International Military Support for Ukraine

There is some growing angst about the amount of treasure and weaponry that we’re sending to Ukraine in support of that nation’s effort to defeat the barbarian Russian invasion and to drive the barbarian back out. Typical of the angst is Victoria Coates’ (a former Deputy National Security Advisor to former President Donald Trump) beef, which includes concern about the amount of aid the US is providing compared to that provided by the European nations on whose ramparts the barbarian would be should he overrun Ukraine:

Given the fact that the Germans and the French are not doing anything close to this in terms of support is shameful. This is not our job. This is Europe’s backyard. Europe needs to shoulder this burden.

To an extent, Coates’ beef is valid; however, as the table below shows, the European shortfall is not at all universal. Most of these data are drawn from statista; for Sweden and Finland they come from the Kiel Institute for the World Economy.

Nation Amount Sent Billions GDP Billions (IMF) Percent GDP
Poland $2.55 $716.00 0.356%
US $46.56 $25,035.00 0.186%
Great Britain $5.13 $3,198.00 0.160%
Denmark $0.59 $387.00 0.152%
Sweden* $0.85 $604.00 0.141%
Finland* $0.36 $281.00 0.128%
Norway $0.62 $505.00 0.123%
Netherlands $0.90 $990.00 0.091%
Canada $1.35 $2,200.00 0.061%
Germany $2.47 $4,031.00 0.061%
Italy $0.65 $1,997.00 0.033%
France $0.69 $2,778.00 0.025%
*Converted from € a/o 2Mar23

 

Poland actually is providing more support relative to the size of its economy than we are. That shouldn’t be surprising, though, as the memories of the barbarian’s occupation and depredations of their nation remain fresh in Polish minds. Poland also has taken in the most Ukrainian refugees; although a factor in that is the border the two nations share, which shortens refugee travel.

Great Britain, shorn of EU political limits, is right up there with us.

The real European shirkers, especially given their extant military establishments, are Germany and France, as noted by Coates, and Italy. Their behavior is truly shameful, especially for Germany, whose eastern States were under the barbarian’s jackboots not so long ago, also. The shortfall for France is not so surprising, for all the shortfall’s…disreputableness…given that nation’s constant efforts to make nice with Russia.

My claim here is not that the we should cut back on our material—and materiel—aid to Ukraine, but that we should push—pressure—those European nations who are shirking to do much more. Were those nations to meet their obligations—moral as well as material, and not only to Ukraine but to their own peoples and to their obligations toward each other under the spirit of NATO—Ukraine would be in a much better position to destroy the barbarian invasion.

Our Woke DoD Managers

Here’s Lloyd Austin’s Pentagon in action, via a memo he had sent to the public affairs offices of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and National Guard on Feb. 10:

In recent years, many sponsors of sporting events have instituted a tradition of requesting uniformed military members to unfurl and hold giant, horizontal US flags during events as an expression of patriotism and love of the country[.]
While many, including military members, view these displays as inspiring and patriotic…uniformed service members may not participate directly in the unfurling, holding, and/or carrying of giant, horizontal US flags that are not displayed during community outreach events.

View these flag displays as patriotic. Not just view them as patriotic, these flag displays are patriotic. Austin’s memo is disgusting. Barring our military personnel from participating in these flag displays—displays of the flag which symbolizes the nation for which these men and women are sworn to defend, even to die in the defense—is too woke by half. Austin needs to be dismissed. Not allowed to resign, dismissed.

Full stop.

In Which I disagree with DeSantis

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) has written in his new book, The Courage to be Free: Florida’s Blueprint for American Revival, that (Fox News‘ paraphrasing)

…left-wing company employees pressuring their executives to reflect their political values and “woke” CEOs using their corporate bully pulpit to exert their influence.
“This is especially true as the movement for [ESG] responsibility within corporate America has gained traction[.]”

I disagree, and this is a much broader problem than the ESG movement. Company executives who understand who is in charge of the companies they run only feel the political or “social justice” pressure of their employees that they choose to feel. The employees work for them, and they work for the companies’ shareholders. There is no bidirectionality to the governing hierarchy.

Company executives who surrender to their employees’ political/social justice demands are unfit for their roles in company governance: they’re abject cowards.

An Empty Gesture

OMB Issued a memo barring the installation of TikTok on most Executive Branch facilities and the removal of currently installed TikTok from those facilities.

Most of them.

…limited exceptions to the restrictions outlined in this memorandum for law enforcement activities, national security interests and activities, and security research.

Never mind that TikTok is subordinate to, a subsidiary of, ByteDance, a People’s Republic of China-domiciled company. ByteDance, as a PRC-domiciled company, is bound by the PRC’s national intelligence law that makes it beholden to the Communist Party of China’s intelligence community to conduct intelligence-gathering as demanded by that intel community. Never mind, either, that as a subordinate facility of ByteDance, TikTok is required to conduct that espionage whenever ByteDance passes the requirement along.

Why, then, is the Biden administration allowing this enemy nation espionage tool to penetrate our own police forces and intelligence community?

“Ran out of Time”

The Washington, DC, City Council, dominated by the Progressive-Democratic Party as it is, voted a month ago to allow non-citizens, including illegal aliens, to vote in city elections, so long as they have been “resident” in the city for at least 30 days.

Congress has a 30-day review window during which it can override DC Council-passed laws and remove them.  The Republican-led House did so, but the Progressive-Democrat-led Senate…did not. As Fox News meekly put it, the Senate ran out of time before the review period ended.

No, the Senate didn’t run out of time. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D, NY) wouldn’t even let the matter come to the floor for a vote. Apparently, he didn’t want his majority caucus to have to be on the record as favoring non-citizens voting in American elections.

This needn’t be the end of the matter, though, the 30-day window is a statute, not a constitutionally set limit. Here’s what Art I, Sect 8, of our Constitution has to say on the governance of the District of Columbia:

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States….

That exclusive legislation over the District means that a later Congress can withdraw DC laws allowed under prior Congresses. This business of allowing non-citizens—including those illegal aliens—to vote in American elections, a quintessential factor in being an American citizen, needs to be rescinded. Elections have consequences, and we have another one coming in a year-and-a-half.

I have a caveat to this, though. Some might suggest that DC’s voter rolls might be useful things to search for illegal aliens in the District, round them up, and deport them. That must not happen. Government must not run around searching jurisdictions’ voter rolls to find illegal aliens, no matter how convenient such a search might seem.

Government must never be allowed to any search voter roll for groups of folks of whom Government, from administration to administration, disapproves and…silencing…them. The only purpose for a voter roll, the only legitimate purpose for local government searches of them, is to establish eligibility to vote in a jurisdiction and to remove individuals who are not eligible from those rolls. The Federal government must not be involved in such searches.