Putin Gambles That the West Is Weak Both militarily and culturally, we’ve been derelict in our duty to defend our civilization. By Tony Abbott
Mr. Abbott served as prime minister of Australia, 2013-15.
‘The bullying of small nations by big ones, the trampling of justice and decency in the pursuit of national aggrandizement, and reckless indifference to human life, should have no place in our world.”
Those were my words to the Australian Parliament on the morning of July 17, 2014, when a Russian missile battery had shot down flight MH17, killing 38 Australians among the 298 on board, as Russian proxies seized the Donbas. If it wasn’t yet obvious in 2008, when Vladimir Putin invaded Georgia, it should certainly have been six years later, when he annexed the Crimea, that Mr. Putin was bent on the restoration of greater Russia—and to hell with the freedom and independence of the countries that were once part of the Soviet Union.
Yet since then, Western democracies have culpably failed to boost their military capability while indulging acts of economic and cultural self-harm.
Take the U.K., the West’s second-strongest military power. The total number of British defense personnel dropped from about 600,000 in the 1950s to 300,000 in the 1960s and about 150,000 now. British forces in Europe declined from 80,000 in the 1950s to 50,000 in the 1960s to 25,000 in 1994 (still including one tank division), before dwindling to zero in Germany by 2020 and 1,000 in Estonia (placed there after 2015 in reaction to Russia’s renewed threat). In response to Russia’s blitzkrieg on Ukraine, the U.K. government has just announced that this force will be boosted to an armored brigade of fewer than 3,000. Given that the U.K. has provided by far the strongest response to the current crisis, it’s little wonder Mr. Putin thinks the West is weak and easily distracted.
In 2014 I was criticized for contemplating the dispatch of Australian troops to Ukraine. Fortunately, this became unnecessary once the rebels’ sponsors relented and allowed the repatriation of our dead.
In retrospect, Ukraine’s fate was probably sealed when President Biden said last month that America might not respond to a “minor incursion” and definitively ruled out “boots on the ground.” No consideration whatever appears to have been given to declaring a “no fly” zone for Russian military aircraft over Ukraine, even though that had been done to protect Iraqi Kurds against Saddam Hussein and would have given the Ukrainian army a much fairer fight against the Russians’ greater numbers.
America’s unwillingness to take risks to protect Ukraine, a democracy of more than 40 million people, is now fueling doubts about the risks the U.S. might run to help defend other countries that were once controlled by Russia—especially the Baltic states, which are part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. It’s obvious that small countries are largely helpless in the absence of collective defense and that countries that won’t or can’t fight an aggressor are doomed to negotiate the best possible surrender.
Yet the West’s bigger surrender has been economic and cultural. For at least 15 years, much of Western policy has been directed to reducing carbon-dioxide emissions. In Australia, former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd declared that climate change is the “great moral challenge” of our time. The British Parliament, along with many others, has officially declared a “climate emergency.” Last week, as the air raid sirens wailed over Kyiv, John Kerry worried that the Ukraine crisis would produce “massive emissions” and distract the world from climate change.
Reducing emissions is an important policy objective but should never be governments’ main task—especially when it entails risking significant economic damage and putting national security at risk. Europe has been busily closing down coal-fired power stations (and in Germany even emissions-free nuclear ones) only to become dependent on Russian gas that Mr. Putin can turn off and on like a tap. Here in Australia, we’re set on closing coal-fired power stations without any base-load substitute even while our thermal coal exports surge to record levels (including to China, an even more dangerous strategic competitor than Russia). It’s the private sector that’s doing this, an unforgivable folly reminiscent of Lenin’s reported quip that the “capitalists will sell us the rope by which we hang them.”
Then there’s globalization, which has undoubtedly made the world richer but at the cost (as we’ve only lately come to realize) of strengthening the West’s competitors and exporting its manufacturing base. Free trade should continue to be promoted but principally between countries with comparable standards of living and only between democracies that respect the rule of law.
The worst contemporary folly is the constant undermining of Western civilization, history and national virtues. Partly it is deliberate subversion by cultural Marxists, but mostly it’s the polite acquiescence of diffident and historically ignorant people conditioned not to give offence. These days the rights of men who want to be women routinely trump those of women who don’t want to face unfair competition in sport. Religious free speech is still OK, as long it’s not the Bible you’re quoting. Martin Luther King’s famous plea that his children be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin, would be denounced on most Western campuses as an example of “colorblind racism.” “Monty Python’s Life of Brian” couldn’t be made today due to politically correct wowserism. And I wonder how many students are still taught to take pride in Australia Day, which celebrates the founding of a country that’s as free, fair and prosperous as any on earth.
A Western world that has spent two years sacrificing freedom to preserve life is hardly going to sacrifice life to preserve freedom. Or at least that’s how it must look to the hard men in Moscow and Beijing. As Churchill said of the Munich sellout in 1938, this is “the first foretaste of a bitter cup that will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigor we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.”
Comments are closed.
