Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis are the frontrunners for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. It may well be that, in January 2025, one of them will be president. (In Trump’s case, again.) What they think about the Ukraine war matters.

Trump’s attitude toward Russia and Ukraine is well-known. I believe he is a mortal threat to Ukraine. What about DeSantis?

In his now famous, or infamous, statement to Fox News, DeSantis said that Ukraine was not among our “vital national interests.” That must be music to Vladimir Putin’s ears. DeSantis expressed no sympathy with the Ukrainians, and he had no condemnation for the Kremlin.

He described the Ukraine war as a “territorial dispute.” Again, that must be music to Putin’s ears. The Ukraine war is not a territorial dispute. Russia invaded Ukraine for the purpose of wiping Ukraine out and bringing that country back into an empire ruled by the Kremlin.

In Ukraine, Russian forces have committed mass murder, mass rape, mass torture. War crime upon war crime.

Since 1991, Ukraine has been an independent state, same as other former Soviet “republics”: Georgia, Estonia, and so on. The Ukrainians are fighting to hold on to their country, their freedom. They are fighting for their very right to exist.

Anyone who believes that this war is a “territorial dispute” — what a light little word, “dispute”! — betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of something very important to understand.

Some people have suggested to me that DeSantis is jus’ playin’ — that he knows better, but is offering “boob bait” (in Senator Moynihan’s expression) to primary voters. After all, DeSantis criticized the Obama administration for not being tough enough in its response to Russia’s initial invasion of Ukraine, in 2014.

Frankly, I don’t care. I have no interest whatsoever in the “private views” of politicians (or media personalities). I care about what they tell their audiences — and the broader world.

In his statement to Fox, DeSantis checked off the usual Republican canards: “blank check,” “distraction” from our domestic problems, etc. He also said, “Without question, peace should be the objective.”

Ah, peace, yes. I wrote an entire book about the subject. In the days of the Soviet empire, Margaret Thatcher of the United Kingdom said, “We speak of peace, yes, but whose peace? Poland’s? Bulgaria’s? The peace of the grave?”

Listen to what the foreign minister of Ukraine said about peace:

Does anyone doubt it?

On February 20, President Joe Biden went to Ukraine, to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Ukrainian president, Zelensky, and to demonstrate American solidarity with the Ukrainians at large. Ron DeSantis went to Fox & Friends. In my view, Biden looked very big and DeSantis looked very small.

To Fox, DeSantis spoke a common Republican talking point: Biden cares about Ukraine’s border but he doesn’t care about our border. Because, you see, the Ukraine war is a border dispute (or a territorial dispute).

“While he’s over there,” said DeSantis, “I think I and many Americans are thinking to ourselves: Okay, he’s very concerned about those borders halfway around the world. He’s not done anything to secure our own border here at home.”

Bear in mind, this is not a man auditioning to be a talk-radio host. He is auditioning to be president.

Taiwan is “halfway around the world,” too. (More than halfway?) The Taiwanese are very concerned about their “border,” i.e., their independent island. The rulers in Beijing want to gobble that island. Is Taiwan too far away for Americans to be concerned, or interested?

But to concentrate on eastern Europe: We Americans should resist the temptation to think of the Ukraine war as a “quarrel in a faraway country, between people of whom we know nothing.” Ukraine is the frontline of a broader contest between freedom and tyranny. If Putin were allowed to eat Ukraine, he would not be sated. He would go on to his next meal.

Aggression, if it goes unchecked, will aggress on. Once more, a dictator is redrawing the borders of Europe by force. We have seen this before.

The new Right, or whatever you want to call it, likes to snort about “zombie Reaganism.” Yet certain principles and cautions apply to any era. Human beings have gathered a lot of experience, over the centuries. Conservatives especially should appreciate this.

In 1983, Reagan said, “In your discussions of the nuclear-freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride.” The temptation to declare oneself “above it all” and to “label both sides equally at fault.” To “ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire.” To “call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.”

Yes.

Last month, Condoleezza Rice noted, “We are defending not just Ukrainian independence.” No, “we are defending a rules-based system that says: Might doesn’t make right. You can’t just extinguish your neighbor.”

Isn’t that elementary?

I hear people say, “America shouldn’t be defending some international rules-based system! We should be defending our national interest!” What makes them think such a system is not in the national interest?

Countries ally with one another for good reason. There is such a thing as “the West.” This is not a geographical concept (although it is that in part). It has to do with values and interests. Here is an example of what the West looks like:

And here is something else altogether:

“Welcome, Excellency!” indeed.

When Putin launched his all-out assault on Ukraine in February 2022, the Swedes and the Finns did not have to see any more: They applied for NATO membership. I hope they get it. Viktor Orbán, of Hungary, is a stumbling block.

Are the Swedes and the Finns more realistic, more clear-eyed, about Russia than U.S. Republicans are? It seems they are. Are U.S. Democrats more realistic, more clear-eyed, than Republicans? I can’t tell you how astonishing — how weird — that is for some of us.

Here is David French:

It could be that the Right is, in a sense, coming home. Russell Kirk voted for Norman Thomas, the Socialist nominee, in the 1944 presidential election. He did so on grounds that President Roosevelt and Governor Dewey were militarists. In 1976, Kirk voted for Eugene McCarthy, the left-wing Democrat, who was running as an independent that year. He did so on grounds that President Ford and Governor Carter were militarists.

From Kirk, the Buckley-Reagan conservatives were very different.

I hope that the Ukrainians can accomplish as much as possible in the next year and a half. Obviously, the support of the United States is not guaranteed. Since February 2022, I have frequently quoted Charles Krauthammer, on Israel. The survival of Israel, he said, depends on two things: the will of the people to survive and the support of the United States. I believe the same is true of Ukraine.

If we cease to support Ukraine, the Ukrainians will regret it, yes. Boy, will they. But other people, including Americans, will likely regret it too.