Mexico Is Not Ukraine

Comparing a revanchist imperial power to a stable democracy isn't as smart as you think it is

For a long time, there was a broad consensus among Americans that when dictatorships threaten free states with invasion and dissection, the US would not stand idly by. In recent decades, this position has lost its popularity among much of the American Left. But in the last few years, there has been a shift among large segments of the American Right as well. The long dormant isolationist impulses in the American Right have been given a new voice in Tucker Carlson and the politicians, writers, and pundits who share his worldview. 

At this moment, those voices are talking about Ukraine, and the threat that is being posed to it by Vladimir Putin's Russia. There is an excellent argument to be made that American troops should not be sent to fight against Russia in eastern Ukraine. This is a position that is held by a clear majority of Americans, including prominent foreign policy hawks, such as Bret Stephens. 

    However, this is not a binary issue. The United States can support Ukraine in many ways without putting American boots on the ground. But the new right-wing isolationists are not focusing on any of that. Instead, some of them are justifying Mr. Putin's threats and actions, with an absurd analogy. Imagine, they say, if Mexico was expressing interest towards joining a military alliance with Russia, or China, and those countries, instead of flatly rejecting Mexico, appeared to be entertaining the notion. This is exactly what is happening with regards to Russia and Ukraine's request to join NATO, or so the argument goes. 

    The logic goes something like this. Russia massing troops at the Ukrainian border and threatening invasion are all about a single issue: whether or not Ukraine, either now or at a later date, will be allowed to join the NATO military alliance. And this is a perfectly legitimate worry of Mr. Putin, because Ukraine joining NATO would be a large Western (read: American) force or protectorate right at their doorstep. Neither the US nor any other major power would tolerate that sort of chutzpah, so why should Russia?

    This is where the argument falls flat on its face. Drawing an analogy between US-Mexico relations and Russia-Ukraine relations is comparing apples to oranges. Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom signed the Budapest Memorandum in 1994 guaranteeing Ukrainian territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine returning its nuclear weapons stockpile to Russia. In the nearly 30 years since, Russia has repeatedly violated that pledge. 

    Let's review some history through the lens of this comparison. Say the USA had signed a multilateral treaty with Mexico promising its territorial integrity. All goes well for 14 years until Washington decides to invade Canada and eventually install two unrecognized puppet states on Canadian territory. This is the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008 and the creation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as Russian satellites. Then, six years later, the US breaks its treaty with Mexico, invades, and annexes one area while supporting a still running civil war in another area. This is the annexation of Crimea and the civil war in the Donbas, both undertaken in 2014. Plus, the US is running what is essentially another satellite on the Mexican border with Guatemala, whose existence is kept in place by the presence of American troops. This is Transnitiria, a throwback republic to the grand old days of the USSR, where a statue of Vladimir Lenin graces the parliament. 

    After all that, now think about the more recent events that bring Ukraine and Russia or, in our fictional instance, the USA and Mexico back into the news, and think more about these arguments which are made in Russia's favour. If the US had actually done all these things in it's neighbourhood, no one would fault the Mexicans, or hell, the Canadians, for seeking the embrace of a world power across the globe, in the hopes of keeping their remaining territory safe from American aspirations. 

    The Baltics, along with Central European states, joined NATO not due to Western bullying for the nefarious purpose of establishing bases on Russia's front porch, but rather out of fear of falling victim to a revanchist scheme to reestablish the Russian Empire, much like the one that Mr. Putin seems very interested in enacting. Clifford May of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies has pointed out that the traditional title of the Russian Czar was "Czar of All Russias," which includes Ukraine, and that Vladimir Putin seeks that role for himself. I might add, that if it weren't for NATO expansion into Eastern Europe already, he might have also coveted the sub-titles of "King of Poland, Grand Duke of Finland." 

    That leaves two possibilities regarding those in the West who draw these comparisons. Either they are ignorant of the history and the political realities on the ground or they don't care and value total American isolationism above all else. Of course, there is a third option: that they are actual supporters or propagandists of Mr. Putin's vision. But this is so dark that I would prefer not to even entertain it as a serious option. 

    It is imperative that the US, NATO and the West as a whole do absolutely everything they can to strengthen the cause of world freedom and democracy. However, undertaking incredibly unpopular action discredits governments at home — another goal of Mr. Putin's. So it is important that the US not be involved in ways which it's citizens will broadly disagree with. Instead, seek methods that will appeal to broader segments of the population, such as applying sanctions on Russia, and selling lethal weapons to Ukraine. The rhetoric must match though, speaking softly and carrying a big stick doesn't always work. America showing that it can be a strong bulwark against anti-Western forces, while not undertaking too radical of action, will help restore America's global standing after the debacle of Afghanistan last year.

I would like to thank my friend, who prefers not to be named for helping me edit this. You can follow him on twitter @johncarlson31 though!