Do We Have to Lie on Russia’s Behalf?

By Noah Rothman

Monday, February 24, 2025

 

The Trump administration’s efforts to secure something it could plausibly call a cease-fire between Russia and Ukraine seem to have compelled the administration to internalize the notion that Ukraine is the real obstacle to peace. That is all a rational observer could conclude from watching this presidency go out of its way to support Russian geopolitical objectives.

 

For example, on Monday, the United States failed to generate support for a United Nations General Assembly resolution that called for an end to the war — a war that erupted as if by magic, apparently, because it failed to make note of the fact that Russia was the aggressor. A competing resolution demanding Russia’s immediate withdrawal from sovereign Ukrainian territory passed, but not with American support.

 

According to the Wall Street Journal, “U.S. diplomats told European counterparts over the past day that Washington would oppose the Ukrainian resolution if it advances and pressed the Europeans to persuade Kyiv to withdraw its text.” Americans have now been drafted into an attempt to muscle Ukraine into keeping its objections to the slaughter, rape, and abduction of its citizens to a minimum. That initiative succeeded only in sacrificing America’s moral authority.

 

The United States was joined in this ill-conceived attempt to shield Moscow from international criticism by such global paragons as Russia itself, Belarus, North Korea, Nicaragua, Sudan, the Central African Republic, and other ne’er-do-wells. Among America’s democratic allies, only Israel joined it — likely because of Jerusalem’s understanding that the Trump administration will play a crucial role in its own strategic planning. Save for that exception, the United States aligned itself with nations that actively oppose its interests.

 

Is that what’s needed for Moscow to get to yes? Is it absolutely necessary to compel U.S. elected officials to lend credence to Russia’s revisionist history to secure a lasting — forget just — peace in Ukraine? That seems to be the Trump administration’s conclusion. It’s not enough that the Trump administration is pressuring Ukraine to consent to its own dismemberment and to surrender its natural resources in exchange only for, well, not much. It seems there will be no deal unless Trump officials articulate the morally deformed apologia for Russian aggression that was once exclusive to Moscow’s most shameless sophists.

 

The Sunday shows were replete with Republicans making excuses for Russia’s war of conquest. Indeed, that inarguable characterization of the Kremlin’s objectives in this war is one that Trump administration officials are now visibly afraid of admitting.

 

“Can you acknowledge that Russia is the aggressor here?” Maria Bartiromo asked national security adviser Mike Waltz. The NSA did not answer, preferring instead to issue a flurry of unrelated words burnishing Trump’s credentials as a hard bargainer (the evidence to the contrary when it comes to Russia notwithstanding). “The war didn’t need to happen,” said Trump’s chief negotiator, Steve Witkoff. “It was provoked. It doesn’t necessarily mean it was provoked by the Russians.” Pete Hegseth assumed a fragile and defensive posture when confronted with the reality of Russia’s war in Ukraine. “Standing here and saying, ‘You’re good, you’re bad; you’re a dictator, you’re not a dictator; you invaded, you didn’t.’ It’s not useful. It’s not productive,” the defense secretary insisted. The war, he added, is “a very complicated situation.”

 

It’s not complicated at all. Russia invaded Ukraine on the second occasion for the explicit purpose of eradicating what Vladimir Putin regards as a historical mistake from the face of the Earth. He was not coy about his aims or vague about the ancient historical claims on Ukrainian lands he intended to press. The evidence of Russia’s crimes against humanity and disregard for the laws of armed conflict are so beyond dispute that many Republicans are on record acknowledging them — back when it was safe to accept the evidence of your own eyes.

 

It is no longer, and not just because Donald Trump’s intemperate and inaccurate assessment of which combatant in this war is the aggressor that has become gospel among GOP officials lest they offend the president’s easily offended fanbase. Apparently, Russia will not be cajoled into a cease-fire through concessions alone, and there are plenty on offer. The reintegration of Moscow into the global economy, the reopening of U.S.-Russian diplomatic facilities, the legitimacy Washington is prepared to grant Russia’s illegal territorial acquisitions — all that and more are on the table. But it’s not good enough for Putin or Trump, apparently, both of whom appear to believe that the U.S. must make itself a complicit party to the Kremlin’s lies.

 

Well, as Solzhenitsyn said, “Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph, but not through me.” The Trump administration may believe that its political imperatives will not be secured but through dishonor. They may be right, but that conduct is nevertheless a stain on the nation they represent. Even if there is a political “win” available to Trump’s acolytes, it will not be worth the sacrifice. The deal they are hammering out will not be a just peace. It will, therefore, not be an enduring peace. The legacy that will emerge from this process is the memory of how easily America cast off its hard-earned heritage as a standard bearer for the free peoples of the world who are willing to suffer to cast off the shackles of tyranny and oppression.

 

The Trump administration can cast off that legacy if they like, but the president should take down that portrait of Ronald Reagan hanging prominently in the Oval Office. This presidency can mutilate Reagan’s legacy without forcing him to watch over this abomination from the beyond. That would be a small mercy for the Gipper, at least. The rest of us cannot so easily avert our eyes from this obscenity.