The blue and yellow flag still flies high over Britain’s town squares and public buildings, symbolizing our unwavering support for Ukraine’s war effort.
However, the initial fervor has faded, and a sense of fatigue has settled in. It’s like a heavy autumn mist slowly engulfing a valley. We had hastily assumed that Kyiv wouldn’t withstand the mighty Russian army, but then swung to the unrealistic expectation that Ukraine could achieve a David vs. Goliath victory within a year. We convinced ourselves that enduring skyrocketing gas bills for one winter would be a small price to pay for peace in Europe. Now, we’re faced with a second winter of freezing homes and stories of a protracted war of attrition that could last for years.
This is a critical moment for Ukraine. Its soldiers are engaged in a crucial military offensive, and its civilians are bracing themselves for another harsh winter of Russia’s attacks on their power infrastructure. However, it’s Western resolve, not Ukrainian, that is showing signs of faltering. Republicans in Congress hesitate to approve Joe Biden’s military aid package, and a pro-Russian populist recently won the Slovakian elections, promising to withdraw support for Ukraine. In Britain, a prime minister eager to satisfy President Zelenskiy has been replaced by an unsentimental economic hawk under pressure to deliver tax cuts.
It is hardly a coincidence that former British defense secretary Ben Wallace revealed his request for an additional £2.3bn for Ukraine just before Chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s party conference speech, during negotiations on the crucial autumn statement. Wallace emphasized the importance of hope in times of war and argued that Britain had a duty to support Ukraine’s aspirations for victory.
British politicians have been privately concerned about maintaining support for the war in Washington since early spring. There is mounting resistance on the Republican right, and there are suspicions that Donald Trump would cut off aid to Ukraine if he wins the next presidential election. Similar views are now emerging in Britain. Nigel Farage questioned whether Britain’s support for Ukraine had gone too far and left itself defenseless, even though arming Ukraine is intended to prevent NATO members from having to defend against a victorious Russia.
While conspiracy theories circulate among some circles, arguing against continued support for Ukraine, the idea that charity should begin at home is becoming an argument against military aid. Western military support for Ukraine is not a charitable act but rather guilt money. Ukraine’s allies have a vested interest in stopping Russian aggression in Europe but are unwilling to risk their own troops. Instead, they have chosen to provide financial support for weapons and absorb the economic impact of rising oil and gas prices. However, there are concerns that this agreement may start to unravel as times get tougher. Conservative party members love patriotic defense rhetoric at conferences, but if they had to choose between tax cuts at home and supporting a foreign war, would they bet on Europe’s future?
“We have a chance to help finish this,” Wallace wrote, optimistically highlighting cracks in the Russian army. However, this opportunity will only materialize if Western politics remain steadfast.
-
Gaby Hinsliff is a Guardian columnist
-
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
