The Zeitgeist

Bromance Breakup: Tucker Carlson’s

Anti-Ukraine Tirades Send Me Packing.

 By HOWARD BARBANEL

True confession: I’ve been a loyal and regular viewer of Tucker Carlson’s program on Fox since its inception. About 95 percent of the time, until recently, I’ve been in agreement with him (hey, I’m a mainstream Republican) but lately I have been turned-off (and have been turning-off the show) because of his strident opinions on Ukraine and the war there. To put it simply, our views and paths on foreign policy have diverged dramatically. To find myself in agreement with Joe Biden on something is quite a shock.

To listen to Mr. Carlson, we are on the precipice of Armageddon, twisting the nose of Russia’s nuclear-armed Vladimir Putin who would have no compunctions about ending the world as we know it over US and NATO support for Ukraine. Never mind that would also mean the end of Mr. Putin’s Russia as well. Tucker calls for an immediate negotiated end to the war, as if there were willing participants for such a discussion and easily reachable terms to end the hostilities to everyone’s mutual satisfaction. There are also his rationalizations that a Ukraine tethered to the West is a mortal strategic danger to Russia. How is that so? Do the Poles, Estonians and Bulgarians have imperialistic designs on Russia? Hard to imagine. A normal, democratic Russia would want to be a part of Europe too, not feel threatened by it.

According to Mr. Carlson, fear of Russia’s alleged military prowess should impel the US and our allies to do a Munich on Ukraine because, hey, why is this any of our business? For those who’ve forgotten history, Britain and France in the late 1930s acquiesced to Hitler’s reoccupation of the Rhineland, Anschluss of Austria and finally the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia in an orgy of appeasement because the major Western powers were cowed by the specter of war. We all know how well that policy turned out.

Tucker constantly harps on the allegation that Ukraine is not a democracy. Yet, Ukraine’s president was in fact elected in a nationwide popular vote in two rounds of voting that ended on April 21, 2019, garnering about 75 percent of the vote in the run-off. Tucker decries the imposition of martial law by President Zelensky in what by any definition and measure is most clearly an existential crisis, yet, Great Britain went a full 10 years from 1935 to 1945 without a national general election owing to the comparable crisis of World War Two which started in 1939. In fact, Churchill was never elected Prime Minister before or during the war and was defeated in the 1945 election. He only won a personal mandate for the first time in 1951. Yet Tucker has never called the UK a “fascist regime” for its lack of elections during its fight for survival against Germany.

According to Google, on April 27, 1861, President Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus for a large part of the country “to give military authorities the necessary power to silence dissenters and rebels. Under the order, commanders could arrest and detain individuals who were deemed threatening to military operations” in what was also obviously a fight for the America’s survival. During World War One draconian censorship measures were introduced in the US to control the war message and stifle dissent owing to the war emergency.

With Ukraine’s cities under bombardment night and day, with civilians being slaughtered, with cities being leveled, with fierce battles being waged on a constant basis, how is Ukraine’s situation different from the examples above? Ukraine wants to be a part of the EC and NATO and to do so they would have to be a democracy adhering to the rules of law in those institutions. They are fighting for the opportunity to join the West. Ukrainians want to be free. What is the whole point of America if not to stand against violent dictators, tyranny and the crushing of human rights? Should our country just be about NFL football, pizza delivery, the latest iPhone and inane TikTok videos or do we stand with brave people fighting for their freedom?

Mr. Carlson also constantly alleges that Ukraine is a cauldron of corruption and that US and NATO tax dollars are going to “oligarchs in track suits” instead of to fund the war effort. Yet he offers not one scintilla of proof to those charges. Tucker additionally spews wholesale barrages of personal insults against Ukraine’s president. Zelensky is a guy who could have hopped a US plane for Dubai and cozied-up next to Afghanistan’s last leader but instead chose to stay, stand his ground, rally his people and fight.

Finally, supposing the US were to cease support for Ukraine, how it is in the strategic and political interests of the US to empower and embolden Russia’s Vladimir Putin? What good would come from a Russian victory? A significantly strengthened Russia would be a very real threat to Western democracies, especially those in Eastern Europe and the Baltic. A much stronger Russia could make more mischief across the globe in league with China and Iran. How does that help America?

Tucker’s constant attacks on Ukraine come across (inadvertently, I’m sure) as though he wishes Russia to win and become a reincarnated USSR. The US supports many countries that support us, even if they are not perfect democracies and even if we don’t agree with all of their policies. The key idea being fought for in Ukraine is that wars of aggression to subjugate other peoples are illegitimate and cannot prevail. Reasonable people can debate whether aiding Ukraine is worth $40 or $60 Billion but belittling Ukraine in its struggle to defend its people and territorial integrity surely does nothing to enhance global security or American interests and belittles Tucker’s otherwise important and compelling program.