Comment In Ohio, Senate candidate JD Vance (R) said the United States should “finally stop money laundering in Ukraine.” JR Majewski, an Ohio Republican running for a House seat, criticized President Biden for “[cutting] billion-dollar checks to Ukraine” at a time of inflation at home. In New Hampshire, Senate candidate Don Bolduc (R) said U.S. aid to Ukraine is “money we don’t have.” Opposition — or skepticism — to sending more U.S. money to Ukraine has accelerated within the GOP in recent weeks, with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) signaling earlier this month that Republicans will end or limit war spending if they take control of the House in next week’s midterms. The threat to cut funding marks a sharp U-turn for a party whose members almost universally supported helping Ukraine after Russia invaded in February. Over the past eight months, supporters of former President Donald Trump have joined forces with military intervention skeptics and anti-Biden forces within the GOP to challenge traditionally hawkish Republicans. The result is a rare rift in the GOP that is likely to erupt into a more open fight if Republicans retake Congress and face forceful demands from Biden and emotional appeals from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Just last week, a group of Republican lawmakers objected to a provision Democrats had inserted into a defense authorization bill that would have allowed the Justice Department to send Ukraine millions of dollars in yachts and other assets seized from Russia. Most Republicans, like Vance and Bolduc, frame their objections in terms of fiscal responsibility, saying the money would be better spent on problems at home. In a few cases, far-right candidates echoed Trump’s praise of Russian President Vladimir Putin and called for a complete cutoff of aid. Biden criticizes Republicans for threatening Ukraine aid But the GOP is also home to a large number of old-school hawks who vow to continue providing support to Kyiv and have in some cases called on the White House to do even more. In a sharp break with McCarthy’s comments, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called for just the opposite: He urged the Biden administration “to do more to provide the tools Ukraine needs to prevent Russian aggression’, including additional aid. McConnell said that if the GOP retakes the Senate, the Republican majority “will focus its oversight on ensuring the timely delivery of much-needed weapons and increased coalition assistance to Ukraine.” Several Republicans privately expressed skepticism that McCarthy and a Republican-led House would cut aid all together, saying his comments likely included posturing ahead of the midterm elections. House Republicans poised to ascend to powerful positions on the committee may find themselves trying to thread the needle between partisans and traditionalists. Even so, Republican divisions pose a challenge for President Biden, who has worked to hold together a domestic and global coalition in support of Ukraine amid rising food and gas prices and a global hunger crisis. Biden and his top aides said they would support Ukraine “as long as necessary” and would not force Zelensky to the negotiating table. The sheer number of Republicans questioning the current U.S. role in the Ukraine conflict is a remarkable shift for a party often led by hawks who have fought to spend more money on military efforts. That sentiment was personified by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a former prisoner of war who strongly supported U.S. military interventions in Iraq, Libya, Syria and elsewhere. McCain, who often clashed with Trump, died in 2018, silencing an influential voice on Republican foreign policy. During Trump’s presidency, when the former president has sporadically called for the United States to withdraw its troops from Syria or Afghanistan, his sentiments have been quickly overruled by Republicans who have served under him. Under Biden, however, skepticism about US aid to Ukraine is finding a wider constituency in the Republican Party. That includes a network of younger conservatives, many centered around groups like Concerned Veterans for America and Stand Together, seeking to redirect the party from its post-9/11 neoconservatism and emphasis on projecting military might. “We do not believe that blank checks for Ukraine are the best thing for the security of the United States or the security of Ukraine,” said Dan Caldwell, vice president of foreign policy for Stand Together, a group backed by billionaire industrialist Charles Koch. Caldwell, like some progressive lawmakers on the other side of the aisle, called on the Biden administration to play a bigger role in promoting a negotiated end to the conflict sooner rather than later. “It is immoral to continue to urge people to fight a war that we believe they cannot win,” he said. Democrats have remained largely united behind aid to Ukraine, although a group of 30 progressive lawmakers last week sent a letter to the White House urging Biden to resume direct negotiations with Russia and begin working on a diplomatic path to the end of the war. They called on Biden to combine the unprecedented economic and military support the United States is providing to Ukraine with a “proactive diplomatic push, redoubling efforts to seek a realistic framework for a ceasefire.” But the effort’s leader, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), rescinded the letter less than 24 hours later after a backlash from fellow Democrats, voicing unwavering support for Biden’s approach to the war. Democrats and even Republicans have said that part of the Democratic Party’s skepticism about aid to Ukraine stems from opposition to Biden. A central pillar of his presidency has been trying to rally an alliance of Western leaders who have imposed tough sanctions on Russia and maintained support for Ukraine even as their countries have suffered severe economic turmoil. “There is an element of Republican hostility toward Ukraine that comes from their hatred of Joe Biden,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). “In the beginning, Republicans were willing to support Ukraine, but as Joe Biden has been more successful in defending Ukraine, and more of his identity is tied to defending Ukraine, he’s antagonizing Republicans because they just can’t enjoy the stomach. same side as Joe Biden on anything.” But Congress has so far provided nearly all of the aid and weapons the White House has requested—amounting to more than $60 billion—with overwhelming bipartisan support. Even if Republicans take control of both chambers, the challenge for Biden will be much greater in the House, which will have a significant number of rebels aligned with Trump. Some Republicans said the desire to review the billions in aid that suddenly went out the door is perfectly reasonable. “I think what these statements reflect is that aid is not a blank check and it’s not unlimited, but that’s very different from saying, ‘We’re going to cut you off and turn you over to Putin’s dogs,’” Witt said. . Ayres, GOP poll. “It is inconceivable that there is a significant majority of the entire House, Democrats and Republicans, who want to leave Ukraine in the clutches of Vladimir Putin.” Sen. James E. Risch (R-Idaho), who will chair the Foreign Relations Committee if the GOP takes over, expressed his full support for the war effort and signaled no change in Republican support for aid and arms packages. “Ukrainians must decide for themselves about the future of Ukraine. I support their fight for freedom, which they are winning on the battlefield,” Rees said in a statement to the Washington Post. “Any attempts to appease Putin are dangerous, irresponsible and will only encourage Russian aggression.” Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Tex.), who is set to become chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, tried to incorporate both traditionalist and rebel elements, telling Bloomberg TV that he wants more powerful weapons sent to Ukraine but and “more oversight and accountability over funding.” Some concerned Republicans support a measure authored by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) earlier this year that would appoint an inspector general to oversee how Ukraine’s funds are spent. Paul failed to attach the legislation to the $40 billion Ukraine package, but shared his ideas for Ukraine oversight in a closed-door meeting with House lawmakers in May, an exchange that could bear fruit next year. time if Republicans take control of the House. Democrats have argued that the money is desperately needed as Ukrainians fight a rogue Russian enemy and that imposing traditional surveillance rules would harm Ukraine. “There is no information to suggest that any of these dollars are being misused and the priority is speed,” Murphy said. “You have to get the money out the door, so there is no evidence of abuse of the dollars, I don’t know why we would punish the Ukrainians by slowing down the whole process.” Polls have shown that domestic support for Ukraine is waning, particularly among Republicans. In March, 9 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents said the United States provides too much aid to Ukraine, according to a Pew Research Center survey. In a follow-up survey this fall, that number rose to 32 percent. In top Republican circles, the debate over aid to Ukraine is increasingly heated. In late October, former Vice President Mike Pence tried to rally support for aid to Ukraine in a speech at the Heritage Foundation, a well-known conservative think tank. “Conservatives must make it clear that Putin must be stopped and Putin will pay,” Pence said. But after the speech, a handful of prominent Republicans publicly blasted the former vice president. Legacy…
