GOP’s blocking of Ukraine aid would be a national security debacle

Is it really possible that the GOP is about to kneecap Ukraine on the battlefield by cutting off all U.S. military aid to Kyiv?

Are Republican legislators, who constantly trumpet their patriotism, really prepared to stab America in the back (a phrase often politically abused but wholly accurate here) by handing Russian President Vladimir Putin a huge potential victory at a terrifying cost to U.S. security?

Yes, and yes.

On the eve of a crucial Senate vote on funding weapons for Ukraine, it appeared that GOP members would block the aid. “We are on the verge of stopping funding,” I was recently told by Sen. Chris Coons. The Delaware Democrat is among the sane legislators working hard to prevent this debacle.

“Without congressional action by the end of the year,” wrote President Joe Biden’s top budget official, Shalanda Young, to congressional leadership, “we will run out of resources to procure more weapons and equipment for Ukraine and to provide equipment from U.S. military stocks.”

So let me puncture one by one the arguments Republicans are using to justify their blinkered determination to undermine Kyiv — and then address what Biden should do to push back.

» READ MORE: In the war between Ukraine and Russia, which side is the GOP on? | Trudy Rubin

Led by House Speaker Mike Johnson, the GOP has tied Ukraine funding to “transformative change” in U.S. policy on the southern border. Yes, a revamping of border policy is needed, but it will require difficult bipartisan negotiations. Yet, by making Ukraine aid “dependent upon enactment” of draconian border changes, Johnson shows he isn’t serious about either crisis. (Many GOP senators, notably Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, support Ukraine aid, but have bowed to the House linkage with immigration reform.)

Johnson and his MAGA backers display an amazing indifference to the security costs of handing Putin a potential victory over Ukraine. Perhaps they have drunk the Kool-Aid of Donald Trump’s promise to solve the Ukraine issue within 24 hours by making a deal with Putin — i.e., by conceding to him the Ukrainian territory that Russia has occupied, which will destroy Ukraine as an independent country.

Should Putin emerge triumphant, this will comprise the most critical strategic defeat for the United States since the end of the Cold War. Ukraine’s collapse, abetted by the U.S., would confirm that the West has no stomach to push back against Putin’s efforts to rebuild Russia’s empire, including partial territorial grabs of neighboring countries and interference in other regions. China, Iran, and North Korea will be watching closely.

Moreover, the U.S. betrayal of Ukraine would strengthen the assessment by America’s friends and enemies that Washington is no longer an ally that can be trusted, thereby undermining America’s alliances in Europe and Asia.

Nor will the Europeans, who now provide more aid to Ukraine than the United States, be able to provide the key weapons systems produced in this country. As Sen. Coons pointed out, U.S. leadership is critical in keeping the Western alliance together in supporting Ukraine. “If we back off, many of the other countries will find reasons to back off,” he said. “If we continue to lead, others will follow.”

None of this seems to trouble the MAGA crowd.

GOP gripes on Ukraine go beyond border policy, raising the issue of corruption in Kyiv. Yet they never mention that the Pentagon has multiple systems to check where the money goes, nor that the bulk of the funding previously authorized by Congress comes right back to the United States. The funds mostly go to purchase updated U.S. weapons systems, while the Ukrainians get the older systems the Pentagon is phasing out.

There is one — and only one — Republican concern that I would echo, and that is that the administration presents clearly defined and obtainable objectives to Congress and the U.S. public regarding the conflict.

By seizing this opportunity, I believe Biden could rejuvenate public support for Ukraine aid and turn the pressure back on the GOP. To do this, however, he would have to change his Ukraine approach, from that of keeping Kyiv afloat to making a determined effort to ensure the Ukrainians win.

» READ MORE: Documentary sheds light on Putin’s mass murder in Ukraine | Trudy Rubin

One reason Ukraine’s counteroffensive against Moscow has stalled is that Biden is still hesitating to give Ukraine key weapons systems.

The delay in delivering F-16 fighter jets — and training pilots — has left Kyiv without necessary air support and defense of its ground forces. Meanwhile, Biden’s continued refusal to send long-range missiles that can travel 300 kilometers with a single powerful warhead, known as ATACMS, has deprived Ukraine of a critical weapon that could help cut off Russian access to the Crimean Peninsula, which it now occupies. Long-range ATACMS could strike Moscow’s bases in Crimea along with its fleet in the Black Sea.

Despite the Pentagon’s claims that it has no ATACMS to spare, Lockheed Martin has an active production line manufacturing 500 in fiscal year 2024, with most or all of them being exported to countries that are not at war.

“Even a couple of dozen could make a huge difference,” I was told by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Bradley Bowman, a weapons and security expert. While not a silver bullet, ATACMS could do real damage to the Kerch Bridge linking Russian territory to Crimea and put Putin on the back foot.

While President Biden deserves credit for his strong support of Ukraine, he needs to clarify why it is so important for Kyiv to drive the Russians out, and provide the weapons for it to do so. That is the key to pushing back against the blinkered MAGA crowd who would rather see Putin win.