The war in Ukraine has gone well from the perspective of Western pundits and officials. Russia has seen a series of costly reversals on the battlefield because of poor military performance and overambitious plans. Now many in the West are debating what should happen next. Shall we stay the course, continuing to fight on for more ambitious objectives — Ukraine’s full territorial integrity and further diminution of Russian power — or should we sue for peace, solidifying gains — a safe Kyiv and Russian drubbing — and avoiding risks of widening the war or even nuclear escalation?
The problem with this question, and the surrounding debate, is that it is pretentious. It is not up to officials in the West whether Ukraine continues to resist Russian aggression or whether President Vladimir Putin persists or pulls the plug on his ill-conceived military campaign. The West has quite carefully, and consciously, absented its armies from Ukraine’s battlefields. This policy of nonintervention has been supported by the Western public. The West is helping but not fighting.
With a policy of restraint comes the obligation not to engage in hubris (or timidity) by proxy. The fate of two sovereign nations is being determined by their own citizens and political leadership. The government on one side at least, Ukraine, was democratically elected and shows signs of acting in the interest of its people. Let’s let President Volodymyr Zelenskyy keep it that way.
