U.S. Aid Making a Difference in Ukraine

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• With the help of U.S. and allies’ weapons and assistance, Ukraine has heroically resisted Putin’s invasion for six months.
• Since the 2014 invasion, Republicans in the Senate have pressed both the Biden and Obama administrations, and congressional Democrats, to provide more aid to Ukraine.
• Military assistance to Ukraine is an investment in U.S. security and sends a message to our adversaries, like China, that the U.S. has the resolve and ability to defend its interests and allies.

The Ukrainians continue to defend their country six months after Russia invaded. In recent weeks they began a counteroffensive to retake key territory in the South near Kherson and the northeast near Kharkiv. Ukraine’s success is due in large part to the weapons and training the U.S., NATO, and others have provided.

Bilateral Support for Ukraine as a Share of Each Country’s Economy

Congress passed funding packages to arm the Ukrainians and backfill our own arsenals in March and May. The Biden administration has requested $13.7 billion in supplemental appropriations through the continuing resolution, including $4.5 billion for direct military aid to Ukraine and $2.7 billion for continued U.S. military support operations. The rest of the package would go to the State Department, USAID, and the Department of Energy. The assistance is needed, but it will be incumbent on Republicans in Congress to push the administration to rapidly provide Ukraine with the military capabilities it needs to expel the Russians. If these efforts succeed, not only will Russia’s threat to the west be blunted, but China will learn a valuable lesson about U.S. resolve and support for friends and allies.

Ukraine continues to hold on

On February 24, Russia invaded Ukraine after months of building forces on the border. Vladimir Putin sold this war to the Russian people as a “special operation” to cleanse Ukraine of Nazis. In reality, it was just an attempt to take over a neighboring country. Russia invaded Ukraine from the north, south, and east, with an initial goal of pushing into Kyiv and overthrowing the Ukrainian government in a matter of days. The Ukrainians, who received training and equipment from American and other western militaries after the Russian invasion of Crimea in 2014, pushed them back using western-supplied weapon systems and fighting tactics.

The Department of Defense estimated in early August that “the Russians have probably taken 70 or 80,000 casualties.” After being rebuffed around Kyiv, Russia has consolidated its forces in the east and along areas connected to Crimea, which it already controlled either directly or through proxy forces. The Ukrainians continue to push the invaders along these lines. U.S. weapons like HIMARS, anti-radiation missiles, and other artillery are proving critical in this fight. Longer-range HIMARS systems have been used to destroy Russian ammunition depots and command headquarters, take out strategic bridges, prepare the ground for a Ukrainian offensive, and target Russian units on the battlefield. On September 8, the U.S. announced another package of advanced weapons.

Republicans push more military aid  

Republicans have long called for a tougher approach to Russia and more assistance to Ukraine. President Trump changed U.S. policy to supply Ukraine with lethal assistance such as Javelin anti-tank munitions in 2017. This was a departure from the Obama administration, which provided only non-lethal aid after the invasion of Crimea and the Donbas region despite Congress approving the sales of lethal aid in the Ukraine Freedom Support Act. Republicans in Congress also worked to halt the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, an energy project intended to make Europe more dependent on Russia for energy. The Biden administration vociferously lobbied against those efforts last year in an attempt to appease the Kremlin and German energy interests.

Republicans sounded alarm bells during Russia’s buildup on the Ukrainian border in spring 2021, during the Biden administration’s first year in office. Despite these warnings, the Biden administration allowed NS2 construction to resume and delayed military aid as the Russians continued to move troops to the border. After the invasion in February, the administration delayed routine tests of our strategic nuclear deterrent for fear of “provoking” the Russians. They reportedly even delayed efforts by our allies to provide weapons.

Democrats in Congress followed the same course. Forty-three of them voted against legislation that would have re-implemented NS2 sanctions. They initially agreed with the administration that the first supplemental budgetary package for Ukraine should have included new non-Ukraine-specific spending that supported Democratic domestic priorities like green energy and diverted money from the defense budget to arm the Ukrainians. To protect national security, Senate Republicans focused the aid to help Ukraine defend its territory and added language to preserve DOD’s budget. Senate Republicans have had to fight to ensure Ukraine funding packages contained enough resources, as well as oversight provisions to ensure the money and supplies were being used properly. 

The administration could do more. A United Kingdom-led group of nations is running mass-scale basic training for 10,000 Ukrainian soldiers every three months, and other allies have returned forces to Ukraine to resume the training and support they had conducted prior to the invasion. But the U.S. remains hesitant to do more than small training modules on specific systems, and only after pressure to do so. The Biden administration also has been hesitant to see any allies give Ukraine fighter aircraft. This is despite the Air Force chief of staff expressing support for the eventual delivery of F-16s and other western fighter aircraft to Ukraine.

Military Aid to Ukraine helps the U.S.

Military aid for Ukraine is a strategic investment in the security of the United States. The U.S. has a willing and effective partner to help Ukraine stand up to Putin’s agenda, while keeping his aggression farther from NATO borders. If Ukraine defeats Russia, this will save the U.S. from making larger-scale investments in Europe to deter Russia in the future. A weakened Russian military will be a good thing for the U.S., NATO, European, and international stability. As we and our allies buy new weapons to replace what is being sent to Ukraine, we will help modernize our military industrial base and fill the U.S. arsenal with newer weapons.

United States support to Ukraine also sends a clear message to America’s adversaries that we will not back down and that this kind of reckless rejection of the rule of law will have consequences. This is particularly notable as China’s desire to invade Taiwan grows more obvious. It makes clear that there are significant costs to pay for any authoritarian state that expects a quick military victory when invading its neighbors. We must leave absolutely no doubt in the minds of Russia’s, China’s, or any other nation’s leaders about U.S. resolve to support sovereignty and self-determination around the globe. Decisive military aid to Ukraine will accomplish this task.