Are Americans willing to sacrifice for Ukraine?

Russia’s massive invasion of neighboring Ukraine has laid bare a fundamental question facing the United States: At a time of public exhaustion with U.S. involvement in foreign wars, and isolationist wings prominent in both parties, are Americans willing to make sacrifices in defense of democratic values? 

As the Russian assault unfolded Thursday – the biggest attack by one state against another in Europe since World War II – President Joe Biden and congressional leaders made clear that an attack on Ukraine is an attack on democracy. 

“America stands up to bullies, we stand up for freedom. This is who we are,” said President Biden in an address denouncing Russia’s “brutal assault” on its neighbor and announcing new sanctions.

All week, top Biden administration officials have appealed to democratic values, and acknowledged that in standing up to Russian President Vladimir Putin with increasingly harsh economic sanctions, Americans could be forced to make sacrifices in the form of higher gas prices, other economic ripple effects, and possible Russian cyberattacks. 

American-made weapons are already in Ukraine, with more to come. The U.S. and the global community have also stepped up humanitarian aid to Ukraine.

But Mr. Biden and his surrogates have also asserted repeatedly that the U.S. has no intention of engaging in a shooting war with Russia by sending troops into Ukraine, which is not a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The weapon of choice is escalating economic sanctions, words of condemnation, and a rallying of Western allies to punish and isolate Russia and Mr. Putin.

“This is going to impose severe cost on the Russian economy, both immediately and over time,” President Biden said Thursday. He added: “We have purposely designed these sanctions to maximize the long-term impact on Russia and to minimize the impact on the United States and our allies.”

Behind the scenes, debate remained over which sanctions to impose and what their impact might be. European leaders declined to pull Russia out of the financial system known as SWIFT, in part because such a move could hurt other economies.

Just six months after the U.S.’s chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan after 20 years, the longest U.S. military engagement in history, an Associated Press/NORC poll released Wednesday presented stark evidence of Americans’ unwillingness to go to war again: Only 26% of Americans want the U.S. to play a “major role” in addressing the Ukraine-Russia crisis. At a time of deep partisan polarization, the poll showed similar reluctance by both Republicans and Democrats. 

“There’s no appetite for any military action – maybe that’s where there is unity,” says Stella Rouse, director of the Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement at the University of Maryland. 

Still, the poll shows 52% of Americans approve of a “minor role” in addressing the Ukraine crisis, which suggests a willingness to support actions aimed at punishing and pressuring Russia short of military intervention. 

Americans’ reluctance to get involved in foreign entanglements goes back to the founding of the country. And outright isolationism, most pronounced in the America First movement of the 1930s, has flared after periods of deep involvement in wars overseas – such as World War I and most recently, Afghanistan. 

In the run-up to World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill met and put out the Atlantic Charter, which was “very much an American liberal values – small-L liberal – document,” says Michael Butler, an adjunct lecturer in history at the College of William & Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia. “Values hold an alliance together, and then, to sell it to your people, there has to be an element of values to it.” 

In the days leading up to Mr. Putin’s invasion, leading members of Congress sought to present a united front, arguing that efforts to prevent a Russian invasion were about defending a world order essential to U.S. national security.  

“Why should it matter to us? It’s a little country, it’s far away,” said Democratic Rep. Tom Malinowski of New Jersey, speaking Wednesday on a Zoom event sponsored by the Jewish Democratic Council of America. But, he noted, so were Poland and Czechoslovakia, whose invasion by Nazi Germany in 1939 spiraled into World War II. “We’re not doing this for Ukraine. We’re doing this to defend a principle, a set of rules, that has protected us for decades.”

In order for that defense to be effective, lawmakers underscored the importance of unity within NATO as well as within the U.S. itself.

“We’re going to have to remain united, because Putin will look to exploit any fissure, any crack within NATO,” Rep. Adam Schiff, Democratic chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Wednesday on Capitol Hill. 

On Thursday, after the invasion was fully underway, Chairman Schiff told reporters the U.S. needs to “dramatically escalate” sanctions, target the largest banks in Russia, and cut off Russia from the global financial system – including SWIFT. 

Republicans, too, weighed in with strong support for Ukraine and tough sanctions. GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell called on the U.S. government to “ratchet the sanctions all the way up” against Russia.  

Members also said bipartisan unity was essential in focusing the blame squarely on Mr. Putin.

“Putin invading Ukraine only emboldens our adversaries, which poses a direct threat to our national security,” said Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas, the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, in a statement to the Monitor. “Now is the time for Republicans and Democrats in Congress to come together as Americans and work to punish Putin’s terrible violence.”

In the run-up to Thursday’s invasion, some Democrats expressed concern about influential figures on the right resisting calls to defend Ukraine and appearing to sympathize with the Russian president. Earlier this week, former President Donald Trump called Mr. Putin’s maneuvering vis-à-vis Ukraine “genius,” while Fox News host Tucker Carlson called into question the value of America defending Ukraine’s borders when the U.S. is facing a huge spike in illegal immigration over its own southern border.

Michael Caputo, a former adviser to Mr. Trump, has a different take, born of his life experience: He has lived in Ukraine, his wife is Ukrainian, and her parents still live there. But he’s torn over how the U.S. should respond. 

 “I understand Donald Trump when he says we should focus on America first,” Mr. Caputo says. “I absolutely understand the people on Fox who are complaining that we don’t pay attention to our own border while we’re concerned about Ukraine’s border.”

And he agrees that values are highly relevant when it comes to helping Ukraine. 

“We should be concerned about our border and Ukraine’s border – more about our own, of course,” he says. “But Russia’s attack on a sovereign nation – it absolutely concerns us as members of the family of man.”