President Zelensky And The Soft Bigotry Of Low Expectations

I continue to think Ukraine's President Zelensky is practicing wartime national-purpose rhetoric at an Abraham Lincon or Winston Churchill level. Below is from his March 24 address in English to NATO:

I am addressing you from Kyiv, our capital, which has been fighting for a month already, just as our entire state.

Yes, it is true - we are not in the Alliance. Not in the most powerful defense union in the world. Not one of the 30 states under the umbrella of joint protection. Under the umbrella of Article 5. It feels like we are in the "gray zone". Between the West and Russia. But we defend all our common values. And we are bright people! And we have been defending all these values for a month now!

. . . And do you have confidence that Article 5 can work?

"Budapest" hasn’t worked for us already. Our Budapest Memorandum. Has not worked for peace in Ukraine.

And I will tell you honestly - today Budapest is not working for peace in Ukraine as well. Yes, we receive help from individual members of the Alliance. I am very grateful. Ukrainians are sincerely grateful for this. To each of you who gives what you have, supporting us.

But what about the Alliance? The question of Article 5 is fundamental. I just want you to know what we think about it. And I sincerely wish you that we are wrong in our assessments and in our doubts. I sincerely wish that you actually have a very strong Alliance. Because if we are wrong, the world is safe. But if we are at least one percent right, I ask you to reconsider your attitude. Your own estimates. And really take care of security, security in Europe and, consequently, in the world.

You can give us one percent of all your aircraft. One percent of all your tanks. One percent! We can't just buy it. Such a supply directly depends only on NATO's decisions, on political decisions, by the way.

MLRS systems. Anti-ship weapons. Means of air defense. Is it possible to survive such a war without it?

So when it's finally available, it will give us and you as well, one hundred percent security. And we need one. And the only thing I demand from you. . . After such a month of war. This is a request for the sake of our military. After such a war against Russia ... Never, please, never tell us again that our army does not meet NATO standards.

We have shown what our standards are capable of. And how much we can give to the common security in Europe and the world. How much we can do to protect against aggression against everything we value, everything you value. But NATO has yet to show what the Alliance can do to save people. To show that this is truly the most powerful defense union in the world. And the world is waiting. And Ukraine is very much waiting. Waiting for real actions. Real security guarantees. From those whose word is trustworthy. And whose actions can keep the peace.

This is actually a version of President Trump's line with NATO, that, effectively, in not budgeting adequately for defense, NATO is relying on someone else -- in Trump's case, the US -- to provide its security. Zelensky is making precisely the same argument from the other direction, that Ukraine has been willing to fight, and indeed to fight at a level that's at least equivalent to NATO, indeed to provide security to NATO, while NATO as an alliance hasn't been functioning very well and is effectively allowing Ukraine to provide its security..

In fact, I think Zelensky and Trump are similar populist, national-interest and national-identity politicians. This is an issue that the US right is currently struggling with; they don't trust Trump, and they don't trust Zelensky. Well and good, but who has a better idea?

It seems to me that Zelensky's argument boils down to this:

• Ukraine is outside of NATO and can't invoke Article 5 for mutual defense
• However, Ukaine has far surpassed expectations and is now actually protecting NATO merely by conducting a successful defense of its own territory
• NATO members who rely on Article 5 for their own defense from a Russian invasion are naive
• Other international agreements that theoretically protected Ukraine haven't worked
• So how much confidence can you really have in Article 5?
• On the other hand, we have protected you without the obligation Article 5 would have imposed on us
• It's in your individual interest to support us with active military assistance
• You owe it to yourselves to behave as if you're a trustworthy alliance.

The story of the Russia-Ukraine war has consistently been about underestimating Ukraine. I think, though, that Zelensky has an acute understanding of the situation on the ground. As Russia weakens during this war -- and as its actual weakness prior to the war has been revealed -- the strategic fulcrum in Europe must inevitably move east. The decision making majority will also move east, especially if or when Finland and Sweden join NATO.

However, the strategic reality, as Zelensky lays out here, is effectively that there is a parallel quasi-alliance that not only includes but is at least morally led by Ukraine and Zelensky. Ukraine as of now is neither in NATO nor the EU but as a practical matter is setting the terms for decision making in both. All are obligated to send Ukraine aid, notwithstanding any actual alliance, in their own interest. Some, like Hungary, aren't pulling their weight, but Zelensky is setting expectations.

It seems to me that this is a situation that Trump as president would endorse. If NATO had become complacent that the US would make up any defense budget shortfall among its members, Putin's invasion of Ukraine woke them up. Indeed, a recognition, as Zelensky puts it, that "NATO has yet to show what the Alliance can do to save people" ought to be prompting Europe to rethink what a functional alliance would look like. As a practical matter, this will have to include Ukraine, and Zelensky will be a major leader.

A footnote is that Biden and the US have been transitioning away from a leadership role in the new de facto alliance. The performances of both President Biden and Vice President Harris in Poland have been terrible. Beyond Zelensky's unexpectedly superb performance, Both Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron have shown far more initiative than Biden. For the sake of the West, it's good that others are stepping in.