The Ukraine crisis reminded me of Ronald Reagan. At this point, it makes me appreciate his combination of moral clarity and realism better: he understood that some governments are simply evil. Their leaders crave power and seek to limit the freedoms of their citizens. These governments are a threat to global security.
For Reagan, the No. 1 culprit was the Soviet Union, but he held this view of communist governments more generally. He saw communism as an ideology that elevated the power of the state, a non-democratic state over it, to the rights of the individual.
It is impossible to know what Reagan would have thought of Putin’s Russia, which is not a communist country. But everything Reagan has said and written implies that he would have been highly skeptical. Putin’s Russia has already advanced militarily in Georgia, Ukraine and Syria. It imprisons political opponents and restricts freedom of expression. It is far from a legitimate democracy.
So I don’t think Reagan will be surprised by the fact that Russia has gathered at least 150,000 troops along the border with Ukraine, there is a good chance that the conflict will escalate any time soon. He understood very well the logic of what he called the evil kingdom.
Unfortunately, Reagan has gone out of style, including with a conservative base. For 20 years, disgruntled Republicans have been saying they want to move away from the legacy of Reaganism. Some of this intellectual migration has been more against Reagan’s market-oriented economics. But separatism and even pro-Russian sympathies have become common in the Republican Party.
As I explain Reagan’s career, he understood another point very well – and that relates to his lack of moral capital. Reagan knew there were real “bad guys,” and it was up to politicians and elites to recognize them and stand by them, both rhetorically and diplomatically. Above all, it was important to encourage the American public to internalize these same moral decisions. This may all sound nonsense and dated, but the pending conflict in Ukraine shows this to be an enduring truth.
The complementary Reagan vision was positive, optimistic and focused on what Americans could achieve when they worked together. Americans are going to disagree on a lot of issues, he acknowledged, but they should maintain a relatively united front and save their real disgrace to the truly destructive forces on the global scene.
Fast forward 40 years, and the US seems to have almost completely ignored these strictures. Many people on the right seem most upset about the worst aspects of those on the left, and vice versa. Even as evil forces emerge in the international arena, Americans seem far more engaged in their fights with each other.
On Russia in particular, as recently as several months ago the current military escalation was hardly a matter of discussion among the American elite. When Mitt Romney tried to raise the threat of Russia in his 2012 presidential campaign, things fell largely flat. Former President Barack Obama actually made fun of him.
Now it’s time to catch up. Much of the panic about Russia over the years has been introverted, related to its ties to former President Donald Trump’s campaign. Finally, there is a realization that European peace is not to be taken lightly – and there is much at stake.
So far President Joe Biden has done a commendable job building a relatively united NATO and European coalition to oppose Russian moves against Ukraine. Like Reagan with the Soviet Union, Biden understands it’s essential to keep open lines of communication and dialogue with Russia.
If an aggressive Russia were to remain central on the global stage, few can assure themselves more than the Reagan Presidency. The war would require a re-evaluation of everything else, including the prospects for economic growth and international cooperation. The question will also be whether this cycle of war and conquest has any meaningful end.
Reagan understood all that. He made his share of mistakes, including foreign policy, but the main issue he found grew ever larger in importance. Even those who disapprove of other aspects of his legacy should be able to appreciate it.
Tyler Cowen is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He is a professor of economics at George Mason University and writes for the blog Marginal Revolution. His books include ‘Big Business: A Love Letter to an American Anti-Hero’.,
This story has been published without modification in text from a wire agency feed.
Never miss a story! Stay connected and informed with Mint.
download
Our App Now!!
,