One of the reasons I became a conservative and a Republican, many years ago, is that I found them clear-eyed about world affairs. (When I say “them,” I mean conservatives and Republicans.) I thought they were especially clear-eyed about the Kremlin and other enemies of the West. People on the left, I thought, were fuzzy at best.
I am still a conservative, of course (in the traditional American sense), but have not been a Republican—again, of course—since 2016.
George F. Will was asked why he left the Republican Party. “For the same reason I joined it,” he answered. “I’m a conservative.”
The past decade has been topsy-turvy. The Right has often sounded like the Left of old, using the same language as, say, Code Pink. I wrote about this in a long, detailed 2024 essay titled “Our Political World, Topsy-Turvy.”
Are you acquainted with Mette Frederiksen, the Danish prime minister? She is a Social Democrat. Yesterday, she said, “Russia unfortunately doesn’t want peace with us. Therefore, we have to continue rearming ourselves and we need to support Ukraine.”
If you had told me, short years ago, that Scandinavian social democrats would be more clear-eyed about the Kremlin and threats to the West than American Republicans and “conservatives” …
Holy-moly sakes alive, as we say in my native Midwest.
You are acquainted with James Talarico, the Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate in Texas? He is an all-out hate-figure among Republicans. Also yesterday, he said,
I think we learned back in the Second World War that when we failed to stand up to an aggressor in Europe—that comes back to haunt us. We need to strengthen Ukraine. We need to strengthen our NATO allies as they stand up to Russian aggression, so we don’t have to. In some ways, I see this as a cost-saving measure. If we can stop this aggression, if we can stop Vladimir Putin in Ukraine, then we’re not going to have to stop him elsewhere.
My friends, this is exactly how Republicans and conservatives talked until ten years ago. Exactly. I swear, I was there (and did a lot of talking myself).
***
Our president, Donald Trump, has partnered with Putin in an oil deal. This aids Russia’s war machine, which is murdering innocents every day. Are we complicit? Of course we are. Trump demands that Ukraine stop bombing Russian oil refineries. He never, ever demands that Putin stop murdering civilians.
I believe our beloved country has joined the side of evil. That is the strongest of all words (on the negative side). (On the other side, it would be “love,” I think.) But I believe it applies.
About a month ago, I wrote an essay about President Reagan’s “evil empire” speech. Sometimes, the occasion, the facts, call for such language.
You know who else does not shy from the word “evil”? Elon Musk. Last year, when he was a senior adviser to Trump, he said the following about the National Endowment for Democracy, an organization founded at the urging of Reagan: “That evil organization needs to be dissolved.”
Here is Musk yesterday:
Does Musk ever say a word of criticism about the slaughterer? No. Neither does Trump. They only slam people who are defending themselves.
Listen to Mike Waltz, Trump’s ambassador to the United Nations: “The Ukrainians have been attacking Russian refineries as part of the war. The president has been clear in asking the Ukrainians to stop, and asking, you know, from the perspective of the global economy suffering …”
Not a word—not a word—about the daily murder of innocent men, women, and children.
I thought of an acronym: “AINO,” meaning, “America in Name Only.” This is not the America we have known and loved.
***
Putin is a hero to many. A “guardian of Christian civilization,” they say, a scourge of “wokeness.” Trump and his party—and their media, etc.—have done something remarkable: they have turned Volodymyr Zelensky, a genuinely heroic leader of our time, into a villain while boosting and perfuming the blood-soaked monster Putin.
In explanation, I can only draw on Milton: “Evil, be thou my good.”
***
Katie Zacharia is Trump’s new press secretary. She has a rich tweeting past, as this article details. Shortly after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Zacharia retweeted a post that said,
Which side are you going to stand on! I don’t know fully what is going on but I will tell you that Putin is at war with the CABAL - and the Ukraine is in bed with them.
Yup. That’s how it goes. Heard a lot of that.
***
Neutrality between Ukraine and Russia—invaded and invader, victim and aggressor—would have been bad enough. But to join Putin’s side … This shame, this stain, will cling to America for a long time, I believe, and deserve to.
Once, William H. McRaven, the retired admiral, was teaching a class. He asked the students to define the essence of America in world affairs. After some discussion, with people making this point and that, a young fellow blurted out, “We’re the good guys.”
Still true?
Daniel Hannan, the British Conservative, writes,
This is not neutralism. Neutralism, in the sense of “Putin’s a bastard but wake me up if he invades Seattle,” I understand. It’s not my cup of tea, but I can respect it. No, this is backing the totalitarian aggressor against the victim.
(I myself have made this point repeatedly—for example, in this 2023 column.)
***
Zelensky is now speaking of betrayal by the United States. Many people have said to him, “Hush!” I spent years among such people—the “anti-anti-Trumpers” who insisted that Zelensky had to kiss Trump’s behind at every turn.
Well, how did that work out? What did that gain the Ukrainians? Trump is partnering with Putin anyway.
Might as well tell the truth. Polite fictions and bitten tongues have proven unavailing.
***
About 25 years ago, Michael Walzer asked a plaintive question: “Can there be a decent Left?” In that same spirit: Can there be a pro-Ukraine, anti-Putin Right? Yes.
Giorgia Meloni, the Italian prime minister, exemplifies this. On Wednesday, she said,
We all want peace. The difference lies in how we intend to achieve it. As I see it, supporting Ukraine is not an alternative to peace; it is what makes peace possible. Because if an aggressor expects its opponent to surrender, why would it negotiate? Surrender is not peace. It is conquest. If Ukraine stopped defending itself tomorrow, as many propose, we would not have peace. We would be discussing the occupation of a European nation and the return of Soviet imperialism.
Personally, I do not miss those times. I do not miss Russian tanks crushing uprisings in Prague and Budapest. I do not miss the Berlin Wall. And nobody will ever convince me that the abandonment of those defending their freedom can be called “peace.”
Meloni makes me think of Kossuth, that Hungarian leader of the 19th century: “I am a man of peace—God knows how I love peace. But I hope I shall never be such a coward as to mistake oppression for peace.”
After Meloni’s remarks, Zelensky wrote,
I thank Giorgia Meloni for the support and a clear, unequivocal, principled stance. Thank you for understanding who the aggressor is and what it means to build a dignified and lasting peace. This is possible only through strength and joint efforts for our security.
To hear Meloni deliver her remarks, go here. And lemme tell you: she does it in a honking Roman accent. I rather like that she is so “local,” rather than “standard.” This is not “anchorman” Italian. It is very particular—straight from the Roman streets.
Of course, Romans don’t regard themselves as local but central. Universal!
***
Radek Sikorski, the foreign minister of Poland, is another conservative—a conservative of the Reagan-Thatcher stripe. (They still exist. We could hold our convention at a mid-sized Denny’s.) He said,
We appreciate President Trump’s involvement in trying to end the Russia–Ukraine war. But in Poland, we believe that it will bear fruit if you put pressure on the aggressor and not on the victim of aggression.
“A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver.”
***
Boris Johnson, too, is a conservative, and a Conservative—a former prime minister of the United Kingdom, and a former foreign minister, too. Last Saturday, he wrote,
It is sickening that the USA is now lifting sanctions on Russian fuel, and transparently ridiculous to blame Ukraine for the spike in prices that obviously began with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Putin is murdering innocent Ukrainian civilians every day. The Ukrainians are fighting for their lives. And yet the White House is apparently determined to force American drivers to bankroll Putin’s slaughter. It won’t work and I doubt it will make much difference to the price of fuel.
If we want Russian oil and gas back on the world market then let’s end this war—with a free, sovereign and independent Ukraine.
Note Johnson’s first three words: “It is sickening.” That is the way a lot of us feel.
(One note on Johnson’s last sentence—a mere language note. Perhaps a moment of relief. Though Johnson went to Oxford, he apparently does not use the Oxford comma.)
***
Well, I’ve been quoting a lot of foreigners—foreign conservatives. Any American conservatives? Yes, Mike Pence:
President Trump’s decision to lift sanctions on Russian fuel amidst Putin’s ongoing and brutal attacks on civilian targets in Ukraine makes no sense …
America should not be throwing a lifeline to Putin’s war machine. …
Putin doesn’t want peace. Putin wants Ukraine.
That, my friends, is realism. And it’s amazing that self-styled “realists” tend to lose touch with reality when it comes to Putin and the Kremlin.
***
Over the years, I have been asked, “Do you think Trump is a Russian asset?” No. But he is certainly an asset to Russia. In a brief video, I explained the distinction.
Bear with me for a moment—this is a little offbeat. I have a friend who’s a professional golfer. When he loses a ball—a ball he thinks he should find—he says, “It’s not that I want to play that shot, play that ball. It’s not that I want to avoid a two-stroke penalty. I just want to know where it is!”
One fine day—or un-fine day, whatever—I want to know the truth about Trump’s obsequiousness before Putin. It is simple affinity? Admiration of dictators, or even envy of them? Or is there … something else?
I just want to know, as Tom just wants to know where his ball is.
***
The plain truth is, Donald Trump is on the other side—the side of an expansionist, murderous Russian dictator against the Free West. During the Cold War, there were plenty of Americans on the other side. But here’s the thing: they were likely to be professors at Antioch or folk singers. They were not president of the United States.
***
An old saying goes, “You are what you eat.” I say, “You are the media you consume.” A Fox News personality named Rachel said that Ukraine has killed “a million kids on the Russian side.” This is a weird, gross lie. But I know people who are hooked up to that network as to an IV, day and night.
***
In Ukraine, Putin’s forces have committed mass murder, mass rape, mass kidnapping, mass terror … Atrocity after atrocity, war crime after war crime. The day may come when recognition of these atrocities is so widespread, no one will admit to having been against helping the Ukrainians, or having made excuses for Putin.
I think of Edda Mussolini. I wrote about her in a book about the sons and daughters of dictators. She was a flaming Nazi. In her autobiography, she said that an expression arose in Germany after the war: “Hitler? Don’t know him.” But “I myself prefer to say, ‘Hitler, Goering, Goebbels? I knew them.’ It is more honest.” Yes, and she loved those men, too.
There have been times in my life when I was ashamed of my US government. I was ashamed when I read about Wounded Knee. I was ashamed when I learned of My Lai. I've been ashamed of the Republican Party since January 6th, 2021. The departure of the current administration (gang of thieves) cannot come too soon.
This column made me think of an acronym of my own, if you'll forgive me working blue: FAJ. "Fuckin' A, Jay". Lots of hard truth in here. Thanks for telling it.