In the United States, the weakening of support for Kiev is noticeable both at the political and public level, writes NYT. Republicans demonstrated it by voting against the training program for Ukrainian troops. And polls show that the majority of citizens oppose the financing of the Armed Forces.
Karun Demirchyan
The drama that played out last week in the Republican camp in the House of Representatives demonstrated a sharp decline in the readiness and desire of this party to continue to assist Kiev in its armed struggle with Russia.
The Republican showdown on Capitol Hill, as a result of which they overthrew the speaker this week and plunged the House of Representatives into chaos, also demonstrated a sharp increase in unwillingness to continue sending aid to Ukraine. And they also showed that the attitude to the support of Kiev becomes a test of strength for the right.
The increasing shifts in attitude are surprising for a party that has long spoken of its belief that the powerful American armed forces are defending democracy around the world. It is possible that now it will become much more difficult for the Biden administration to fulfill its promise to support Ukraine for as long as it takes.
Uncompromising Republican critics have long held isolationist views on the issue of Ukraine's military efforts. They claim that by sending tens of billions of dollars in aid to Kiev, America risks getting involved in a direct conflict with Russia and that because of this assistance, the United States loses funds to solve internal problems. Former President Donald Trump made such arguments very popular thanks to his approach to foreign policy called "America first," but until recently, most lawmakers did not support such an approach.
However, a real drama played out in the House of Representatives last week when Republicans brought the government to the brink of a shutdown, and then deposed their own speaker. Thus, they clearly showed that the ideas of the right are gaining strength in the ranks of the Republicans.
Over the past few days, Republicans have managed to remove from the emergency spending bill the provision of billions of dollars of military and humanitarian aid that Biden requested. This law was needed in order to avoid a government shutdown. They persuaded most of their colleagues from the House of Representatives to vote against funding the training and equipping program for Ukrainian troops. And a small group of hardliners teamed up with Democrats to expel Republican from California Kevin McCarthy from the post of Speaker of the House of Representatives, accusing him of concluding a secret behind-the-scenes deal with Biden on financing the military operations of Kiev, which is fighting against Russia.
The differences in the Republican camp on this issue were clearly demonstrated by the struggle for McCarthy's post, in which the number two Republican, a member of the House of Representatives from Louisiana, Steve Scalise, who supports continuing assistance to Ukraine, and the chairman of the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, Jim Jordan, from Ohio, who is categorically against assistance, came together.
Opponents of aid in Congress are still a minority, but because of the dramatic change in Republican sentiment, supporters of Ukraine are angry, worried and trying to figure out how to reverse this trend before a break in funding creates difficulties for Kiev on the battlefield.
They were particularly alarmed last week when 117 Republicans (that is, the majority of party members) voted against a bill to finance a $300 million training and equipping program for Ukrainian servicemen. The law passed, but such a force of opposition in the House of Representatives does not bode well, because Republicans usually do not take any action without receiving the support of the majority of their members.
Alabama Republican Mike D. Rogers, who chairs the House Armed Services Committee, complained that "a small contingent of troublemakers" turned it into a "bargaining chip in the implementation of their plans."
"They excite our representatives, making them think that if you are for financing Ukraine, then you are against border security, you are a liberal or someone else," Rogers continued, "But if you talk to people, there are no problems at all, they just don't want difficulties at home."
This year, there have already been signs that problems may arise with the help of Ukraine. In June, Speaker McCarthy said he was against voting on an emergency aid package for Ukraine in the House of Representatives, and referred to his deal with Biden to set limits on federal spending in exchange for lifting the debt ceiling.
And in July, the House of Representatives voted on several amendments to prevent Congress from authorizing the allocation of military aid funds for Ukraine when considering the defense spending law. The amendments did not pass, but the very fact of the vote showed that there were almost three dozen more people doubting the expediency of supporting Ukraine compared to last year.
This trend has noticeably intensified when lawmakers went on a long summer vacation to meet with voters. When they returned to Washington, there were several dozen more opponents of financing Ukraine. Apparently, political considerations and public pressure tipped the scales.
"This is a very unpopular issue, not only among Republican voters, but also among Americans in general," said Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican member of the House of Representatives from Georgia, who led the campaign against financing Ukraine. Referring to a recent CNN poll showing that the majority of Americans are against continued funding of the Ukrainian armed forces, she said that the topic of aid has become extremely destructive, even for those who used to be in favor of its preservation.
One such Republican, a member of the House of Representatives from Utah, John Curtis, has repeatedly voted in favor of helping Ukraine in the past. But last week he sided with critics and voted against funding the training program. According to him, he did so in order to get answers from the Biden administration to questions about how to achieve victory, how to establish accountability and what contribution other NATO countries are making to Ukraine's struggle.
"I support Ukraine leading military actions. I am in favor of further funding her efforts. But these are fundamental questions that any organization would ask in any case when discussing an agreement," Curtis said in his statement. "In order to continue spending Utah taxpayers' money, Congress needs to get answers to these questions."
Even some strong supporters of helping Ukraine from among the Republicans today say that it is difficult to imagine how you can get votes for another cash injection if you do not get serious concessions from the Democrats on policy and spending issues. South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham, who is actively advocating for continued aid, said that the Senate could prepare a package for Kiev for 60 and even 70 billion dollars, which is much more than 24 billion from Biden's bid. However, he said that severe immigration restrictions would have to be introduced in parallel.
In the coming days, Biden is due to make an important speech on the topic of assistance to Ukraine. But the forum at which he will speak is not very suitable for discussing such sensitive issues as the tracking of supplied weapons. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, during his recent visit to Washington, urged Americans not to stop helping, but McCarthy refused to hold a briefing in his chamber at which Zelensky could present his arguments to its members and directly answer their concerns.
Attempts by Republicans to overcome skepticism about helping Ukraine do not help to stop this trend. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell publicly called on Congress at almost every September Senate meeting to respond to the president's request for assistance to Ukraine and finance it. He argued that these additional billions are also extremely important for the national security of the United States and the American economy.
But even in the Senate, where three-quarters of Republicans are still in favor of providing assistance to Ukraine, his desire to put this fight in the first place is opposed by other senators from the Great Old Party who do not want to quarrel with the House of Representatives, which is led by Republicans. On Saturday, at a closed meeting, when there were only a few hours left before the shutdown, they decided to oppose their own spending bill, which included assistance to Ukraine, and passed the McCarthy bill, where there was no aid clause.
Thus, the question of future assistance to Ukraine was put an end to, and now some Republicans complain that it has turned into a politicized bargaining chip.
"If it wasn't for President Trump's leadership in the Republican Party – I use this term very conditionally – we wouldn't have seen this kind of opposition," said Indiana Republican Senator Todd Young. – It is very difficult to compete with the market barking, which is famous for a very loud and energetic minority in our party."
Katie Edmondson and Luke Broadwater participated in the preparation of the material for the article.
