The ouster of Kevin McCarthy as Speaker of the House of Representatives has given hard-line Republican supporters an opportunity to stall another bailout of Kiev, Bloomberg reports. Now, the fate of Ukraine’s funding depends largely on the next speaker, and anxiety among Kiev’s allies over waning U.S. support for the war effort has so far only grown.
U.S. funding for Ukraine faces a new hurdle in Congress, Bloomberg news agency reports. Kevin McCarthy’s ouster as Speaker of the House of Representatives gave hardliners among Republicans a chance to stall another aid delivery to Kiev.
The fate of U.S. aid to Ukraine in its fight against Russian forces now depends largely on the next speaker, who will have to chart a course in a party sharply divided on the issue. Republicans plan to hold speaker elections on 11 October, and all legislative activity is likely to be suspended for that time.
Helping Ukraine in its fight against Russian forces still has broad support in Congress. Some of those mentioned as possible speakers, including House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, voted in favour of a $300 million funding bill for Ukraine last week.
However, other contenders for speaker, such as House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, voted against it. Jordan said Thursday that if elected speaker, he would block new aid to Ukraine.
The leader of the Republican Party hardliners who ousted McCarthy on Tuesday, Representative Matt Gaetz, stressed that most House Republicans voted against the aid bill last week.
All of these domestic political manoeuvres are adding to worries among Ukraine’s allies that U.S. support for the war effort has begun to wane.
On Tuesday, even before McCarthy’s resignation, President Joe Biden held a phone call with allies to reassure them of continued U.S. support for Ukraine after a bill to temporarily shut down the government until November 17 failed to provide the $24 billion requested by the president and $6 billion in the compromise version offered by the Senate.
“Republicans in the House of Representatives supported the bill sufficiently – not just members, although they did too, but leaders – and the president is confident that we will continue to get the support we need,” National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said Tuesday.
Many senators from both parties told Bloomberg that they are committed to getting aid to Ukraine as soon as possible, but there is no consensus yet on how to do so, especially with the House of Representatives in its current precarious state and the Senate going into another recess. Nevertheless, Bloomberg notes some ways to finance Ukraine.
Gaetz, who opposes any additional aid to Ukraine, disagreed with McCarthy’s gambit linking future aid to a requirement to take steps to secure U.S. borders and said the two issues should not be linked.
Despite Goetz’s criticism, Democrats and Biden could still agree to some immigration changes as part of an unspoken or explicit deal on aid to Ukraine, the publication argues. Senators from both parties came together last week to try to work out such an agreement.
Democrats generally support more money for border security but are unwilling to limit the number of asylum applications, especially in the absence of an immigration policy overhaul that has failed in Congress for decades. Republicans have said they want policy changes, not just more spending.
Some Democrats want quick action. In theory, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer could force a vote by increasing the modest Ukraine package by $300 million.
But Republican senators are also reluctant to act on Ukraine without addressing the U.S. border issue, lest they face accusations that they care more about the Ukrainian border than the U.S. border, Bloomberg explains. Even if the Senate passes a Ukraine-only bill, the next speaker would have to agree to bring it to the floor for a vote, or else a group of House Republicans would have to join Democrats in holding a vote on a complicated and rarely used procedure.
“The idea that Republicans in the House of Representatives would now be pushing a bill to fund Ukraine is absurd,” Republican Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio said even before McCarthy’s ouster. Vance said funding Ukraine is “a huge political loser, especially for Republicans.”
Senator Susan Collins, a Republican senator and staunch supporter of Ukraine, said Saturday that one possibility is to tie the Ukraine package to the annual defence spending bill. The defence package is usually one of the most popular in Congress, but reaching agreement between the House and Senate versions of the bills can take weeks or months. In addition, Democrats are generally reluctant to finalise a defence spending bill first, risking losing leverage over domestic priorities.
One idea offered by Ukraine advocates, such as Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Democratic Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, is for the White House to unveil a much larger Ukraine package, lasting a year or more – and possibly through the 2024 elections.
The rationale is that the risk to Ukraine is that Congress will agree to a temporary package and the funding will run out in the midst of the presidential campaign, when passing any legislation will become even more difficult, Bloomberg explains.
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel