Ukraine is worthy of U.S. sacrifice

Most Americans support Ukraine in its existential struggle against Russia. Many see the fight for democracy and sovereignty like our own story. The widespread admiration for Ukrainian grit despite being outgunned has created a relatively bipartisan congressional consensus to send about $53 billion in military and humanitarian aid to Kyiv.

But the consensus is fragile, especially as the prices of goods like fuel — and soon food, given the disruptions to Ukraine and Russia, Europe's breadbaskets — continue to rise. While the war is not the only reason for spiraling U.S. inflation, higher prices are beginning to mean lower approval for sanctions on Russia, according to a new Associated Press-NORC poll.

For the third consecutive month, the poll asked Americans to choose between "sanctioning Russia as effectively as possible, even if it damages the U.S. economy" vs. "limiting damage to the U.S. economy, even if it means sanctions on Russia are less effective."

In May, Americans chose limiting sanctions over the most effective sanctions by 51% to 45%. While that still reflects a relatively high level of support for the Biden administration's strategy, it's an inverse of numbers from the April poll, and down even more significantly from March, when 55% favored the most effective sanctions and 42% chose less effective sanctions to limit damage to the U.S. economy.

Although it's understandable — especially after President Joe Biden has directly linked Russia's invasion to inflation — that Americans believe it's an either/or choice, it's more complicated, Elizabeth Shackelford, a senior fellow in U.S. foreign policy at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, told an editorial writer.

"It's not a binary decision," Shackelford said. "Both of these things are very important. And it's hard to get the exact right balance on how to address them. … In the long term, it's going to be part and parcel of protecting our engagement in this very globalized, very interconnected world. And that comes back to things like long-term implications on global food security, long-term implications on our trade with not just European partners, but partners around the world, because it isn't just about Russia and Ukraine. It's about how much we can trust and rely on respect to international norms that make this globalized world function."

The globalized world isn't functioning well for many reasons beyond Ukraine, including COVID disruptions. As a result, goods are scarcer, and prices are higher. But the rules-based international order meant to protect democratic and economic stability needs to be defended, particularly at a time of rising authoritarianism.

"We've responded with a big set of sanctions that have also had an impact on the global economy," Shackelford said. "But in the longer term, if you don't take that hit by that sacrifice with our own sanctions, and the question is when is the next major disruption going to be caused by another aggressive state? So, it's a matter of trying to preempt other disruptions to our intertwined globalized economy."

Beyond the pocketbook challenges, there are political considerations in retaining the sanctions on Russia and aid to Ukraine. While most congressional Republicans have been stalwart in their support, a growing number are aggressively pushing back, including former President Donald Trump, who along with 11 GOP senators and 57 representatives did not support the latest aid package. If their numbers grow and support shrinks — and if the GOP takes control of Congress in November's midterms — the economic component of the U.S. strategy — and by extension, the West's — may be undermined.

Such an outcome may be part of Russian President Vladimir Putin's calculations.

"The Kremlin is counting on this war turning into a messy frozen conflict," Melinda Haring, the deputy director of the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center, recently told an editorial writer. "If the war becomes a protracted conflict, Moscow wins. There's no way that Washington will be able to sustain the same levels of giving over a long period of time."

Unless, Shackelford said, Biden gets more aggressive about communicating the need and indeed the patriotism of some economic sacrifice to defending the free world. "This is the clearest-cut case that we've had in decades," Shackelford said. "But there is this fear of telling the American people, admitting to the American people, that they're going to pay."

"Freedom isn't Free" isn't just a bumper-sticker slogan. There is a price — thankfully, not in American lives, but at least temporarily in the cost of goods. We should all be willing to pay it, because a positive outcome in Ukraine is invaluable.