Signaling no resolve would be a mistake

The Warsaw Pact dissolved in 1991 and Eastern Europe began joining NATO in 1999. In 2008, Ukraine started flirting with NATO membership, so Russia did feel a growing threat. In 2014, Russia took over Crimea to solidify its position on the Black Sea and got away with it. That year, a nonpolitician named Donald Trump actually made some statements sympathetic to Russia’s move. A couple years later, Trump

was in charge, and his views mattered. His pro-Russian moves and willingness to weaken NATO gave Moscow a signal that it could be more aggressive. After Joe Biden took over in 2021, he took steps to reverse course and strengthen NATO. A year later, Putin significantly upped the ante and invaded Ukraine.

A solid majority in the U.S. has supported Biden’s efforts to rebuild NATO and back Ukraine. The brutality of the Russian invasion has struck a sympathetic chord. However, recent polls of GOP voters show reluctance to stay the course. It is unclear if this represents sympathy for the Russian position, fear of deeper involvement or penny pinching.

Over 12 months, Biden has cautiously expanded U.S. support and kept the allies on board. It’s impossible to measure the cost of the war to the Ukrainian people, but it can be argued that, for the U.S, spending $100 billion vs the $6.5 trillion we spent in Iraq and Afghanistan has been a real bargain.

Biden is also being criticized as too cautious. Hawks are pushing him to send more offensive weapons even as Russia plays with the nuclear option. A new question is China’s role. For example, can Biden warn China against selling lethal weapons to Russia if, at the same time, we start giving them jet fighter bombers?

Russia seems to read U.S. polls. It would be a mistake to signal a lack of resolve this soon. Keeping the arms spigot open at its current level seems a prudent middle road to follow.