www.vox.com
Donald Trump scolded the president of Ukraine Friday afternoon for expressing excessive hatred for Vladimir Putin and inadequate gratitude for the United States.This extraordinary dustup came at the tail end of a press conference featuring President Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and Vice President JD Vance. Zelenskyy had come to the White House with the hopes of burnishing relations with the US, in part by forging an agreement giving America a financial stake in Ukraines mineral wealth. Instead, the Ukrainian leader secured little from his American counterpart beyond public ridicule.Tensions started flaring when Trump defended his reluctance to publicly criticize Putin, saying that Zelenskyys hatred of the Russian leader was an obstacle to peace. Vance buttressed Trumps position by arguing that Joe Bidens tough talk about Putin hadnt done anything to prevent Russias invasion and that the path to peace lay through engaging in diplomacy.Zelenskyy then expressed reservations about Vances reasoning. The Ukrainian president noted that his country had signed a ceasefire with Russia following its invasion of Crimea in 2014, yet this had not secured lasting peace. He was therefore not inclined to strike another peace agreement, absent security guarantees that would prevent Russia from re-invading to capture more Ukrainian territory in the future. On these grounds, Zelenskyy asked Vance, What kind of diplomacy, JD, you are speaking about?The vice president took exception to this question and accused Zelenskyy of disrespecting the United States by trying to litigate this in front of the American media. He then told Zelenskky that he should be thanking the president for trying to bring an end to this conflict.Trump proceeded to tell the Ukrainian president that he was gambling with the lives of millions of people, and that he didnt have the cards right now, while Vance repeatedly demanded that the Ukrainian president say thank you.To liberals, some Republican foreign policy hawks, and most European leaders, Trump and Vances conduct constituted a historic disgrace: The American president had publicly mocked a US ally fighting an invasion, thereby undermining its position in (hypothetical) diplomatic negotiations with its oppressor. To Trumps admirers on the right, however, his dressing down of Zelenskyy was cause for catharsis and pride. The American Conservative magazine hailed the dustup as a great clarifying moment in which a US president finally stood up to Washingtons warmongering foreign-policy blob. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon lauded the administrations performance as a Master Class in How to Deal with an Entitled Punk. Similar sentiments were issued from other conservative influencers, social media users, and politicians. The rights enthusiasm for Zelenskyys humiliation has two distinct sources. First, among Americas most radical social conservatives, Putins Russia has long commanded admiration as an exemplar of traditional sexual morality, in an increasingly decadent (i.e., LGBTQ-friendly) world. Second, a broader cohort of contrarian commentators, isolationist intellectuals, and nationalistic voters believe that the benefits of aiding Ukraine are slim, while the tail-risks are catastrophic. This perspective takes many disparate forms. In its most extreme rendering, however, Zelenskyy is understood as a villain: A dictator who is leading his war-weary populace into a meatgrinder while trying to ensnare the United States in World War III.Both of these perspectives are lamentable. But the unabashedly pro-Putin right is arguably more clear-eyed than its avowedly antiwar co-partisans: Trumps dressing down of Zelenskyy undoubtedly strengthened Russias position, but there is little reason to believe that it has hastened the return of peace. Why the right fell in love with PutinWhen Vladimir Putin reassumed the Russian presidency in 2012, he confronted a slowing economy and simmering public discontent. To shore up his support, Putin recast himself as a crusader for the Russian nations traditional values. The centerpiece of Putins hard right turn was a so-called anti-propaganda law that forbade positive portrayals of LGBTQ people in media available to minors. In the autocrats framing, this crackdown on civil liberties not only restored godliness to Russian society, but also established his nation as the great defender of Christianity on the world stage. Many Euro-Atlantic countries have moved away from their roots, including Christian values, Putin said in December 2013. Policies are being pursued that place on the same level a multi-child family and a same-sex partnership, a faith in God and a belief in Satan. This is the path to degradation.At a time when American social conservatives felt themselves losing the culture war in general and the fight against gay equality in particular Putins words and deeds were an inspiration. In a 2014 column, the former Nixon speechwriter Pat Buchanan suggested that in the new ideological Cold War, God was on Russias side. Three years later, the Claremont Institute scholar Christopher Caldwell declared that if we were to use traditional measures for understanding leaders, which involve the defense of borders and national flourishing, Putin would count as the pre-eminent statesman of our time. The burgeoning ties between Americas Christian right and the Kremlin werent just ideological, but also institutional. Russian oligarchs have contributed funding to the World Congress of Families, an American Christian organization that promotes discrimination against LGBTQ people, the prohibition of abortion, and other reactionary causes. The Christian rights conception of Russia as a bastion of moral probity locked in a Cold War with an increasingly decadent West informed its understanding of the Russia-Ukraine War. In a July 2022 column for the Daily Wire, the reactionary self-help commentator Jordan Peterson suggested that Russias incursion into Ukraine may have been an act of self-defense against creeping Western wokeness. In Petersons telling, the conflict between Christian and progressive values had grown serious enough to increase the probability that Russia, say, will be motivated to invade and potentially incapacitate Ukraine merely to keep the pathological West out of that country.From this vantage, Trumps willingness to belittle the Ukrainian president and project a neutral stance on the war in defiance of the globalist elite constitutes a heroic defense of Christianity. To the anti-anti-Russian right, Zelenskyy is a dictator fomenting a nuclear warThe pro-Putin right is a marginal force in American life. In a 2024 Pew Research survey, just 8 percent of US voters said they had confidence in Putin to do the right thing in world affairs.But exhaustion with funding the Ukraine war is more widespread. A Pew poll taken last month found 30 percent of Americans including 47 percent of Republicans saying that the US was providing too much support for Ukraines defense (according to the Pentagon, the US has spent over $180 billion on the war thus far). There are more and less ideological versions of this sentiment. Less politically engaged voters may have no strong opinion about Volodymyr Zelenskyy, but simply feel that their government should spend less money on foreign countries and more on aiding its own people. From this nationalistic point of view, Trump and Vances grievance at Zelenskyys lack of gratitude for Americas altruism may prove resonant.More committed America First isolationists, however, harbor a deep resentment of the Ukrainian president. In their analysis, Zelenskyy is a dictator who cancels elections and refuses to accept a ceasefire, thereby condemning his own people to pointless deaths, in service of an unwinnable war. Whats worse, the Ukrainian leader is seeking to trigger a hot war between the United States and Russia which is to say, World War III since he knows he can only win with the direct aid of the US military. This argument has scant factual basis. It is true that Ukraine has not held previously scheduled elections since the wars onset. But the nations constitution bars such elections under conditions of martial law, in which citizens in occupied or embattled areas would be disenfranchised. And although Ukraine would surely welcome direct US military intervention in its defense, there is no evidence it regards that outcome as even a remote possibility.Nevertheless, this analysis has proven popular with contrarian podcasters and isolationist intellectuals. Last November, Joe Rogan excoriated Zelenskyy for firing missiles into Russian territory. He also mocked Zelenskyy for claiming that Ukraine had Putin terrified. Fuck you, man, Rogan said of the Ukrainian president. You fucking people are about to start World War III. This is cocaine-like behavior. Putins fucking scared, man, Putins terrified. Like, what are you talking about? He has nuclear missiles. You fucking monkeys.Notably, Rogans suggestion that Zelenskyys thinking was distorted by cocaine use was echoed by the Kremlin Friday. A fierce dressing down in the Oval Office, Putin adviser Dmitry Medvedev wrote on Telegram: Trump told the cocaine clown the truth to his face for the first time.For those who believe Zelenskyy is a coke-addled autocrat scheming to set off a nuclear war, Trumps ritual humiliation of the leader was more triumph than disgrace.Trumps break with Zelenskyy is more likely to advance Russian imperialism than peaceThe pro-Putin rights enthusiasm for Trumps dustup with Zelenskyy is well-founded. Ukraine cannot maintain the wars existing battle lines or exert substantial leverage at the negotiating table without American support. And it now appears that the Trump administration is indifferent to Ukraines fate. Following Fridays press conference, Trump declared that he did not want Ukraine to have an advantage in negotiations with Russia.Similarly, if one is solely concerned with minimizing the threat of USRussia war or American spending on foreign nations, then Fridays events could reasonably be a source of encouragement. But the self-styled anti-war right often claims to be outraged by Ukrainian war deaths and desirous of peace. To the extent that such remarks are sincere, they should not take much comfort in Trumps denunciations of Zelenskyy. Conservative isolationists often speak as though Putin has proffered a ceasefire deal, which Ukraine has stubbornly refused to accept. And yet, precisely because Russia enjoys natural advantages in a prolonged conflict (as isolationists sometimes emphasize), it is not necessarily inclined to lay down its arms. And this is liable to be all the more true if Russia believes that a cessation of US support for Ukraine is imminent a development that would drastically improve the Kremlins prospects for further territorial gains. This is all well and good for those who wish to see Russian theocracy advance and Western liberalism retreat. But it should bring little pleasure to conservatives sincerely committed to peace.See More:
