From Military.com:
“Future of
US Support for Ukraine at Stake as GOP Grapples with Rift Over Aid”
As the war in
Ukraine enters its sixth month and shows no signs of abating, a Republican rift
is growing over U.S. military support for Ukraine's fight against Russian
invaders. Which side of the GOP wins out could determine the extent of U.S. aid
going forward if Republicans win control of Congress in November's midterm
elections, as political forecasters are predicting will happen. On one side, a
small yet vocal faction of the Republican party that opposes the aid is getting
noisier, warning they will fight to cut off the support if the GOP wins in
November. On the other side are the more hawkish voices in the party that are
taking the opposite stance -- that the Biden administration has been too
cautious in providing military aid and needs to ship more advanced weapons more
quickly to give Ukraine any chance of winning. Some from both camps are
suggesting that U.S. military advisers enter the country to monitor weapons
shipments in a move that could put American troops in harm's way.
For now,
bipartisan support remains strong for the billions of dollars in U.S. weapons
that have been flowing into Ukraine, and some House lawmakers in both parties
sought to downplay the prospect of aid drying up after November as they emerged
Wednesday from a closed-door briefing on Ukraine with administration officials.
"We've seen bipartisan support for Ukraine's fight for freedom," Rep.
Michael Waltz, R-Fla., who was part of a bipartisan congressional delegation
that went to Kyiv over the weekend, said after Wednesday's briefing with Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy Colin Kahl; director of operations for the
Joint Staff Lt. Gen. Douglas Sims II; and other officials.
Still, amid
domestic concerns such as inflation, Waltz added that "we constantly need
to talk about why this is in our interest." The last time Congress voted
on Ukraine aid -- a $40 billion military and humanitarian aid package approved
in May -- 57 House Republicans and 11 Senate Republicans voted against it. While
a minority in their party, those Republicans are digging in with vows to cut
off U.S. assistance to Ukraine if their party wins control of Congress in
November. When Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., tweeted earlier this month that
"if the Republicans take over the House in 2022 US support to Ukraine will
come to a halt," Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., replied that "Ruben is
correct." Democrats have seized on such comments to warn about fractures
in the bipartisan support that Ukraine aid has garnered since the start of the
war. "I worry about rhetoric in the Republican primaries, from the MAGA
right, from the extreme right," Rep. Jake Auchincloss, D-Mass., a Marine
Corps veteran, said Wednesday, referencing former President Donald Trump's
"Make America Great Again" slogan. "It was [Republican Senate
nominee] J.D. Vance in Ohio who notoriously said, 'I don't care what happens to
Ukraine.' And Tucker Carlson, who's the spokesman for the extreme right, who
has queried repeatedly why we're contesting Ukraine with Vladimir Putin." But
Auchincloss also gave "great credit [to] a lot of Republicans in Congress,
[who] have stood up to the extreme right and they have said, 'No, this is going
to be bipartisan.'"
After failing
in its initial goal of quickly seizing Kyiv, Russia has been finding more
success in the eastern Donbas region, where it has been wearing Ukrainian
forces down with a barrage of artillery fire. The West has responded by upping
its military support for Ukrainian forces with heavier weaponry, including High
Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, or HIMARS, from the U.S. military, that has
been credited with slowing Russia's advance. Most recently, the Biden
administration announced another $270 million weapons package last week that
included up to 580 Phoenix Ghost explosive drones. And, after resisting calls
from Ukrainian leaders and U.S. lawmakers early in the invasion to provide
Ukraine with U.S. military aircraft, Air Force officials have begun expressing
more openness to the idea. Some Republicans are walking a tightrope on the
issue of aid. Rep. Ronny Jackson, R-Texas, a former Navy officer who voted
against Ukraine aid in May, said Wednesday he would support funding if U.S.
military advisers were on the ground in Ukraine ensuring the aid is used
properly, something he readily acknowledged risks mission creep. "We'll
have to wait and see what happens," Jackson said when asked whether he
expects his party to scale back support for Ukraine if it wins in the midterms.
"I think it's important to support them to the extent we can, but we can't
spend our entire national treasure in a war over there. There has to be a
balance." Waltz, who is on the side that the Biden administration has
moved too slowly and is only helping Ukraine "play for a tie" and
"lose slowly," also backed the idea of putting U.S. "logistics
planners and operations planners" in Ukraine to provide oversight of the
aid. "This is the largest military aid package since World War II,"
Waltz said Wednesday when asked whether putting advisers on the ground risks
pulling the United States deeper into the war. "There are literally
billions of dollars of equipment going in. We're pushing it over the border,
and we're essentially blind as to where it's going, who's utilizing it. So to
me, it's just responsible oversight."
Mindful of
Russia's advantage in a war of attrition and the potential for the West to lose
interest in a prolonged conflict regardless of who's in power in Washington,
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has called on the United States and its
allies to help bring the war to a close soon. "We can achieve a lot of
things before the end of the year, and we can stop this war," Zelenskyy
said in an interview with CNN earlier this month. In the meantime, lawmakers
who support arming Ukraine are warning the war is reaching a critical stage
that could require an evolution in U.S. support. "The next phase of this
war will require longer-range munitions, more sophisticated drones and a closer
connection with advisers provided by the United States and others," Rep.
Jason Crow, D-Colo., said Wednesday. "We don't necessarily need to send
advisers into Ukraine. There's ways that we can provide that support. But we
need to help the Ukrainians evolve the sophistication of their military as they
look at potentially conducting counteroffensives this fall as President
Zelenskyy has publicly talked about. That's a different type of operation that
requires different types of military training and planning."
^ Supporting
Ukraine is not about being a Republican or being a Democrat. It is not about
being a Liberal or being a Conservative. It is not about being pro-America.
Supporting Ukraine is about being against Genocide.
There can be
no more question about whether to support Ukraine over supporting Russia. The
Russian War Crimes in Ukraine (ie. the Bucha Massacre) got rid of that argument
long ago. You are either for human life (and support Ukraine) or against human
life (and support Russia.) There is no Grey Line.
If the
Republicans or the Democrats do not continue to support Ukraine (with words,
actions and funding) then they are supporting Russia’s War Crimes and are just
as guilty as the Russians themselves. ^
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.