Today is the twentieth day since the beginning of the unprovoked Russian invasion of the sovereign country of Ukraine. The courage and resilience of the Ukrainian people has certainly been admirable, but their suffering has been great and their short-term future is exceedingly bleak.
 |
| From the 3/5/22 cover of The Economist |
President Zelenskyy’s Call for Help
Since the very beginning of the invasion of his
country, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been widely praised as a
courageous leader in his beleaguered country and an exemplary advocate of
freedom. He will be awarded the Ronald
Reagan Freedom Award for 2022.
President Zelenskyy has repeatedly taken to
the airwaves to make zealous appeals for increased military help from NATO and
the U.S. He has warned that the refusal to give assistance through such means as
declaring a no-fly zone over his country will result in the deaths of thousands
of his citizens.
In response to that March 5 appeal, Sen.
Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) said, “Let’s be cleareyed about our options: “A No-Fly
Zone means sending American pilots into combat against Russian jets and air
defenses—in a battle between nuclear powers that could spiral out of control
quickly.”
So, how should the U.S. and NATO respond to
Zelenskyy’s call for help?
Has President Biden’s and NATO’s Response
been Weak?
Some in this country have used the lack of
full positive response to Zelenskyy’s call as a sign of weakness on the part of
President Biden.
An opinion piece in the March
11 online issue of The Christian Post is titled “The Ukrainian
crisis: A catastrophic failure of leadership.” The author is Richard Land,
President Emeritus of the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.
Land asserts that the Russian invasion of
Ukraine was “so preventable,” pointing out that 62% of Americans believe that
if Trump were still president, Russia would not have invaded.
Apparently, Land is among those 62%. He
writes, “Putin feared Trump’s strength, whereas he holds Biden’s invertebrate
weakness in disdain.”
He also asserts that “Biden’s weakness is
illustrated by his apparent fear of what Putin might do.”
This same sort of criticism is expressed by Wendell
Griffen, a progressive Baptist leader for whom I have great respect. I was
disappointed, though, by what he wrote in a March
9 opinion piece.
Griffen asserted, “What perturbs Zelensky and
delights Putin is the knowledge that world leaders lack the will to bring their
arsenals, warriors and other war-fighting resources to bear against Putin.”
The opinion of Daniel Davis, a former
lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army is far better than the two divergent
Baptists just cited. Davis’s article in the March
8 post of The Guardian is titled “A no-fly zone means Nato shooting
down Russian jets. We must not do that” (emphasis added).
Can there be Significant Help without
Violence?
The effectiveness, and even the morality, of
the violent resistance of the Ukrainian people is discussed in an article posted
March 7 by Religious News Service (here).
It is titled “Catholic theologians question the morality of Ukraine’s violent
resistance.”
While I agree with much in that significant
article, here I am writing only about the morality of help for Ukraine supplied
by the U.S. and NATO—and in that regard I strongly believe that the stance
taken so far by the U.S. is not a show of weakness but of prudence.
The increasing level of sanctions leveled
against Russia will surely in the long run lead to a cessation of violent
fighting in Ukraine. Direct military action would, no doubt, be more effective in
the short run—but with the distinct possibility of leading to greater escalation
of violence.
Greater military help of Ukraine now, could—and
perhaps would!—lead to greater suffering, more casualties, and more violent Russian
warfare not only against Ukraine but also against other European countries.
Hasty, belligerent acts by the U.S./NATO could—and
perhaps would!—provoke Russia to use strategic nuclear weapons. And that could well
be the beginning of World War III.
Looking at the bigger picture and the
potentiality of unthinkable disaster, I am deeply grateful that the U.S. and
NATO are seeking to help Ukraine mostly by non-violent (=non-military) means.
.jpg)