The Washington PostDemocracy Dies in Darkness

Opinion Zelensky’s visit highlights that freedom is winning in Ukraine — for now

|
December 21, 2022 at 8:42 p.m. EST
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky holds a U.S. flag gifted to him by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) after he addressed a joint meeting of Congress on Wednesday. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)
6 min
correction

An earlier version of this editorial overstated how many election-denying Republicans lost during the midterms. Almost 180 election deniers won, according to a Post count. This version has been updated.

President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine made his career in comedy, but the Russian invasion of his country 10 months ago has brought out his talent for drama — of the most inspiring kind. Standing before a joint session of Congress on Wednesday, Mr. Zelensky thanked the United States for its military and financial support, presented a flag signed by troops defending the the Ukrainian city of Bakhmut and characterized his country’s struggle as the front line in a global battle for freedom and democracy against tyrants seeking to rewrite the international order. Likening the war in Ukraine to the American Revolution, he declared that “the Russian tyranny has lost control over us.”

“Ukrainian courage and American resolve must guarantee the future of our common freedom,” he said.

His address culminated a whirlwind of events that included President Biden’s official confirmation that the United States will send a Patriot missile-defense system to Ukraine. The Patriots will help protect against Russian aerial bombardment — Moscow fired 76 missiles on Friday night alone, 16 of which penetrated Ukraine’s air defense. The onslaught has destroyed half of Ukraine’s electric power infrastructure, according to the United Nations. A fresh package of $44.9 billion in economic and military aid, included in Congress’s must-pass omnibus spending bill, will bring total U.S. support since the war began to $110 billion.

Skip to end of carousel
  • Lawyers plead guilty in racketeering case in Fulton County, Ga.
  • The Biden administration announces more than $100 million to improve maternal health.
  • Wisconsin Republicans back off impeachment threat against justice.
  • Bahrain’s hunger strike ends, for now, after concessions to prisoners.
  • A Saudi court sentences a retired teacher to death based on tweets.
Attorneys for Donald Trump have pleaded guilty in the racketeering case led by Fulton County, Ga., District Attorney Fani T. Willis. Even those lawyers related to the deals focused on equipment-tampering in rural Coffee County are relevant to the former president — they help to establish the “criminal enterprise” of which prosecutors hope to prove Mr. Trump was the head. The news is a sign that the courts might be the place where 2020 election lies finally crash upon the rocks of reality. The Editorial Board wrote about the wide range of the indictment in August.
The Department of Health and Human Services announced more than $103 million in funding to address the maternal health crisis. The money will boost access to mental health services, help states train more maternal health providers and bolster nurse midwifery programs. These initiatives are an encouraging step toward tackling major gaps in maternal health and well-being. In August, the Editorial Board wrote about how the United States can address its maternal mortality crisis.
Wisconsin state Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R) announced Tuesday that Republicans would allow the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau to draw legislative maps, a dramatic reversal after years of opposing such an approach to redistricting. A new liberal majority on the state Supreme Court is expected to throw out the current maps, which make Wisconsin the most gerrymandered state in America. Mr. Vos has been threatening to impeach Justice Janet Protasiewicz, whose election this spring flipped control of the court, in a bid to keep those maps. This led to understandable outcry. Now it seems Mr. Vos is backing off his impeachment threat and his efforts to keep the state gerrymandered. Read our editorial on the Protasiewicz election here.
Prisoners are eating again in Bahrain after the government agreed to let them spend more hours outside and expanded their access to visitors, a welcome development ahead of the crown prince’s visit to Washington this week. Activists say the monthlong hunger strike will resume on Sept. 30 if these promises aren’t kept. Read our editorial calling for the compassionate release of Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, a political prisoner since 2011 who participated in the strike.
A retired teacher in Saudi Arabia, Muhammad al-Ghamdi, has been sentenced to death by the country’s Specialized Criminal Court solely based on his tweets, retweets and YouTube activity, according to Human Rights Watch. The court’s verdict, July 10, was based on two accounts on X, formerly Twitter, which had only a handful of followers. The posts criticized the royal family. The sentence is the latest example of dictatorships imposing harsh sentences on people who use social media for free expression, highlighted in our February editorial.
End of carousel

Massive as this support is, it amounts neither to everything Mr. Zelensky wants nor everything he and his people need. The symbolism of providing advanced Patriots — despite Russian warnings that it would be provocative, as well as the U.S. government’s own previous hesitancy — should not be underestimated. And yet the practical effect of a single battery should not be overestimated, either. Troops need training to use them, and their most cost-effective application is against missiles and aircraft, not the Iranian-made drones on which Russia increasingly relies. Mr. Zelensky commented in a joint news conference with Mr. Biden that he would be back for more Patriots later on — and Mr. Biden indicated that, while committed to helping Ukraine defend itself, the United States would stop short of sending some weapons that might provoke a wider conflict with Russia.

Wednesday nevertheless sent a strong signal of commitment — material and political, Ukrainian and American. As such, the day provided a capstone to a year that began amid fear of a quick and complete Russian conquest but is ending in frustration for Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin. Ukraine has lost territory, to be sure; but it has taken some back. The chances that it will emerge from war as a viable state are far greater than the chances Russia will swallow it. Ukraine did not capitulate in a matter of days, as Mr. Putin had planned, and the combat has been costly in blood and treasure for Russia as well as Ukraine.

To call this unexpected situation a miracle would not do justice to the courage and sacrifice of the Ukrainian people, led by Mr. Zelensky. Nor would it give due credit to the strategic choices the Biden administration and the United States’ NATO allies made, none of which was foreordained, all of which were fraught with risk — and most of which have paid off. There is indeed a global contest between forces of autocracy and democracy. The democracies have held the line in Ukraine, and this a historic achievement.

Mr. Putin’s Russia is not the only autocracy in difficulties of its own making. In China, President Xi Jinping began the year boasting with Mr. Putin of a broad Moscow-Beijing partnership but ends it facing a wave of protests, sluggish economic growth, the failure of Mr. Xi’s vaunted zero-covid strategy — and declining global prestige. Despite its violent efforts at suppression, Iran’s theocracy is still challenged by a woman-led democratic movement. In the United States, by contrast, democracy has been shored up by the defeat of high-profile election-denying candidates in the midterm elections. Among the factors that helped was the example Ukraine’s resistance.

It is far too soon to declare victory in Ukraine. Ukrainian officials predict Mr. Putin might try a new ground offensive as soon as January. The Russian autocrat continues his campaign to starve and freeze Ukraine’s civilian population, just one of the war crimes for which he and the soldiers who commit them should be held to account. Yet Mr. Zelensky’s visit should encourage reflection on the pivotal role the West’s political will has played in helping Ukraine resist. Mr. Putin’s best hope — and our main concern — is evidence that U.S. support for Ukraine might be getting less bipartisan. Polls show a significant falloff in support for aid among Republican voters; the likely next House speaker, Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), has made equivocal statements on the matter. And in October, 30 progressive House Democrats issued (and quickly retracted) a woefully premature call for U.S.-brokered negotiations. All the more reason to appreciate Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell’s speech on the Senate floor Wednesday, in which he backed accelerated aid for Ukraine, noting — correctly — “our support for Ukraine is morally right, but it’s not only that. It is also a direct investment in cold, hard American interests.”

Those interests include: the stability and peace of a continent with which the United States has close and complex social, economic and political ties; the sanctity of international borders; and deterrence of military aggression. The U.S. commitment to Ukraine is costly ― but much less costly than it would be to live in a world in which Mr. Putin makes the rules.

“The world is too interconnected and interdependent to allow someone to stay aside and at the same time to feel safe when such a battle continues,” Mr. Zelensky said. “Your money is not charity. It is an investment in the global security and democracy.”

Mr. Biden has so far made this argument convincingly. He can point to the favorable results of U.S. policy in 2022 to reinforce it in the year ahead. “We will stay with you for as long as it takes,” Mr. Biden promised Mr. Zelensky on Wednesday. There is no reasonable alternative in the face of Russia’s aggression, a threat to the whole world.

The Post’s View | About the Editorial Board

Editorials represent the views of The Post as an institution, as determined through discussion among members of the Editorial Board, based in the Opinions section and separate from the newsroom.

Members of the Editorial Board: Opinion Editor David Shipley, Deputy Opinion Editor Charles Lane and Deputy Opinion Editor Stephen Stromberg, as well as writers Mary Duenwald, Shadi Hamid, David E. Hoffman, James Hohmann, Heather Long, Mili Mitra, Eduardo Porter, Keith B. Richburg and Molly Roberts.