OPINION:
About a week after the Hamas attack on Israel, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy offered to go to Israel, but the Israelis turned him down.
Mr. Zelenskyy’s intention was to regain some media attention to Ukraine, which had been demoted to about 10th place behind the Israel-Hamas war and Britney Spears’ upcoming memoir. Mr. Zelenskyy fears that the competition for attention will evolve into a competition for U.S. aid.
As this column has often pointed out, we have no vital national security interest in Ukraine, which would be the predicate to risking U.S. troops’ lives in its defense. Our interest in Ukraine is indirect and derivative of our vital national security interest in NATO and Western Europe, which fully justifies our aid to that nation.
In Israel, we have a vital national security interest. It is our only real ally in the Middle East. Israel has been fighting our enemies — terrorists and the nations that control them — Iran, Syria, Lebanon and others — since it became a nation. We demonstrated this interest, for example, in the first days of the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, when it appeared Israel might be overcome. We were readying naval and air forces to enter the fight when the Israelis turned the tide.
President Biden has, so far, done well in helping Israel defend itself. U.S. aircraft have been delivering aid to Israel since about 48 hours after the war began. Two U.S. carrier battle groups are now close to Israel, and 2,000 troops have been alerted for possible deployment to Israel. This may be sufficient to deter Iran from attacking Israel with its other proxy, the Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon, but only the Iranians know whether it will be.
That leaves Mr. Biden and Mr. Zelenskyy in a conundrum. Will we, as we should, continue to aid Ukraine?
On July 13, President Biden said that the NATO nations were more united than ever with respect to aiding Ukraine against the Russian invasion. He added that the allies understood that this was not only a fight for the freedom of Ukraine but also for sovereignty, security and freedom throughout Eastern Europe.
In less than two months, that unity has smashed against several rocks, including House Republicans refusing further aid in the current continuing resolution, Britain’s mistake in saying it would send British troops to Ukraine on a training mission, Germany’s slowdown of shipments of munitions and Poland’s halting the shipment of its arms to Ukraine.
Congress’ last-minute deal to avoid a government shutdown on Oct. 1 contained no funding for further aid to Ukraine. That 45-day deal will expire in mid-November. It’s unclear whether the Republicans can get a majority vote for more aid to Ukraine.
The Pentagon has said it still has about $5 billion in aid pipeline to send to Ukraine, but that may soon run out. There shouldn’t be competition between Israel and Ukraine for American help, but political calculations are often illogical, as some NATO members are demonstrating.
On Sept. 21, soon before its elections, the Polish government announced that it wouldn’t send any new Polish arms to Ukraine and was focusing on replenishing its own munitions stocks. It also banned new grain shipments from Ukraine.
The newly elected Polish government, led by Donald Tusk, hasn’t yet taken a position on Ukraine aid, but Mr. Tusk was critical of the previous government’s action. Mr. Tusk would be wise to renew the flow of arms to and grain from Ukraine without exacting a price from other NATO members.
On Sept. 27, Germany announced that it would slow the delivery of its Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine because it would be necessary to send German military technicians with them to train the Ukrainians.
On Sept. 30, the United Kingdom’s new defense minister, Grant Shapps, said that the U.K. might send troops into Ukraine to train Ukrainians on British arms. About a day later, Dmitri Medvedev, who is often Russian President Vladimir Putin’s mouthpiece, said that any of those troops would be legitimate targets for Russian forces. That quickly caused U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to deny that any U.K. troops would enter Ukraine.
NATO is in a state of mild confusion, with the U.S. leading the way. The Ukraine conundrum can be solved in several ways, but only with real U.S. leadership, of which Mr. Biden is incapable.
A strong U.S. president would meet with the NATO leaders who are uncertain about Ukraine aid and to work out their differences. Mr. Biden should go to Europe to do that. He should also meet with House Republican skeptics on Ukraine aid to solve their problems.
Such meetings aren’t on Mr. Biden’s agenda. Whatever the results of his meetings in Israel, the threats coming from Iran pose a danger of a much larger war.
We can help Israel and Ukraine at the same time, but the reasons for Republican opposition to further Ukraine aid are hard to define. Mr. Biden shouldn’t just throw up his hands and blame Republicans but instead work to resolve their policy objections. Maybe he could even close our borders to terrorists and saboteurs.
We have to stand for freedom in both Israel and Ukraine. If we don’t, no one else will.
• Jed Babbin is a national security and foreign affairs columnist for The Washington Times and contributing editor for The American Spectator.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.