The Free World's Betrayal: 21st Century Fascism Finds a Patron

The reduction of funding for military assistance to Ukraine in the 2026 U.S. defense budget is being presented as “rationalization,” “accountability to taxpayers,” and a “pursuit of peace.” Yet behind this official diplomatic rhetoric lies something far more dangerous: the West’s capitulation to a fascist regime attempting to redraw borders and reshape the global order through force.

The Kremlin Is About Fascism, Not Just “Authoritarianism”

By all definitions — from Robert Paxton to Umberto Eco — Vladimir Putin’s regime meets the classic criteria of fascism:

• a cult of leadership and military valor,
• a revanchist ideology of “historical mission,”
• a mobilized population under the control of propaganda,
• war as a form of “purification” and “redress of historical grievances.”

Putin is not conducting a “military operation” — he has launched a new type of fascist expansionism. His goal is not Donbas, nor “Russia’s security,” but the dismantling of the post–World War II global order.

The U.S. as a Co-Author of Putin’s Future War

When Pentagon officials speak of a “peaceful settlement in the interest of both sides,” it sounds like a cynical renunciation of the very doctrine of deterring aggression.
 What kind of peace is possible with a regime that rapes children, destroys cities, tortures civilians, and bombs civilian energy infrastructure?

This is not a “conflict.” It is a war waged by a fascist state against international law, freedom, and human dignity. If the U.S. truly believes that “both sides have interests,” it implies moral symmetry between the executioner and the victim.

To pressure Ukraine into “negotiations” means:

• legitimizing the annexation of its territories,
• granting the Russian army time to regroup,
• demoralizing NATO partners,
• and signaling to China: Taiwan is next.

Is This Beneficial to the U.S.? Only If the U.S. Admits It Is No Longer a Global Leader

The argument “let’s invest at home, not in a European war” is seductive populism. But it’s self-deception. If Russia wins — or even locks in the status quo — America will pay:

• economically: European markets will become vulnerable to blackmail,
• militarily: NATO will have to defend a direct border with Russia,
• geopolitically: China will gain a free hand in Asia,
• morally: democracy will lose its strength as a global model.

And most importantly — it will be a loss of trust.
 If the U.S. abandons a nation that has walked toward it for ten years, sacrificing everything — why should any other country follow Western standards?

The U.S. Must Choose Not “War or Peace,” But Defeat of Evil or Its Triumph

Yes, supporting Ukraine is not charity. But it is the cheapest way to stop a global war without direct intervention.
 Instead of saying “we are tired of war,” one should say: we are tired of pretending that peace is possible with fascists.

In 1938, Munich was hailed as “a victory of reason over war.” One year later, World War II began.
 2025 is the repetition of that mistake.
 Let us not repeat it again.