It is predictable that sentiment of support for Ukraine will decline as the war in Russia continues. It is difficult to understand the spending on Ukraine when we face so many domestic challenges. This is why the media needs to improve the questions they ask so that the public understands better. Many media reports focusing on polls and interviews with policymakers stop there.
Suppose we end our support for Ukraine to focus on domestic challenges. What happens next? There is a good chance that Russia will take Ukraine. Vladimir Putin and his superiors have made it clear that there is a strong desire to rebuild Russia and return it to its leading regional dominance. Chances are he’ll need to replenish his army while enjoying a bit of nationalist pride. This would lead the West to once again think it is satisfied (we saw this after Crimea).
So which of the former members of the Warsaw Pact does he want to return to his empire and in what order? What about Moldova, Georgia, Bosnia, the Balkans?
Many might think that Russia’s reassimilation of these now independent countries poses a negligible risk and that it is better not to get involved, while keeping the money at home. What’s after that? Russia is even stronger at this point, so would it start trying to disrupt and destabilize NATO countries?
As Russia does what it has done historically, when do we intervene and on what scale? Is the return on investment better if we help Ukraine now, or is it better to wait and resolve a bigger problem with Russia while strengthening our alliances?
Understanding the logic of our policy makers would allow us to make better decisions when we vote. Please improve your questions!
Scott Reichard, Holladay