Two weeks ago, Russia invaded Ukraine in the largest on-land military operation since 1945. Over 2 million refugees have fled to neighboring countries since the start of the war, and even more have stayed to fight — including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The Ukrainian people proudly stand with their president. With a population of just 44 million — compared to Russia’s 144 million — Ukraine has been punching well above its weight to stave off a military eight times the size of their own.

So how does a country no bigger than the state of Texas resist conquest for over two weeks?

Though abstract in theory, the answer is simple: morale.

When the U.S. offered to evacuate Zelensky from his country to avoid assassination attempts, the Ukrainian embassy in Britain reported that the president responded simply: “The fight is here. I need ammunition, not a ride.”

Russian troops, on the other hand, seem to not even truly understand what the point of President Vladimir Putin’s “special military operation” is. As Ukrainian forces continue to stymie their attacks, including three attempts on Zelensky’s life in the past week, the Russian military has experienced a degradation in morale as well as food and fuel supply.

Communication between Russian soldiers and their families is circulating around social media, with a common theme being confusion over the war’s purpose. Many units have even surrendered to Ukrainian forces upon capture, explaining they were under the impression they were performing military exercises until they were commanded to cross the border.

Even Russia’s own citizens are protesting, with 5,000 anti-war demonstrators arrested last weekend. 

Because of the deep historical ties between Russia and Ukraine, citizens from both nations will often have family and friends across the border; the recent invasion is not just a demonstration of Putin’s gross misuse of power but a ruthless attempt to pit neighbors against one another.

We at the Panther stand in solidarity with Ukraine. 

But as a bloodbath ensues on the other side of the globe, we question if the assistance offered by the U.S. and its allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) aligns with the original goal of the international military alliance, as proclaimed by former President Harry S. Truman.

“I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures … to work out their own destinies in their own way,” said Truman in a joint session of Congress March 12, 1947 at the start of the Cold War — a speech which later became known as the Truman Doctrine.

The 1949 establishment of NATO, which has since grown to encompass close to 30 countries, has long been a point of contention for the Russian government given the reputation of NATO countries in helping nations like Turkey and Greece evade Soviet rule through economic assistance.

Though Ukraine is not a full-fledged member of NATO, it is considered a “partner country” of the organization, meaning it cooperates closely with the international military alliance but is not guaranteed the same security as countries who have signed the treaty.

Zelensky pleaded with NATO countries Feb. 24 to make Ukraine a no-fly zone in order to deter Russian missiles, warplanes and other projectiles, but his request was rejected. NATO emphasized their role is to focus on conflict prevention rather than conflict resolution — a precedent also illustrated when U.S. troops were prohibited from entering the conflict under the rationale that it could bring war upon every country in the alliance.

Similarly, the NATO website denounced Putin’s aggressive annexation of Crimea in 2014 — catalyzed by former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych abandoning office — as “illegal and illegitimate,” but the only tangible resources provided to the nation were enhanced military training and the establishment of the NATO-Ukraine Trust Funds. 

Despite the prohibition of sending foreign troops into the Russo-Ukrainian conflict, NATO countries are not precluded from providing armory and military supplies to Ukraine — and many of them are. U.S. President Joe Biden authorized $350 million worth of military aid to be sent to Ukraine from the States’ own weapon stocks.

And there lies the irony: NATO countries, which proclaim to occupy an esoteric role in the political sphere as being removed from conflict, can send over millions of dollars worth of weapons to struggling nations but not their own troops. The sad truth? They just don’t want to get their hands dirty.

But when war is already raging in Ukraine and blood has already been spilled, it’s hard to continue justifying a response of non-intervention. 

As history repeats itself, the U.S. and its global allies instead cling to a strategy of containment, which gained popularity in Truman’s presidency. Economic sanctions against Russia and restrictions on travel to and from the country have been enacted by various other nations, all in an attempt to curb the spread of Russian influence to other global communities.

But as Ukraine’s so-called allies sit around waiting for a war to end, over 470 Ukrainian civilians have been killed. More deaths are sure to follow as the country fights what many international officials have called a losing battle with grim consequences almost guaranteed even in the most positive of scenarios. 

Potential outcomes of the Russo-Ukrainian crisis include the possibility of insurgence from both Russians and Ukrainians, partitioning of Ukraine and the onset of World War III. With Russia now having seized two of Ukraine’s five nuclear power plants in addition to their own arsenal of high-tech, chemical weaponry, the global threat of nuclear warfare is not far from reach.

Though we recognize the privilege that accompanies being over 6,000 miles away from the conflict, we’d like to stress the importance of continuing to bring these global conversations to Chapman campus. Especially as the Russian government enacts restrictions on the freedom of the press amid national turmoil, our duty as reporters is to continue fostering an open dialogue to combat the spread of misinformation and authoritarian propaganda.

For readers interested in providing financial support to the Ukrainian community, we’ve provided a few resources to help you get started:

Voices of Children Foundation: Since 2015, this non-profit organization has offered psychological and psychosocial support to children affected by the trauma of war in Ukraine. Currently, the organization is also assisting families in evacuating the nation.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR): UNHCR specializes in emergency relief, which encompasses ushering in humanitarian aid to war-torn countries, providing shelter to refugees and disseminating food, water and medical care to displaced civilians.

International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC): Funded by volunteer donations, the ICRC provides humanitarian assistance to victims of armed conflict. Current donations to the ICRC delegation in Ukraine will be used to help citizens get access to clean water and offer temporary shelter to people whose homes were destroyed.