The Ukraine divide threatens the GOP’s unwavering legacy on defense

The mindless, red-meat-type criticisms of America’s support of Ukraine by former President Trump and congressional acolytes such as Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and the equivocations of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), are enabling Vladimir Putin’s criminal aggression and threaten to despoil the Republican Party’s traditional advocacy of American world leadership.  

For eight decades, ever since the years following the close of World War ll, the Republican Party has proudly worn the mantle of strong national defense. This belief in strong military and strong alliances reached its apex during the Reagan years with the tearing down of the Iron Curtain and the collapse of the Soviet Union. 

To be fair, there were strong national defense Democrats such as Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, former Sen. Henry “Scoop” Jackson (D-Wash.) and former Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.). But cracks in a bipartisan foreign policy consensus first emerged within the Democratic Party from its McGovernite wing, aptly labeled by ambassador Jeanne Kirkpatrick as the “blame America first” crowd. Except for a few outliers like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) Republicans stood unwaveringly against this appeasement movement. Until now.

 Let me be clear, while I believe it is in America’s national interest to support Ukraine and Volodymyr Zelensky against Putin and Russia, I understand there can be legitimate questions about our current policy. For instance, I believe weapons systems should be supplied to Zelensky without so much delay and hesitation. 

My objection is to the gratuitous criticisms of the Trump MAGA wing:

• “We should worry about our borders, not Ukraine’s.” This is eerily reminiscent of Charles Lindbergh and the “America First” foreign policy of the 1930s which was thoroughly discredited by Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor and Hitler’s Nazi aggression and acts of genocide.
• “The fighting will never end. There must be peace negotiations.” Very similar to former United Kingdom Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain who thought he had attained “peace for our time” with his concessions to Hitler at Munich.
• “We’ve already given Zelensky $100 billion in arms and humanitarian assistance. We can’t afford any more.” This is a lot of money but barely 25 percent of Biden’s $400 billion student loan forgiveness plan. Most importantly, it would be minuscule compared to the amount of American blood and treasure that could well be expended if Russia’s aggression is not halted.
•  “We can’t keep giving Zelensky a blank check.” Totally false argument. No one supports a blank check as evidenced by the laborious process in place for every weapons request by Ukraine.
•  “This is a proxy war against Russia.” It is a proxy war against Russian aggression. Would they rather have American boots on the ground?

Stopping Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is in our national interest as well as Ukraine’s. The consequences would be far-reaching. If U.S. and NATO forces cannot outlast Russia in Ukraine, how could Russian moves against the Baltic States or Poland be resisted? Countries like Germany and France would be susceptible to Russia’s economic and energy pressures. As America’s shameful abandonment of Afghanistan encouraged Putin to invade Ukraine, China will be emboldened to attack Taiwan while neighboring nations such as Japan and South Korea will view the United States as an unreliable ally and be more accommodating to China.

If Donald Trump has intelligent objections to defending Ukraine, he should try to articulate them rather than sounding like a 1960s flower child denouncing American generals as “warmongers.” I never thought I would see the day when Sweden and Finland would be more willing than a former Republican president to stand against Russian imperialism. 

It is time for Republicans to stand against the policies of surrender and appeasement lest, like Chamberlain, Lindbergh and that era’s failed America First policies, they be consigned to the ash heap of history.

Peter King was the U.S. representative of New York’s 2nd and 3rd congressional districts for 28 years, including serving as chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security. Follow him on Twitter @RepPeteKing.