First, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, including its takeover of Crimea and its aggression in Donbas, violates the basic principle of international relations — that "borders between countries should not be changed through the use of military force," reads a column by Richard Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, written for USA Today.
“This is what Saddam Hussein attempted in Kuwait in 1990, and what Hitler’s Germany attempted before and during World War II,” he wrote. “Respect for this principle is the bedrock of what peace and order there is in the world.”
Read alsoU.S. State Dept explains Tillerson’s offhand remark on Ukraine at G7 summitA second reason has to do with Russia specifically. Vladimir Putin’s Russia is a one-dimensional power. Its influence is tied to its ability to dominate others through the use of force, be it military, cyber, or related to Russian oil and gas exports. “It is important that Putin not conclude that continued use of force is a viable path to make Russia great again,” the article reads. “If he does, he will continue to invade, coerce and interfere.”
Read alsoEurope's forgotten woundUkraine’s nuclear history is another reason to care. It was once an integral part of the Soviet Union and a good many of the Soviet Union’s nuclear warheads were located there. Ukraine voluntarily dismantled its nuclear warheads under a 1994 deal with the U.S., the United Kingdom and Russia. But its subsequent loss of Crimea to the Russians sends a terrible message to other leaders: that giving up nuclear weapons can be hazardous to your political health and territorial integrity. The fact that both Iraq and Libya were invaded after they gave up their nuclear programs — and that a nuclear-armed North Korea has not been attacked — is a lesson lost on no one.
And that leads to a fourth reason Americans should care. Under that 1994 agreement, the Budapest Memorandum of December 1994, Ukraine received various security assurances. This was not the same as a defense treaty but there was no mistaking the intent, to convey that Ukraine could give up nuclear weapons and still remain secure. “The assurance has been shown to be empty. A country’s word is its bond, and any time the United States fails to live up to its word encourages adversaries to challenge us and friends to go their own way. Either outcome brings about a world of diminished stability and reduced U.S. influence,” the author wrote.
The good news for U.S. taxpayers is that their country can afford to be interested in Ukraine and many other international issues. Some $600 billion a year the U.S. spends on defense comes to just over 3% of what the economy produces, a level far below the average during the decades of the Cold War.
Read alsoEx-FSB operative: Putin missed moment to unleash "big war" against UkraineJust as important, overseas spending is not money that goes down the drain. As the world learned when Russia hacked the U.S. computers during the presidential campaign, nothing stays local for long in a global, interconnected world.
President Trump campaigned on the theme of America First, and it is of course true that this country faces enormous internal challenges. But ignoring “what goes on in Ukraine or elsewhere in the world will not make us smarter, healthier or richer — but it will make us less safe,” the author says.