As Filipinos celebrated the 39th anniversary of the EDSA People Power Revolution, the bipartisan Congressional Ukraine Caucus marked the third year of the Russian attack on Kyiv.
EDSA ended decades of authoritarian rule. Russia ended some 80 years of peace since World War II, the longest break from war on the European mainland in a millennium. But the immediate occasion for the hastily-convened Caucus was the vote on a Ukrainian resolution at the UN General Assembly (UNGA) to condemn Russia’s invasion and demand the immediate, complete and unconditional withdrawal of its military forces from Ukrainian territory — with implications on when peace would return to Europe, for how long, and with what consequences for the rest of the world.
As expected, the non-binding resolution passed, though with a lower margin than in the 2022 voting. What shocked the Caucus was the US joining Russia, Iran, and North Korea, three of the new “Axis of Evil,” in voting against the resolution that its democratic NATO allies supported. Even China, the fourth Axis member, abstained, although it expressed its support for Russia.
The US then proposed a resolution in the Security Council calling for an end to the war, without naming an aggressor. This passed after attempts at amendments to favor Ukraine met with a Russian veto. In angry, anguished statements heavy with historical references, Caucus members spoke of their baffled disbelief, dismay and shame at the “day of…infamy,” when the US pivoted to Russia’s side.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt had used that phrase in a national address that reported the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor and declared war against the World War II Axis Powers.
The Caucus also alluded to the European security conference in Munich in early February that had already evoked memories of a 1938 Munich meeting to avert war between Nazi Germany and Czechoslovakia. In one day of negotiations with Hitler, England and France pressed Czechoslovakia, not present in the session, to surrender the Czech Sudetenland rather than risk war in its defense.
Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain proclaimed that the Munich Pact had secured “peace in our time.” That peace lasted six months, ending with Germany’s occupation of Czechoslovakia. Six months later, Hitler blitzkrieged Poland and, after another six months, attacked Denmark and Norway. Munich and Chamberlain became identified with the policy of appeasement, based on the hope that concessions would satisfy Hitler and prevent war.
More than just a policy mistake in dealing with dictators, Caucus members denounced the Trump administration’s UN diplomacy as a betrayal. To be sure, there was betrayal at the 1938 Munich meeting. France had treaty obligations to defend Czechoslovakia but deferred to England in postponing any military response. But the most brazen betrayer was Hitler, who had pledged respect for Czech territorial integrity in exchange for the Sudetenland.
Peace still prevailed at the time of the Munich meeting and neither France nor England was ready for war with a rearmed and resurgent Germany. Both did declare war against Germany, albeit belatedly and ineffectively, after the invasion of Poland.
The betrayal at the UN was of a different order. Despite fears that this would be the direction of Trump’s second term, it was still a stunning policy pivot, but already foreshadowed by statements from the American president, vice president, and from Cabinet officials at Munich 2025 and at meetings with Putin’s representatives in Saudi Arabia.
These statements denied the truth the world had seen, and embraced the lie that Zelenskyy, not Putin, was the dictator who started the war. Putin’s track record was already comparable to Hitler’s: the violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty; targeted bombing of population centers and infrastructure; torture and killing of combatants and civilians; abduction of children and their export to Russia. These offenses led the International Criminal Court to indict Putin for war crimes.
Adding insult to injury, Trump denied Zelenskyy’s right to a seat at the negotiations, because “he had no cards” to play. The calculation casually dismissed the 400,000 casualties in killed and wounded that Ukraine had already contributed in three years of brutal warfare in its own defense but also served to keep Russian forces farther away from NATO borders.
American officials discounted the usefulness of condemning Russian aggression, pointing out that this had not prevented Ukraine from losing 20% of its territory. Still, Russia had failed to conquer the whole of Ukraine, as it expected to do in 2022, while losing an estimated 700,000 in killed or wounded among its troops.
While Russia remains stronger than Ukraine in terms of its capacity to sustain the war, it is still not stronger than the US or NATO, as England and France were not in 1938 when they faced Hitler. But to end the war, the US is exerting pressure on a democratic ally, not on its geopolitical rival, to which it is already signaling acceptable concessions.
This is baffling even to Realist, Great Power proponents. Quickly ending the war in Ukraine is a noble and righteous objective that Ukrainians, facing an existential threat, want to realize more than anyone else. But the resolution must also serve justice in rejecting rewards for the aggressor. The fighting can stop with the combatants bringing their troops back to their own borders.
The congressional Caucus contends that accepting and propagating Russian lies betrayed Ukraine and America’s NATO allies. Beyond that, it also betrayed the values of freedom and democracy that had served as the foundation of the American struggle for independence in the 18th century and the cornerstone of its participation in international affairs since World War I.
It raised doubts about American commitment to defending a rules-based order whose basic principle protected the right of nations to their territory and sovereignty. What will be tested is the proposition that a scaffolding of lies can support the structure for a just and enduring peace in Ukraine — and also deter aggression in other threatened areas in the world, including the Philippines. – Rappler.com