Ukraine: Laurels for Sanity

Over the past year, a few dissident voices have spoken out against mindless escalation. The post Laurels for Sanity on Ukraine appeared first on The American Conservative.

The one-year anniversary Russia’s–awful and no-good–invasion in Ukraine is quickly approaching. This tragedy was quickly compounded when Western leaders and media warlords adopted a simplistic ideological approach to complex conflicts. As foreign policy establishments quickly forgot about the devastation in Afghanistan and Iraq, they began a new proxy war against the country with the largest nuclear arsenal and the most valuable energy resources.

This column and the magazine have been subject to many able criticisms. It is worth trying a different approach now. This means that we should give laurels to those dissident voices, who, despite enormous pressure, have spoken out against mindless escalation and for realisability over the past year.

Advertisement

First up, a laurel to German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, for recently hitting the breaks on deliveries of advanced artillery–specifically, the Leopard 2 tank–to Ukraine. It is true that Berlin will not get in the way other (e.g. Poland) who are also sending the same hardware to battle zone. Scholz’s minor and symbolic gesture of dilatory behavior suggests that there is somelimit on how far the most powerful country on the continent will go to fuel a Russo–European war.

Let us also give one to Viktor Orban, Hungarian Prime Minster, for his nimble strategy in a time when all around him are feigning panic. Orban and his country are just as wary of Russian imperialism in Central and Eastern Europe as any other. Orban does not believe the West should be able to transform an intra-Slavic war into an all-out ideological war. Orban also stated that Europe cannot win an energy war with Russia without destroying her industrial base and working classes. He told me that if someone thinks they can defeat Russia and make things better in Moscow, it’s a mistake.

A laurel goes to Senator Josh Hawley for questioning the seemingly endless amounts of U.S. tax dollars his fellow lawmakers are willing to spend on a proxy conflict against Moscow. The Missouri populist voted against a $40 billion package in May. Since then, total aid has risen to around $100 billion. He explained that the package “treats Ukraine like a client state” and would place us in a difficult relationship for funding the war and reconstruction. This is not a case of misplaced priorities.

Ditto for Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio was the one who provoked the fury of the military-industrial community and its spokesmen by declaring outright that “I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine.” However, he was clearly expressing the views of working class Americans from whom he sought votes, people who are ravaged by opioids and other miseries caused by elites now pushing for total war on Russia. Vance called for an audit on the $100 billion in Ukrainian aid since he took office. Kudos to him and Kentucky’s Senator Rand Paul who have repeatedly argued for realistism in these pages, all in the same category.

Although I would love to highlight progressive legislators, for the moment, the antiwar left seems politically dead. There are many left-of-center writers, thinkers and artists who have maintained that tradition, sometimes at the cost of social ostracism. Glenn Greenwald and Michael Tracey are just a few of the honorable mentions. It would be remiss of me not to mention the Quincy Institute and the Stand Together network in general. The Claremont Institute, among other institutions, has stood firm. The various institutions and figures mentioned here don’t always agree with each other. Their cross-partisan alliance on foreign policy restraint makes it shine even more.

Each laurel ceremony should be accompanied with the “awarding of at least one dart.” This is to recognize the person who has acted the most dangerously in the last year. There are many candidates, but I could only choose Senator Lindsey Graham from South Carolina. He was ruminating about assassinating Vladimir Putin at the heights of the invasion–an insane speech seemingly meant to plunge the world into an apocalypse. Thankfully, President Joe Biden refused to agree.

Let’s hope that next year, another award ceremony of the kind we have will not be required. I don’t hold my breath.

More Stories

Read More

Read More
Stay informed by joining TruthRow

24/7 coverage from 1000+ journalists. Subscriber-exclusive events. Unmatched political and international news.

You can cancel anytime