In a leading editorial on Tuesday the Washington Post wrote about a new attitude in the US about the war in Ukraine as it entered its second month: frustration, if not fatigue. “Frustration is understandable, but now is not the time for the US to pivot,” the paper wrote.
The problem, besides the realization that the war is not going to be a short one, is that nobody knows how it is going to end.
The end will be one of two things:
First, the military defeat of the Russians at the hands of Ukraine, without direct NATO involvement, albeit with an enormous cost in civilian life.
Second, military victory for the Russians “seems all too conceivable as well, even if stable Russian political control thereafter is not,” according to the Post.
The frustration in the US seems to reflect an attitude that had already started in Europe, particularly because long before the war some Europeans in France and Germany wondered about the wisdom of pushing Russia to invade. The US had played a major role in rejecting Russian demands for a specific guarantee that Ukraine would not join NATO.
Among the Americans, the minority view, mostly academic, that the US was to be blamed for decades of pushing NATO into East Europe, closer to Russian borders, does not have popular support.
But according to Politico magazine, the American public has shown over decades that it could sway this way and that, sometimes in a contradictory manner. Last week, the magazine headline was: “Polls Show the Public Is Willing to Sacrifice for Ukraine. History Suggests Biden Shouldn’t Count On It”.
The magazine continued: “You can understand why the White House would welcome a new Reuters poll finding more than three in five Americans say they’d ‘willingly’ pay more at the gas pump to support Ukraine in its war with Russia. Of course, Americans also say they plan to exercise more (and) eat more vegetables …”
The Post said that “the frustration is growing, understandably, among many in the United States and Europe, who wonder why, in addition to the military assistance for Kyiv and sanctions against Russia, the West is not doing more.”
Although on the same day the newspaper’s headline across the front page was about the US warning China not to help Russia, the newspaper’s editorial wondered about the expansion of such dangerous outshoots of the war in Ukraine.
Following are two different opinions about the frustration, if not the fatigue of the war, from each writer’s tweets, websites, and statements in the media:
On one side, Matt Bai, a journalist who worked with the New York Times, Newsweek, Yahoo News, and, now the Washington Post. He authored two books: “The Argument” and “All the Truth is Out.''
On the other side, Joe Scarborough, a TV host who anchors “Morning Joe” on MSNBC, with his wife Mika Brzezinski, daughter of Polish-born former national security expert Zbigniew Brzezinski.
Matt Bai: Inspiration, but for how long?
“If we expect the war in Ukraine to end with Russia’s surrender and President Biden basking in praise from Congress and foreign capitals, we might want to revisit Cold War history.
In disputes between nuclear powers, the cause might be clear and just. The resolution generally isn’t …
At this point, Russian President Putin’s unprovoked war has provided the United States — and the world — with a simple narrative and uncontroversial choices. Russia, the behemoth, is isolated from the world and reeling from resistance. Plucky Ukraine stands its ground and pleads for help amid mounting casualties.
But this period of easy choices and simple storylines is coming to an end.
We’re reaching the phase of the crisis where the interests of Ukraine and the United States are no longer perfectly aligned, and the balance will be hard to navigate.
Like any capable leader in his situation, Ukrainian President Zelensky wants to repel the invaders and keep his country whole. His best (and probably only) hope for driving the Russians out is to draw NATO deeper into the war.
And so Zelensky pleads movingly with the West for leftover Russian-made fighter jets and a no-fly zone over Ukraine. If he’s going to hold out indefinitely, he needs the United States and Europe to do more than sanction Russia and ferry weapons across the border.
The United States, however, has a different bottom line, as it did throughout the 40-year Cold War: to avoid a shooting war with a country that keeps nuclear missiles aimed at U.S. cities.
This might mean pressuring Zelensky to accept a negotiated solution that is patently unjust — if it’s even possible.
No one wants to say it now, but America would sooner see Ukraine cede some territory than risk all-out war. It would be an imperfect solution, but one in which we’d all live to fight another day …”
Joe Scarborough: Enough Mr. Putin
“Three weeks ago, only 1 in 4 Americans supported significant U.S. involvement in the war. European allies were wary of confronting Putin on a range of issues … Now, 3 in 4 Americans support a no-fly zone over Ukraine. European allies have flexed their military and economic might in a way not seen since World War II.
These dramatic changes allow the U.S. president to respond more aggressively to the war crimes being committed against Ukrainians.
Biden should stop telling Putin the following:
First, what he will not do, to avoid a confrontation.
Second, what weapons he will not send to Ukraine.
Third, where U.S. troops will not be used.
Biden shouldn’t react to Putin; he should take the initiative, if for no other reason because Putin keeps moving the goal post.
At the beginning, Putin claimed that the trigger would be acceptance of Ukraine into NATO. Then he added the introduction of peacekeeping troops into western Ukraine. Then the transfer of Polish jets across the border. And then the shipment of defensive weapons. And then he moved the line again, declaring to young flight attendants bearing flowers that even economic sanctions against Russia were tantamount to war …
It is as if Putin expects Americans to forget the body bags flown to Dover Air Force Base because of decades of Russian proxy wars fought against U.S. soldiers. Simply put, an alliance that caves to Putin’s nuclear blackmail today would be forced to respond to his chemical weapons attacks tomorrow.
Enough.”
