Aid to Ukraine Helps an Ally, Hurts an Enemy—at a Bargain Price | Opinion

A recent column in Newsweek (Lessons From the U.S. Civil War Show Why Ukraine Can't Win, Dec. 6) did not spark a notable reaction in the United States or in the larger civilized world, but it did attract a fantastic amount of attention in Russia itself. Multiple Russian state media outlets discussed the text at length, giving their domestic audience the impression that it represented the position of the collective West in relation to Ukraine.

"Freedom of speech" is a foreign phrase on the territory of the Russian Federation, and so the concept that different opinions can exist in a healthy, democratic society seems fantastic to most Russians. Thanks to the article's authors, Russian propagandists are drinking champagne and rejoicing that the U.S. has finally changed its mind about its support for Ukraine.

Thankfully, these Russian propagandists, just like the authors themselves, have a mistaken understanding of the current situation. Their column essentially leads the reader to consider one simple question: is it in Americans' self-interest to risk everything for the sake of Ukraine?

This is a fair question to ask and the answer is a resounding "yes."

Russia is a resource-rich country that produces little, and which requires the use of advanced Western components and technologies.

In fact, Russia's main exports are gas, oil, and the types of rockets that Ukrainian air defense forces are increasingly effectively shooting out of the sky. With its 1.53 percent share of the world economy, Russia is incapable of outproducing the economies of the Western world, even if those Western economies convert only a small percentage of their industrial capacity to the production of additional weapons systems and ammunition.

Then there is the question of Russia's perceived military strength. Before Feb. 24 of this year, it was widely understood that there were three military superpowers in the world—the U.S., Russia, and China. However, after 10 months of full-scale war, it is evident that the former second-strongest army in the world is now only the second-most-powerful army in Ukraine.

In its attempt to subjugate Ukraine, Russia has used every weapon in its arsenal except for nuclear bombs, and yet it continues to lose formerly occupied territory by the day. Currently, the Russian army is on the strategic defensive, and it lacks the creative capacity to turn the tide back in its favor.

Instead, Russian troops are digging defensive structures on the territory of Russia itself, a clear sign that the Kremlin understands advancing Ukrainian troops will soon be able to threaten Russian cities such as Belgorod and Kursk. (Of course, Ukrainian troops will not attempt to capture internationally recognized Russian territory, but given their worldview, the men in the Kremlin clearly fear that we will do to them exactly what they attempted to do to us.)

This rapid change in fortune was possible thanks to an unbeatable combination: the technological sophistication of Western arms plus the heroism and ingenuity of Ukrainians themselves. When Javelins and HIMARS were introduced onto the battlefield, each changed the course of the war within a week. When Ukrainian soldiers proved willing and able to effectively deploy these NATO technologies, it quickly became evident that the vaunted Russian military simply had no response. Instead, the Russian army continues to struggle with problems in the spheres of communications, intelligence gathering, ammunition supply, delivery of food and water, and the provision of winter clothing for its troops.

Strategically, Ukraine's looming victory over the "second army in the world" is of immense benefit for U.S. security.

Contrary to what Russian propagandists claim, "democracy," "freedom of speech," "human rights," "international law," "the rules based international order," and "right makes might'' are not empty words and phrases. While some claim "pragmatism" when asking rhetorically whether Americans ought to be concerned about which faraway capital controls cities such as Donetsk or Kharkiv, they ignore the reality that Americans are already engaged in a fight that is about more than just territory.

The U.S. has two key strategic competitors—Russia and China—and the less influence these autocratic states are able to exert over their neighbors, the less likely it is that American soldiers will ever need to be deployed to defend democracy in places such as Poland, the Baltic states, Taiwan, or Japan.

Speaking pragmatically, the U.S. has thus far provided Ukraine with aid totaling 3 percent of the Pentagon's annual military budget. Without the loss of a single active-duty American soldier, roughly 50 percent of Russia's pre-Feb. 24 military potential has been destroyed—quite the pragmatic investment in American security.

It is an investment with the potential to continue paying outsized dividends. With winter approaching, Ukraine continues to hold the strategic initiative on the battlefield. With continuing Western support, further Ukrainian success will positively influence at least six issues that are of critical importance to Americans:

1. Weakening Russia's capacity to act as a spoiler in world affairs;
2. Increasing the security of Europe, a key U.S. trading partner;
3. Demonstrating to China the likely consequences of any invasion of Taiwan;
4. Restoring the image of America as a superpower following the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan;
5. Boosting worldwide demand for American weapons systems;
6. Forming a professional Ukrainian ground army capable of counterbalancing any revived Russian threat for decades to come.

Not a bad payoff for the American taxpayer.

Call it "pragmatism," "realism," "great power politics," or any other academic-sounding cliche you like. The fact is: Ukraine is in the process of liberating all its occupied territories, and this is of tremendous benefit to the entire civilized world.

The song remains the same when it comes to straw arguments regarding Iran and Russia. The claim that, for reasons of domestic regime preservation, the leadership in Tehran might be tempted to attack Israel, and that the U.S. and Russia risk coming into direct conflict after rushing to the aid of their respective embattled allies is nonsensical; As ridiculous as the idea that Russia is about to launch a successful winter offensive in Ukraine. Again, thanks to the combination of Ukrainian bravery and Western weapons, the Russian military simply no longer has the capacity to launch yet another war on yet another front.

In fact, by demonstrating the superiority that free soldiers employing Western weapons enjoy over the corrupt, backward, unprepared army of a politically bankrupt dictatorship, Ukraine's victory over Russia will communicate to Iran the same lesson that it will to China: stay inside your borders, or else.

In this context, democratic Kyiv's control over Donetsk and Kharkiv is of critical importance to democratic citizens the world over.

Ukraine's liberation of Donetsk would mean a complete and total victory over the Russia way of war, of rule, and of life. The defeat of Russia in Ukraine means the end of the Russian threat to Europe, the end of its appeal as an alternative to democratic rule of law, and the end of the Kremlin myth that personal and political freedoms are unimportant in the "real world."

Oleksiy Goncharenko is vice president of the PACE Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons and a Ukrainian member of parliament.

The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.