Without US Aid, Ukraine Will Face Armageddon: Part 1
It is September 1940. In Western Europe, the United Kingdom faces the Nazi onslaught alone. Should the United States help the UK defend itself? Or should America take care of its own pressing problems, with its 25% unemployment rate, and leave the Brits to fend for themselves? After all, Hitler is no threat to the US, right?
Today the United States faces a similar choice. Do we continue to help Ukraine, a democratic, capitalist country, fight off the Russian invaders? Or do we stand by and allow Vladimir Putin to destroy a sovereign nation?
President Biden has proposed giving Ukraine a supplemental package of $60 billion, including $47 billion for military purposes. Tragically, many far-right Republicans in Congress oppose any additional support for that beleaguered country. We will analyze their objections and misconceptions. We will also discuss the likely consequences if the US were to abandon the Ukrainians.
Objection #1: The US Cannot Afford More Aid to Ukraine
Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor-Greene, and others on the far-right fringe of the Republican Party claim that aid to Ukraine creates a huge strain on the national budget, which prevents the US from addressing problems on the southern border. They are simply wrong.
On the other side of the aisle, most progressive Democrats in Congress have condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and supported the Biden Administration’s policy of supporting the country. However, In October 2022, 30 progressives signed a letter calling upon the Administration to engage in direct talks with the Kremlin to seek a negotiated end to the conflict. They expressed concern about the threat of nuclear war and a desire to end the bloodshed in Ukraine.
An uproar ensued, and the group retracted its letter the following day. Since then, the Administration has not faced major dissent among Democrats on its policy toward Ukraine.
The US has enacted about $113 billion in response to the war in Ukraine over the last two fiscal years since Russia launched its invasion. Roughly half, or about $70 billion, has been allocated to military expenditures. The balance consists of financial support for the Ukrainian government and humanitarian assistance for civilians.
That is a substantial amount of money, to be sure, but we must look at these figures in the context of the overall US budget. The Federal government spends about $6.3 trillion each year, with our annual military expenditures running approximately $800 billion. Over two years, federal spending was about $12.3 trillion and military spending about $1.6 trillion. So, in 2022 and 2023, our total aid to Ukraine represented less than 1% of the Federal budget. The $70 billion in military assistance constituted only about 4% of US defense spending. These aid programs are a small drain on our resources.
Objection #2: Ukraine is Corrupt, So the Money Might be Wasted
Rep. Taylor-Greene has repeatedly demanded an audit of US assistance, as she insinuates that the funds are being siphoned off or wasted in other ways.
But in fact, 60% of the funds—or $68 billion-- are spent in the US, according to Mark Cancian, a Marine Colonel (Ret.) and a Senior Advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. That is not surprising, Mr. Cancian points out, because 90% of military allocations are used to pay American arms manufacturers. These expenditures help to support jobs for American workers, who are producing the weapons destined for Ukraine.
Another 10%--$11 billion--is allocated to supporting US troops who were deployed in Eastern Europe to assist NATO allies, such as Poland, after the Russians invaded Ukraine. The Pentagon knows how that money is spent.
Still, it is possible that some humanitarian aid or governmental assistance funds could be misused. Ukraine remains a corrupt country. However, President Zelensky has recently fired high-level officials because of corruption charges, so he takes the issue seriously.
Ukrainian soldiers in the field/Getty Images
Objection #3: The EU Doesn’t Do Enough to Help Ukraine
Donald Trump and his minions also complain that the European Union is not “doing its share”. The US has been the largest single country donor. However, the 27 European Union members, taken together, have provided the same amount of support. The US and the EU have both contributed about 71 billion euros ($77 billion) through October 31, 2023, according to the Kiel Institute’s Ukraine Support Tracker.
To approximate the actual spending to date, we have used Kiel’s figures for short-term commitments, rather than long-term commitments, which can stretch out over several years.
The EU Focuses on Financial Support
One source of possible confusion is that the US has contributed the lion’s share of military equipment, while the EU has provided more financial support for the Ukrainian government and humanitarian aid. That is a reasonable division of responsibilities, since America has bigger stockpiles of military hardware and is a larger weapons producer.
The financial support is critical, as the Kyiv government is running enormous deficits because of the war. Payments from the EU and other donors have funded about half of Ukraine’s budget since the Russians invaded the country. This assistance has enabled the government to pay retirees’ pensions and provide basic services by paying civil servants’ salaries.
Norway, Baltics, Poland Stand Out
When we compare the contributions from individual countries in dollar terms, the US is Ukraine’s biggest single backer. The US also has the largest economy, of course, so it can afford to provide more aid than smaller nations can.
But we should also look at a country’s donations to Ukraine relative to its gross domestic product, rather than just the dollar amount. On that basis, several European nations have sacrificed more than the US has. Donations from Norway and the Baltic States exceed 1% of their gross domestic products, and Poland’s contribution is roughly 0.6% of its GDP, according to the Council on Foreign Relations How Much Aid Has the US Sent Ukraine?
Even Germany, which has moved rather sluggishly on its promises of military equipment, has provided support that is equal to more than 0.5% of its GDP. Using this comparative approach, the US ranks low at about 0.3% of GDP.
Furthermore, the EU is about to supplant the US as Ukraine’s backer. Last week the EU approved another 50 billion euro ($54 billion) package for the Kyiv government. Meanwhile, President Biden’s request for $60 billion in supplemental aid remains bogged down in the House of Representatives. Although most members from both parties support the package, far-right Republicans are still holding it hostage to their demands for sweeping changes in immigration policy.
Objection #4: Ukraine is Not Critical to US National Security
Following Donald Trump’s “America First” policy, far-right Republicans such as Gaetz and Taylor-Greene claim that the US has no vital interest in helping Ukraine. Apparently, they don’t think the US should bother to help a democratic country fend off a brutal, fascist invasion. If this were 1941, they would leave Great Britain to Hitler’s tender mercies.
They also seem to assume that Vladimir Putin would be satisfied if he conquered Ukraine. But the Russian leader has a more ambitious goal: restoring the Soviet Union. That means regaining control over much of Eastern Europe, and by force if necessary.
If Putin were to defeat Ukraine, we can assume that in a few years he would threaten, and, if necessary, attack NATO allies such as Poland and the Baltic States. The Baltic states are particularly vulnerable, as they are small and geographically exposed.
Under the terms of the NATO treaty, the US would be obligated to send troops to defend its fellow members Poland and the Baltic States against a Russian invasion. Spending $60 billion a year to prevent such a scenario seems like a wise investment.
Furthermore, if the US abandoned Ukraine, Chinese President Xi Jin-ping would logically conclude that America would not defend Taiwan against an attack from the mainland. If the US would not even commit sufficient funds to shore up Ukraine, Beijing would assume that America certainly would not dispatch troops to protect Taiwan.
At that point, the US would have lost all credibility with its allies, and it would cease to be the leading global power. The new line-up would be China First, not America First.
In Part 2 of this article, we will discuss the likely consequences for Ukraine if the US does not provide additional aid…quickly.
The Wall Street Democrat