Abandoning Ukraine will shred America’s global credibility

Just how long is “as long as it takes?”

Unless the House of Representatives surprises us upon its return to Washington next week with a vote on the supplemental bill providing military assistance to Ukraine, we may soon know the answer: less than two years.

President Biden has been rightly criticized for the turn of phrase, which he appears to have coined at the 2022 NATO summit in Madrid, at which he promised to “support Ukraine as long as it takes.”

The problem always was that such framing eschewed the question of what our end goal in Ukraine is, and of what strategy could get us there.

Think what you will of Biden’s fecklessness, America’s real predicament is this: Biden’s words were a promise to Ukraine and to the world.

It was a promise made by the leader of the world’s largest superpower.

Walking away from those words — for whatever reason — reflects poorly not only on Biden and on the Ukraine-skeptical Republicans in the House but on the United States as a whole.

Our reputation matters — and not just on aesthetic grounds.

It is our word that enables us to build alliances, deter our adversaries and get other countries to act in ways that don’t harm our interest.

Reneging on a promise to Ukraine, albeit an informal one, makes it less believable that we are ready to follow through on other commitments.

As Alexei Navalny’s murder illustrates, Putin already feels emboldened.

As Ukrainians are rationing their ammunition, Russia is making small but steady advances in the Donbas region.

In neighboring Moldova, the Kremlin-backed separatists in Transnistria are on track to organize a sham independence referendum.

That could derail the country’s pro-Western leadership and provide Russia with another foothold right on NATO’s doorstep.

Not only would a Ukrainian defeat make NATO’s job much more difficult, pulling the plug on our assistance to Ukraine gives Russia a good reason to question our commitment to NATO’s Article 5, thus increasing the likelihood of a conflict over the Baltic countries.

It is already apparent from the behavior of some of our less reliable allies (think Hungary, busy deepening its diplomatic and economic ties with China and Iran) that they see the writing on the wall and are readying up for a Europe without Uncle Sam.

It will not be a Europe that Americans will like, nor will it be of much assistance with our geopolitical competition with China.

But, frankly, what lesson can one take from the short-lived nature of America’s promises?

Annualized, our assistance to Ukraine since February 2022 cost us less than 5% of the Pentagon’s budget and was spent overwhelmingly on modernizing our capabilities — something that should have been done regardless.

If we can’t sustain such a limited burden, can we still do anything on the world stage?

Specifically, just how much weight should Beijing assign to our currently existing “strategic ambiguity” over defending Taiwan?

Will the United States really send its men and women in uniform to fight for an island on the other side of the world in a kinetic war against a nuclear-armed adversary?

Really?

Many others are reading these signals in the same way.

It’s no coincidence that the Iran-sponsored rebels in Yemen felt emboldened to disrupt global shipping lanes late last year.

Nor were they wrong in their assessment: Their piracy has not been met with overwhelming force from the West, nor have their actions backfired on Tehran.

America’s “fatigue” over Ukraine is not an isolated occurrence.

First, there was President Barack Obama’s infamous “red line” in Syria; then, the catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan overseen by the current administration.

Just weeks before the shameful evacuation of US forces, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken sought to reassure the Afghans: Notwithstanding the impending Islamist takeover, he said, America had a “full diplomatic, economic and assistance toolkit to support the peaceful, stable future” in the country.

It would have been comical if it hadn’t been so profoundly sad.

On the second anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, what is at stake is nothing less than the future of Pax Americana.

If we leave Ukraine to fend for itself, why would anyone ever trust a word that comes out of the mouth of any US leader?

Dalibor Rohac is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington DC. Twitter: @DaliborRohac.