Putin’s Rollback of Reagan’s Victory

February 28, 2024 by William R. Hawkins

On March 5, 1946, Winston Churchill made his famous post-World War II speech in which he observed how “an iron curtain has descended across the Continent. Behind that line lie all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe… this is certainly not the Liberated Europe we fought to build up.” That “iron curtain” would become literal with the construction of the Berlin Wall which would not come down until November 9, 1989. Events would then snowball. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics would formally dissolve on December 26, 1991, an excellent Christmas present to the world. President Ronald Reagan had called on Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev to “tear down this wall” at a speech in West Berlin on June 12, 1987. Reagan had dedicated his presidency to ending the Cold War on the terms “We win, they lose.” And he had broken the Evil Empire without the Cold War turning hot by operating from a position of strength, both economic and military, that the Soviet regime recognized as unassailable.

More than the “ancient states” with Warsaw Pact puppet governments were liberated by Reagan’s policies. Fifteen other lands across Eurasia became independent, many having been under Russian domination for centuries. It was the greatest advance of human freedom in modern history. Ukraine was one of those liberated as were the three Baltic States which are now members of NATO. These four countries along with Poland and Finland had made bids for freedom after World War I when Tsarist Russia has been defeated by a Germany that had then lost the larger war. The Soviets used Russia’s defeat to discredit and overthrow the regime but were still imperialists who wanted the lost territory back. Ukraine was reconquered in 1919. The Soviet drive on Warsaw was driven back in 1920. The Baltic States were not retaken until June 1940, after the Hitler-Stalin Pact opened the way. Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia had partitioned Poland (again) the previous year. Russia also invaded Finland in 1939 but suffered heavy casualties and only gained some border areas in the 1940 peace agreement.

Vladimir Putin, who was a lieutenant colonel in the KGB stationed in East Germany when the wall fell, has called the collapse of the Soviet Union “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe" of the 20th century. So, no one should be surprised that he wants to rebuild the empire as Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin did. In 2008, he attacked Georgia and captured border areas. In 2014, he seized Crimea from Ukraine and backed an insurgency in the Donbas. In February 2022 he invaded to reconquering the entire “former province.” Putin has argued that Ukraine deserves no separate identity from Russia, and neither do Poland or Lithuania (and by extension the other Baltic states).  Finland and Sweden are joining NATO in response. On the second anniversary of Russia’s invasion, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg again declared that Ukraine will join the alliance, something that should have been done over a decade ago to deter what has is happening today.

The most alarming development is how many people have accepted Putin’s claim that “NATO expansion” justifies his attack on Ukraine. There is no comparison or moral equivalence between NATO enlargement and the history of Russian imperialism. Free nations have banded together for collective security against renewed Russian expansion which has always been by fire and sword followed by oppression. NATO poses no threat to a peaceful Russia, only to Putin’s revanchist ambitions.

It is in America, and particularly in Congress, that Putin’s words should remind leaders that “the liberated Europe we had fought for” is in danger of being lost. Not because of an adverse shift in the balance of material power -- the expanded U.S.-led Western alliance overawes a diminished Russia by a larger margin than in President Reagan’s day -- but by a shift in the balance of willpower.

Having worked in the conservative movement and the Republican Party since before Reagan was elected, I am not surprised to see left-wing students protesting American aid to Israel or U.S. actions against Houthi and other Iranian-backed militia groups in the Middle East. Nor is it any different this century than last to see groups like Code Pink renew the vows of the Left to Russia and China in a new Cold War as they had in the last one. What I do not understand, in any way, shape, or form, is how these defeatist ideas have infected so many on the putative Right to the extent that Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) would threaten another removal of a GOP House Speaker if aid continues to Ukraine’s successful defense against the Russian invaders.

The claim we cannot afford aid to Ukraine because we are running a deficit does not hold up to inspection. That we are in a fiscal crisis is undeniable, but foreign aid or the entire national security appropriations is not the cause of this. Federal spending in FY2023 was $6.1 trillion, with $1.7 trillion in deficit. Next to that, $62 billion to help defend Ukraine is pocket change. There is no way to solve a budget problem in the trillions unless entitlements are reduced or there is a substantial increase in tax revenue. Those are much larger topics than Ukraine. What we cannot do is let bad money drive out good, letting “waste, fraud, and abuse” cripple our ability to attend to the valid and legitimate priorities of national government.

Trying to link border security to other parts of national security by blocking aid to Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan for “leverage” is dangerous and futile. My concern over lax border security goes back decades. My 1994 book Importing Revolution: Open Borders and the Radical Agenda can still be found on Amazon. I also worked for a Republican congressman whose district was on the Mexican border. I understand the intense desire to stem the massive inflow of illegal and unvetted migrants which is causing crises across the country. What I do not understand is a tactic some Republicans are pushing that will only make matters worse. It amounts to saying that since the Democrats have failed at the border, the GOP will now fail everywhere else. The parties will compete to see which can screw things up the worst. The GOP can run on the slogan “Vote for us and we’ll be even weaker than Biden.”

The better campaign is “Success everywhere, failure nowhere” with a pledge to strengthen national security and America’s place in the world on all fronts. Only by winning big in November can border policy be changed, so the GOP needs to start looking competent and responsible. The criticism of Biden should focus on his weakness to deter the wars that have started during his term, and his restrained approach when he was finally compelled by events and the urging of allies (particularly the UK and Poland) to act. Biden’s desire for Israel not to go “over the top” in pursuit of victory has also been seen in his slow-roll arms deliveries to Ukraine and limits on their use against Russian targets.

I worked in Washington for 20 years, including serving on GOP staffs working with the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees. While there were radical outliers on both ends of the spectrum there was a broad, bipartisan consensus on who were our foreign enemies. That coalition held in the Senate, which passed the aid bill to back our allies 70-29. The bipartisan patriotic coalition still exists in the House which is why the radicals do not want the bill to reach the floor. Those GOP backbenchers blocking aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan (nearly all too young to remember Reagan) do not see the larger forces at work in the world and must be outvoted by those who do.