The Talented Mr. J.D. Vance or Cognitive Dissonance

 When I first encountered J.D. Vance's remarks about Ukraine and saw the face of this man, I was struck by two things: 1. The limitations of strategic thinking. 2. An expression of narrow-mindedness on his face. His statement, “I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine” (POLITICO), shocked me. Such indifference to the fate of Ukraine, which is my homeland and is in a difficult situation following the Russian invasion, was astounding.

I'm not just talking about basic empathy towards the Ukrainian people, whom Russia is trying to erase from the face of the earth with 3,000-kilogram bombs in the center of Europe as you read these lines. Perhaps empathy is too strict a requirement for participants in the modern political vanity fair. However, I am referring to elementary strategic thinking that should be inherent in a U.S. senator.

Upon further investigation, I discovered more statements by Mr. J.D. Vance regarding Ukraine:

1. Skepticism of Military Aid: Vance has consistently opposed U.S. military aid to Ukraine, arguing that it harms the U.S. economy and depletes critical resources. He has described aid packages as strategic quagmires that undermine national security by exhausting American resources (POLITICO, National Review).
2. Doubts on Accountability: He claimed that Ukraine is not properly accounting for donated weapons, citing concerns about the mismanagement of sensitive technology and military equipment. This has been disputed by Ukrainian officials who report detailed tracking of U.S. weapons (POLITICO).
3. Concerns Over Manufacturing Capacity: Vance pointed out that American manufacturing capacity limits the amount of munitions that can be sent to Ukraine, suggesting that the West cannot outproduce Russia in terms of weaponry (POLITICO).
4. Manpower Shortages: He argued that Ukraine cannot field enough soldiers, even with stringent conscription policies, due to its smaller population compared to Russia (POLITICO).
5. Prediction of War Outcome: Vance has expressed skepticism about Ukraine's ability to win the war, highlighting the potential for an "endless war" that Americans would not tolerate (POLITICO, National Review).

These isolationist and economically nationalistic views might seem to belong to a limited and perhaps slightly underdeveloped person, I thought. Imagine my surprise when I found out that Mr. Vance is a writer and graduated from Yale, an institution where I barely survived earning a certificate in contract law. Hence, by definition, Mr. Vance is a person of high intelligence. This is where cognitive dissonance arises between what Mr. Vance claims and who he is.

What motivates Mr. Vance, an intelligent and insightful person, to make these statements? Internal conviction or political expediency? Trying to answer this question and knowing that Mr. Vance is now a supporter and vice president candidate under Donald Trump, I looked into Vance's statements about Trump during the 2016 election. Here are some notable examples:

1. Comparison to Hitler: In a 2016 text message to a former roommate, Vance suggested that Trump could be "America's Hitler," expressing deep concern about Trump's potential impact on the country (The Week).
2. Calling Trump an Idiot: In another message, Vance referred to Trump as an "idiot," highlighting his strong disapproval of Trump's intellect and leadership qualities (People).
3. "Never Trump" Stance: Vance identified himself as a "Never Trump guy" during the 2016 election, making it clear that he did not support Trump's candidacy and was firmly opposed to his policies and rhetoric (People).
4. Unfit for Office: In an April 2016 New York Times piece, Vance declared that Trump was "unfit for our nation’s highest office," criticizing his suitability for the presidency (People).
5. Cultural Heroin: Vance described Trump as "cultural heroin" in a July 2016 article for The Atlantic, arguing that Trump's promises were empty and would not solve the underlying issues facing America, likening his appeal to the temporary high of a drug (People).
6. Dark Place for the Working Class: On NPR, Vance warned that Trump was leading the white working class "to a very dark place" with campaign promises he found to be either immoral or absurd (People).
7. Reprehensible and Fomenting Division: In since-deleted tweets, Vance called Trump "reprehensible" and condemned him for fomenting fear and division within the country (People, The Week).

It is noteworthy that over the years, Mr. Vance has changed his position and become a supporter of Donald Trump. This evolution gives us hope that Mr. Vance might also reconsider his stance on Ukraine and become a supporter of Ukrainian sovereignty and defense if he comes to power as vice president of the United States.

Glory to Ukraine!