“What would happen if we walked away?” President Biden asked in an Oval Office address Thursday night. At one time, such a question would be merely rhetorical, with wide agreement that the United States is, as Mr. Biden put it, the “essential nation.”
Delivered at what he appropriately called an inflection point in history, the president’s comments reflect the risk that the United States might abandon its friends, as wars rage in Ukraine and Israel.
There is broad support for both countries among the U.S. electorate. A generation of Americans who came of age around 9/11 is wary of more “forever wars,” however. Increasingly isolationist Republicans argue that U.S. resources might be better spent on this continent — 117 House Republicans voted against the most recent Ukraine aid package.
And so it behooved the president to make the links between the two conflicts, as he did in Thursday’s somber address to the nation, and to convince Americans that continued support, for both Ukraine and Israel, is not just a principled stand in defense of democracies under attack — but in the United States’ self-interest.
At stake is not only the survival of democracies abroad, however imperfect, but the United States’ long-standing interest in preventing two major regions, Europe and the Middle East, from falling under the sway of hostile hegemons (Russia and Iran, respectively), with the inevitable damage to U.S. security and economic prosperity that would imply.
IF RUSSIA were to succeed in Ukraine, its next target would probably be a NATO ally, which U.S. troops are committed by treaty to defend. The potential stakes extend to Asia, where successful aggression by Russia or Iran could embolden China to seize Taiwan.
America Firsters deny these clear dangers in the simplistic belief that the United States can shut itself off from an interdependent world. NATO treaty obligations and Taiwan’s de facto independence, under this view, seem as dispensable as Ukrainian democracy.
In fact, a rules-based international order, under U.S. stewardship, has a proven record of promoting prosperity not just overseas but also at home. Managing conflicts and deterring aggression prevent small wars from spiraling into catastrophes. American consumers are still recovering from the inflation caused in large part by pandemic-related disruptions of international supply chains. A more volatile world is a scarier — and a poorer — one.
Mr. Biden encouraged Americans to think of Ukraine as a long-term investment that would pay dividends. Already, the United States, via Ukraine, has eroded Russia’s army and prestige, discouraging other nations from aligning with the Kremlin. Though Mr. Biden did not mention it, South Korea is an apt example of how a long-term American security commitment resulted in profound gains for the global economy and U.S. security — not overnight, but over the course of many years.
By contrast, with the blood and treasure the United States has poured into the Korean Peninsula, its investment in Ukraine has been cheap: $76.8 billion to Ukraine so far, including military ($46.6 billion), financial ($26.4 billion) and humanitarian ($3.9 billion) assistance. Mr. Biden seeks a new, $100 billion package that will cover Ukraine and Israel, and devote more money to border security. The United States can afford to help Ukraine and Russia and care for its own people.
These numbers sound enormous, but the total amount is a fraction of spending on safety net programs and other domestic initiatives, in a $6.27 trillion federal budget. The United States can afford to help these two friends in need and care for its own people.
MR. BIDEN’S STRAIGHT talk Thursday was welcome; more is needed regarding the big unknowns in both conflicts. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s strategy is to prolong the Ukraine conflict, at least through next year’s U.S. presidential election, testing the patience of Europe and the United States and biding time to see whether America Firster Donald Trump makes it back to the White House.
Mr. Biden’s case for patience in Ukraine would be stronger if he sketched how the United States, NATO and the European Union will help Ukraine set up a postwar system to guarantee its security. By the same token, it’s not too early to discuss assuring stability and recovery in a post-Hamas Gaza, along with a wider regional understanding for the Middle East, including Palestinian rights.
Against Mr. Trump and the isolationist wing of the GOP — as well as a smaller group of critics in the president’s own party — Mr. Biden has better arguments to make, both morally and practically. He will have to state them forcefully again and again as this dangerous year ends and the even more momentous election year of 2024 begins.
