The Dangers of Isolationism: The Case of Ukraine:
As of present, the support from the west has enabled Ukriane to mount a courageous defense of its nation, going as far as to retake large swathes of land annexed by Russia in the opening weeks of its 2022 invasion of Ukraine. As an area of the world that typically promotes values such as democracy and self-autonomy, its recent decline in support for Ukraine’s cause is a worrying change in sentiment from the promises made in the autumn of 2022. Although there are a few logical explanations for some of the areas in which support has waned over recent months, seemingly the majority of the west's reasoning behind its steady move toward isolationism stems from the lack of desire to endure a conflict that will not be resolved quickly by any means. Isolationism is a dangerous political footing to take when a conflict of this scale has already been raging for roughly two years. At the outbreak of the conflict, it was reassuring to see that nations such as the United States were following the historical precedent in regard to lending aid set in wars such as the Second World War or the Korean war. At present however, this enthusiasm has taken a sharp decline, leaving Ukraine’s future in a worrying position going forward.
It is no secret that without support from primarily the west, that Ukraine’s situation would be vastly different than it is today. Almost two years into the current conflict, sentiments from western governements are taking a worrying turn in regard to their stance on the continuation of support toward Ukraine in its fight against the Russian invasion. Western support played a massive role in the Ukrainian success in fending off the infamous Russian drive on Kyiv. Initially support from the west came in the form of intelligence and lethal aid, in particular ATGMs (Anti-Tank Guided Missiles). Analysists have estimated that roughly 30-40% of Russian tank losses can be attributed to these western donated ATGMs. As the conflict continued, more and more western aid has been delivered to Ukraine, with the most modern main battle tanks now seeing action on the frontline. However, in recent weeks the sentiment toward aiding Ukraine has seen a worrying change in a lot of Western governments, with the belief that ample aid has been delivered to Ukraine seemingly taking over the desire to continue the level of support maintained so far.
Just as in the summer of 2022, Ukrainian forces are reporting shortages of almost every resource necessary to fight a war of attrition, as in the aforementioned summer, Ukraine is also in retreat in many sectors of the frontline. Regrettably, Ukraine is failing in some areas of the frontline to mount appropriate resistance to Russian advances.
These failures can be considered a catalyst for the decline of western support to Ukraine and the subsequent drive toward an isolationist attitude from the West. There are three factors that should be considered as the driving factors behind this attitude change in the west. The first being the fact that supplies for Ukraine are finite, in a post cold-war world, military expdeniture is no longer as high up on the priority lists of governements in the west, perhaps aside from the US. As a result of this decrease in budget paired with advancements in weapon technologies, stocks of weapons have certainly decreased and as such the capability of the west to sustain its support of Ukraine has also followed the same pattern.
The second of these factors is more sinister, seemingly, the seeds of reluctance were sown in the summer of 2023, after the highly anticipated counter-offensive failed to make much headway. Much of the anticipation was built up by the west as some of its most modern equipment was delivered to Ukraine in time for the offensive in the summer. Due to this failure, doubts were raised in regard to Ukraine’s ability to mount future offensives and therefore its ability to liberate the land currently under Russian control.
This second factor brings into question the willingness of the US and other western nations to support a cause that is not necessarily going in the direction that those in Brussels and Washington may have wished for. This flippancy was highlighted in late October of 2023, after the attacks on Israel by HAMAS, $14.5 billion dollars was pledged to Israel in order to aid the nation in its war against the organisation. Although not cut and dry, the balance of power is much more in Israel’s favour than Ukraine’s in their respective current conflicts. Just as when western main-battle tanks and other pieces of lethal aid were pledged to Ukraine, the tide of the conflict was very much in favour of Israel when the latest US pledge was signed off.
The third of these factors stems from criticisms of the west for its involvement in conflicts throughout the world, although a valid argument against involvement in foreign affairs to an extent, in the case of Ukraine, the assistance of western countries has been explicitly asked for.
This lack of consistency is contradictory to the values that were apparently so integral to the ideals of these western nations at the beginning of this conflict. Although for the most part the message from the west has not changed, due to the aforementioned factors there have been more and more examples of western governments posturing to display the same benevolence that was shown in the autumn of 2022. Perhaps the most prevalent comes from the US, a nation with such deep stocks of lethal and humanitarian aid as well as the financial means to support Ukraine, that for the foreseeable future the US alone would have the ability to solely supply the war effort. Despite its unquestionable ability to continue in aiding Ukraine, the topic of support has become an area of political debate, with figures such as Vivek Ramaswamy, pushing for the US to pull out of its support entirely, citing a lack of resistance in eastern Ukraine as a certain indicator of the population being happier under Russian occupation. This opinion is based in fallacy and should have no place in dictating the future of the conflict in Ukraine.
It does not take a historian to understand that isolationism does not work in appeasing a power hungry individual insistent on waging a war of expansion. This weak-spined approach from the west is reminiscent of the period before the outbreak of the second world war for both the United Kingdom and the United States. Although admirable to seek to avoid conflict, both in the case of the second world war and the conflict in Ukraine, sometimes measures have to be taken to preserve the values that the west so readily bestowes on areas of the world such as the Middle East for example. By 2022, the US had spent over $2 trillion dollars on its war on terror since 2001. As stated earlier, the means to sustain a conflict are well within those in Washington, yet the aid package discussed before 2024 is still being held up in congress. This is not to say that the two situations are in any way the same, however, it is clear to the rest of the world that the US and its western allies certainly have the means to do more to help Ukraine.
This points again to a lack of desire to endure a lengthy conflict against an extremely willing opponent that also has the means to sustain such a conflict. One could go so far as to call western leaders hypocritical, preaching to the masses of the importance of liberty and democracy, yet withholding the resources to facilitate the upholding of these values. By no means is this suggesting that supporting Ukraine would not be without cost, in fact it is suggesting quite the contrary. Despite this, for nations such as the US that prides itself on being a ‘beacon of democracy’ evidently, this only applies when it serves to benefit the US and wider western world.
Nations that were privy to supporting Ukraine are now marching steadily towards the policy of isolationism, a stance not renown for its success in putting an end to conflicts. To many western politicians, the movement towards isolationism may seem rooted in pragmatism, yet it contradicts the actions and policies put forward in the initial months of the conflict in Ukraine.
In the final few months of 2023, Russia reclaimed the strategic initiative on the battlefield in Ukraine, although it was an extremely costly year for the Russian armed forces, small amounts of progress are being made. At a time where aid to Ukriane is so vital, the dangers of isolationism are becoming more and more evident, in beginning to turn its back on Ukraine, the west knowingly is not only discarding the values that it holds dear, but also discarding the lives of thousands of Ukrainians who have no choice but to fight on in an attritional conflict that is killing hundreds of people every day. Isolationism will trade money and resources for the lives of Ukrainian service personnel and civilians alike as they continue their David and Goliath-esque fight against Russian aggression.
Comments