As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy makes an impassioned plea for American intervention in his valiant effort to repel the barbarous Russian aggression afflicting his sovereign nation, it's incumbent on each of us to dispassionately evaluate his case and not get swept up in Ukrainian patriotic fervor and the instant, mythical heroism that has enveloped Zelenskyy's persona and stature.
Zelenskyy is a dynamic leader, and he has valiantly represented his nation on the world stage in the face of the violent, unprovoked invasion of Russian tanks. Still, the distance needed to travel between social media pronouncements of "We stand with Ukraine" to committing American military personnel to enforce his desired no-fly zone is dangerously short.
At some point soon, Zelenskyy will rightly ask, "Why do you stand on the sidelines while you proclaim you 'Stand with Ukraine'? We are not on the sidelines, we are on the battlefield. If you truly 'stand with Ukraine,' stand with us and fight."
He will have a point.
Certain American politicians, who recoil at any proud display of the American flag, are all too eager to wave the blue and yellow bars of Ukraine's emblem at any opportunity. The patriotic fervor surrounding Ukraine is leading historically anti-war zealots to call for American intervention.
Case in point: Rob Reiner
How many more innocent civilians have to die, how many war crimes have be committed before America joins the fight to protect Democracy against Authoritarian Tyranny?
— Rob Reiner (@robreiner) March 14, 2022
He tweeted: "How many more innocent civilians have to die, how many war crimes have be (sic) committed before America joins the fight to protect Democracy against Authoritarian Tyranny?"
Recommended
These words, of the actor who famously played "Meathead," could be (and probably were) used to justify America's intervention in the Vietnam War that Reiner protested against. But, here we are.
As Zelenskyy becomes a media darling and a worldwide heroic figure, his calls for support will gain gravitas and influence. It will be harder for American politicians to resist giving him the thing he wants (American intervention), just so they can get an easy fix of affection and praise from the media who love him.
After viewing Zelenskyy's expertly produced and compelling video during his address to congress, I dare say many of these shameless congressional creatures will want to jump in one of Poland's MiG-29s and drop missiles on the Russians all by themselves...except they won't. They'll send your kids to do it instead. That's what they do.
And this is the problem.
Every consideration for American military intervention drummed up by the likes of Rob Reiner must also recognize the fact that it is not Reiner's children or grandchildren who will be doing the fighting. It won't even be his children or grandchildren's friends. It will be the sons and daughters of those much-hated red-state Republicans who will fight Rob Reiner's fight.
Maybe that's why he and his party are so eager to engage it.
The phenomenon of the past several presidencies to reflexively commit American military forces to foreign wars is alarming and rather new. Until the middle of the 20th century, American presidents followed the heroic, precedent-setting footsteps of George Washington in being extremely reluctant to engage in foreign entanglements with no direct interest for America or her people.
We came a long way from that perspective.
In the 1990s, Secretary of State Madeline Albright famously asked Colin Powell, "What's the point of having this superb military that you're always talking about if we can't use it?"
Of course, Albright – the armchair warrior who served under Vietnam protesting, draft-dodging Bill Clinton – seemed to miss the obvious fact that not having to use our superb military is precisely the point.
And this is certainly not the time to commit our military just because we have it.
Our history of cheering on wars in Eastern Europe is not a proud one. We cheered and lionized Hungary and Czechoslovakia as Soviet tanks rolled over women and children in the streets. We encouraged their people to fight for freedom while we stayed put, recognizing the danger in engaging the Russian bear.
We mistakenly believed that threat was gone when we convinced Ukraine to relinquish its defensive capabilities and nuclear arsenal upon the fall of the Soviet Union. We delivered assurances that if its sovereign borders were ever infringed upon, we'd be there for them.
The Russian tanks are back, and Ukraine is naturally asking where we are.
We cannot and should not commit our forces to this war. It is not our fight. But we have recklessly led Ukraine and the rest of the world to believe that we would and that it is.
We must show leadership in further isolating Russia, and we must disengage from all diplomatic entanglements with Moscow starting with the misguided and obscene Iran nuclear talks. And we must equip and empower the Ukrainian military, so it is able to fight with whatever it needs.
And beyond that, we must learn to keep our mouths shut in the future if we aren't willing to fight the wars we so eagerly cheerlead from the sidelines.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member