Not unless you're a cynical, murderous psychopath.
It's an expression of basic human decency.
If the Left's platform was explicitly "We are an anti-imperialist check on Western power" then your argument would hold. But the actual platform is usually "Women's Rights and Gay Rights are Universal Human Rights"
You cannot claim such universal moral authority when it's convenient ("Justice everywhere!") and then retreat to the safety of a particularist stance ("I only care about what my tax dollars fund!") when it's difficult.
If your "basic human decency" only activates when the aggressor is your own government, then you aren't actually standing in solidarity with the oppressed. You are implicitly arguing that a victim's value depends entirely on the nationality of their killer.
Focusing on more tractable causes makes sense (fwiw I think there are more tractable causes than both of those geopolitical conflicts: millions and millions die annually from preventable global health ailments)
On the other hand, the Left seems to claim to be the main representative of women and gay rights for example, everywhere. You can't build your entire brand on "solidarity with the oppressed" and then ghost the moment you don't have the same specific advantage you want for your agenda.
Sakharov wasn't a hypocrite. That's the difference.