Editing Francis Fukuyama (section)

===Views following Russian invasion of Ukraine===
A few weeks after the beginning of [[2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine|Russia's invasion of Ukraine]] in February 2022, Fukuyama made several prognoses in the magazine ''American Purpose'':<ref>{{Cite news |first=Francis |last=Fukuyama|date=2022-03-10 |title=Preparing for Defeat |url=https://www.americanpurpose.com/blog/fukuyama/preparing-for-defeat/ |access-date=2022-04-10 |website=American Purpose |language=en|url-status=live|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20220328162743/https://www.americanpurpose.com/blog/fukuyama/preparing-for-defeat/|archive-date=28 March 2022}}</ref>

* Russia was heading towards defeat, with its planning being incompetent and based on flawed assumptions about Ukrainians being favorable to Russia and about the Ukrainian military suffering immediate collapse in an invasion scenario. "Russian soldiers were evidently carrying dress uniforms for their victory parade in Kyiv rather than extra ammo and rations." The bulk of Russia's military had been committed to the invasion and so there were no vast reserves available to it.
* Russia's position could collapse suddenly and catastrophically rather than through a slow [[war of attrition]]. Its army would reach a point where it could be neither resupplied nor withdrawn, and morale would collapse accordingly.
* A Russian defeat was a prerequisite for any diplomatic solution to the war as otherwise both Russia and Ukraine's [[Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian War|losses]] meant that there was no conceivable compromise which they could both accept.
* [[Vladimir Putin]]'s rule over Russia would not survive a military defeat. "He gets support because he is perceived to be a strongman; what does he have to offer once he demonstrates incompetence and is stripped of his coercive power?"
* The invasion had done huge damage to populists such as [[Matteo Salvini]], [[Jair Bolsonaro]], [[Éric Zemmour]], [[Marine Le Pen]], [[Viktor Orbán]], and [[Donald Trump]]; all had expressed sympathy for Putin before the war, and their "openly authoritarian" leanings had been exposed by the war's politics.
* The war thus far had been a "good lesson" for China whose military, like Russia's, was technologically sophisticated but had minimal combat experience. The [[People's Liberation Army Air Force]]'s lack of experience in relation to complex air operations meant that in a future conflict it would likely replicate the poor performance of Russia's air force. "We may hope that the Chinese leadership will not delude itself as to its own capabilities the way the Russians did when contemplating a future move against Taiwan"; as for Taiwan itself, Fukuyama expressed his hope that it would now begin to prepare for a future conflict including by reintroducing conscription.
* "[[Bayraktar TB2|Turkish drones]] will become bestsellers".
* A Russian defeat would permit a "new birth of freedom" and assuage fears about the declining state of global democracy. The spirit of [[Revolutions of 1989|1989]] would live on thanks to Ukraine's bravery.

Fukuyama has also put emphasis on the importance of national identity for a sound defense of liberal values{{snd}}and thus the need to reconcile the nation-state with liberal universalism, even if they seem at odds at first{{snd}}in a ''[[Foreign Affairs]]'' article:<ref>{{Cite news |last=Fukuyama |first=Francis |date=2022-04-05 |title=A Country of Their Own |journal=Foreign Affairs |language=en-US |url=https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukraine/2022-04-01/francis-fukuyama-liberalism-country |access-date=2022-04-10 |issn=0015-7120}}</ref>

<blockquote>Liberalism, with its universalist pretensions, may sit uneasily alongside seemingly parochial nationalism, but the two can be reconciled. The goals of liberalism are entirely compatible with a world divided into nation-states. ... Liberal rights are meaningless if they cannot be enforced by a state. ... The territorial jurisdiction of a state necessarily corresponds to the area occupied by the group of individuals who signed on to the social contract. People living outside that jurisdiction must have their rights respected, but not necessarily enforced, by that state. ... The need for international cooperation in addressing issues such as global warming and pandemics has never been more evident. But it remains the case that one particular form of power, the ability to enforce rules through the threat or the actual use of force, remains under the control of nation-states. . . Ultimate power, in other words, continues to be the province of nation-states, which means that the control of power at this level remains critical. ... There is thus no necessary contradiction between liberal universalism and the need for nation-states. Although the normative value of human rights may be universal, enforcement power is not; it is a scarce resource that is necessarily applied in a territorially delimited way.</blockquote>

In a 2022 interview with ''[[El País]]'', Fukuyama expressed support for [[Social democracy|social democratic]] policies: "In Germany, the Netherlands, Scandinavia, you've had social democratic parties in power for a long time. [They've] done a lot of redistribution – you don't get this kind of polarized politics and you have an alternation between the center-left and center-right, which I think is much healthier." However, Fukuyama also said that he "was never opposed to social democracy. I think that it really depends on the historical period and the degree of state intervention. By the 1960s, many social democratic societies had become mired in low growth [and] high inflation. At that point, I think it was important to roll some of that back. That is, in fact, what happened in Scandinavia. Most of those countries reduced tax rates, reduced levels of regulation and therefore became more productive. But I think that in the current period, we need more social democracy, especially in the United States."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Fanjul |first=Sergio C. |date=2022-09-07 |title=Francis Fukuyama: 'The neoliberals went too far. Now, we need more social democratic policies' |url=https://english.elpais.com/culture/2022-09-07/francis-fukuyama-the-neoliberals-went-too-far-now-we-need-more-social-democratic-policies.html |access-date=2023-08-06 |website=EL PAÍS English |language=en}}</ref>

On June 29, 2023, at an event hosted by [[Stanford University]], Fukuyama met with the delegation from the [[Azov Brigade]], posing for a picture with them and expressing his support "to Ukraine on [their] sure way to victory."<ref>{{cite news |last1=Golinkin |first1=Lev |title=Why did Stanford students host a group of neo-Nazis? |url=https://forward.com/opinion/552958/why-did-stanford-host-azov-neo-nazis/ |access-date=21 April 2025 |work=The Forward |date=3 July 2023 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Regimbal |first1=Alec |title=Famed author, Stanford fellow 'proud to support' far-right Azov group |url=https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/fukuyama-senior-fellow-stanford-far-right-group-18193614.php |access-date=21 April 2025 |work=SFGATE |language=en}}</ref>