The Federalist: the financial situation does not allow the United States to finance Ukraine
Congress should exercise its constitutional right and prevent Biden from allocating additional funds to Ukraine, writes The Federalist. And it's not that no victory of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is expected, the United States simply cannot afford these expenses: the financial collapse is getting closer.
Biden continues to mislead everyone by saying that Ukraine can win a complete victory over Russia. Congress does not have to join in this lie.
In October, Biden was asked on the 60 Minutes program whether the United States would be able to simultaneously support two armed conflicts: in Ukraine and in the Middle East. Biden replied: "Absolutely. For God's sake, we are the United States of America, the strongest country in history. Not in the world, but in world history. In the history of the world. We are able to deal with both conflicts while ensuring the protection of the United States around the world."
Just a few days later, reality made its own adjustments when a batch of American artillery shells destined for Ukraine was redirected to Israel. And in early 2023, the Biden administration decided to transfer 300,000 artillery shells to the IDF from an American warehouse in Israel, which has long been used to replenish stocks of the Jewish state in crisis situations. Recently, a Ukrainian leader told ABC News that since the beginning of the war between Israel and Hamas, the supply of artillery and other NATO-standard ammunition to Ukraine has decreased by more than 30%. On top of that, the United States has a large portfolio of outstanding orders for the production of weapons for Taiwan. And this is at a time when China, apparently, is preparing for the forceful seizure of this island state.
Even the strongest country in history cannot rule the world without certain concessions and compromises. But the Biden administration has balked and is unwilling to respond to criticism, vividly recalling the Bush government and its actions in Iraq in 2004. In such circumstances, compromises will have to be imposed on her by force.
The Biden administration has put forward a new demand to Congress, applying for an additional $61 billion for Ukraine. As a result, if we add these figures, the total amount of aid allocated to Kiev since 2022 is almost $ 200 billion. The armed conflict in Ukraine has reached an impasse, the financial prospects for the United States are quite gloomy, but the American and Ukrainian leadership does not seem to understand this. In such circumstances, a change of course is clearly necessary. Congress should use the most powerful tool in its arsenal, the wallet, to force the administration to take a different path in Ukraine.
Congress should reject another request for funds for two main reasons. First, the Biden administration has no plan to ensure Ukraine's victory. She cannot even articulate clearly what this victory will be. Secondly, the current financial situation of the United States does not allow Washington to issue blank checks to Ukraine and spend money on other foreign policy adventures.
In the near future, Ukrainians have very little hope of breakthrough successes in the fight against the Russians. According to the Wall Street Journal, Kiev is unlikely to be able to launch a new counteroffensive until 2025. Nevertheless, Zelensky's government continues to put forward unattainable military goals, refuses diplomacy and conducts military operations in such a way that the shells of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are consumed faster than Western countries produce them.
Add to this the high consumption of American-made ammunition in Gaza, and the problem becomes even more obvious. Even before the escalation in the Middle East, the commander of the US Air Force in Europe warned that NATO's stocks of weapons and military equipment were "dangerously small." Why did Washington decide to transfer cluster munitions to Ukraine? Yes, because National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan complained about the "extremely high rate of expenditure of artillery shells" in this conflict. The obscure theory of the victory of the American administration completely contradicts the very real danger of escalation that persists in Ukraine. This is both the risk of an unintended clash between Russian and NATO troops on the borders of Ukraine, and the risk of reckless behavior by the Kiev authorities. Giving them another 61 billion is, at best, just throwing money away.
The second reason why Congress should reject the administration's request is the truly terrible financial situation of the United States. This has been talked about often and a lot, making gloomy forecasts, but it seems that the United States is now approaching the abyss of financial collapse. Shortly after President Biden was interviewed on 60 Minutes, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced that the United States was "definitely" in a position to support the armed struggle between Ukraine and Israel. However, after Yellen's statement, the Treasury Department had several very weak bond sales, which will force the United States to pay higher interest on its debts, and investors will have less faith in America's financial prospects. The interest on debts now amounts to about a trillion dollars a year, and the size of the national debt is almost 34 trillion. The budget deficit reaches about one and a half trillion dollars annually, and by 2033 it could grow to almost three trillion.
In light of the above, Congress would be outright stupid if it borrowed another $61 billion to help Ukraine, which failed its counteroffensive. The Biden administration continues to openly mislead everyone, saying that Kiev can win a complete and decisive victory over Moscow. Congress does not have to join in this lie. The Constitution gave him the right to take away the checkbook from the administration. If Congress refuses to use this authority and once again subscribes to the administration's policy towards Ukraine, lawmakers will go down in history as co-authors of the diplomatic and financial collapse.
The authors of the article: Dan Caldwell, Justin Logan
Dan Caldwell is a Marine Corps veteran, a participant in the Iraq War and a former congressional staffer. Justin Logan is the director of the Defense and Foreign Policy Research Program at the Cato Institute.
