratio of Russian to Ukrainian artillery fire is 5-to-1.
Top Ukrainian commanders have acknowledged the heavy toll of the war, including high attrition rates. They warn that faltering support from the United States will only make things worse. The interruption in U.S. aid has emboldened Russian President Putin, reinforcing his view that Russia can outlast Western resolve and making him confident that he can extend his offensive and capture more Ukrainian territory. This could lead to a more assertive Russia, posing a direct threat to NATO’s eastern flank.
Moreover, the strength of Ukraine’s military will have a direct impact on the prospect of ending the conflict in a way that would allow Ukraine to define victory on its own terms. With less ability to leverage formidable defenses and the material support of partners, Ukraine will be at a strategic disadvantage that may force it into concessions that encourage future authoritarian aggression––both in Europe and globally. Against this background, the need for military aid transcends immediate tactical needs; it is about ensuring that Ukraine can define victory from a position of strength.
America must invest in alliances in order to avoid war
The Biden administration’s firm support for Ukraine and role in bringing Europe together has strengthened the NATO alliance and pushed Europe to take more serious responsibility for its own security. With encouragement from the United States, several NATO countries, particularly Germany, are boosting their military budgets. Finland and Sweden have submitted applications for NATO membership, significantly reinforcing the alliance’s northern flank. NATO has also embraced Ukraine as a future member and determined that it now stands closer to the alliance than ever before. And politically, the European Union has initiated Ukraine’s EU membership process, a move poised to bolster Ukrainian institutions and steer its transformation into a fully democratic country. This approach showcases the effectiveness of American leadership that invests in strengthening alliances without drawing America into direct military conflict.
Support for Ukraine extends beyond the obligation to aid a partner in distress; it encompasses the duty to reinforce the foundational principles of the international order, upon which American prosperity relies, and to secure a future safe for democracy.
As the somber anniversary of the February 24 invasion approaches, the words that U.S. President Ronald Reagan spoke at Pointe du Hoc on June 6, 1984, resonate with renewed clarity. His speech on the beaches of Normandy honored those who fought on D-Day:
The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right … there is a profound moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest.
These words should guide Congress today. The United States must continue to support Ukraine, not just as a partner but also as a champion of self-determination in order to bulwark against authoritarian aggression. Russian forces illegally invaded a country in the heart of Europe, occupied its cities, and terrorized its people. These are the facts. Support for Ukraine extends beyond the obligation to aid a partner in distress; it encompasses the duty to reinforce the foundational principles of the international order, upon which American prosperity relies, and to secure a future safe for democracy.