The future of US aid for Ukraine is uncertain following a last-minute agreement to avoid a government shutdown, despite President Joe Biden’s efforts to reassure Kyiv that it will receive the necessary support to combat Russia.

Key points:

• Last-Minute Congress Deal Cuts Ukraine Funding Despite President Biden’s reassurances
• Military aid for Ukraine has become highly politicized in Washington
• Calls on House Speaker McCarthy to secure a separate Ukraine funding bill
• The EU expresses surprise and regret over the funding cut

Just a week after President Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to Washington to request additional Funding, a compromise reached in Congress on Sunday omitted new funding for Ukraine due to opposition from staunch Republicans.

Biden and his Democratic party argue that the United States has a responsibility to assist Ukraine in resisting Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggressive invasion, warning that failure to do so could embolden other authoritarian leaders in the future.

The matter has become highly politicized in Washington, jeopardizing critical military assistance at a time when Kyiv is striving to make progress in its slow-moving counteroffensive before the arrival of winter.

On Sunday, Biden urged Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy to “put an end to the political maneuvering” and expressed his “full expectation” that McCarthy would secure the passage of a separate bill for Ukraine’s funding soon.

Addressing the situation from the White House, Biden stated, “I want to reassure our American allies, the American people, and the people of Ukraine that you can rely on our support. We will not turn our backs.”

Ukraine downplayed the setback, stating on Sunday that it was actively collaborating with its American counterparts to secure new wartime aid.

Josep Borrell, the European Union’s top diplomat and a key partner of the US in delivering aid to Ukraine, expressed surprise at the last-minute agreement and deep regret over the US decision. He expressed hope that this would not be a final decision and that Ukraine would continue to receive US support.

Moscow ‘celebrating’

Analyst Brett Bruen expresses concern about the message being sent to the world, as both Republicans and some Democrats appear willing to prioritize political interests over supporting Ukraine. This situation could damage global perceptions and may be seen as a weakening of US support for Ukraine. The potential return of former President Donald Trump, known for praising Vladimir Putin, further adds to Ukraine’s concerns.

House Democrats expect Kevin McCarthy to introduce a separate Ukraine aid bill, though its final funding amount remains uncertain. The issue of aiding Ukraine has become entangled in political disputes, occurring just over a year before the US presidential election. Congress has already approved significant aid totaling $100 billion, with $43 billion allocated for weaponry.

Additionally, there is a challenge from hardline Republican Matt Gaetz, who seeks to unseat McCarthy. Gaetz and other staunch conservatives oppose further aid to Ukraine. McCarthy has indicated that if he remains in his position, he will insist on funding to secure the Mexican border, a key demand of the Republican party.

War fatigue

Even if McCarthy were to agree to provide Ukraine with aid, perhaps as part of a negotiation with Democrats to secure his position as speaker, a more significant concern arises war fatigue.

Skepticism is no longer limited to hardline Republicans; it has spread to more moderate lawmakers who are hesitant to offer Ukraine an unconditional commitment.

What’s even more worrying for President Biden and Kyiv is that American voters, grappling with inflation, appear to share these reservations about supporting Ukraine.

According to an ABC/Washington Post poll released on September 24, 41% of respondents believe that the United States is stretching itself too thin in supporting Ukraine. This number has risen from 33% in February and a mere 14% in April 2022.

Adding to the complexity of the situation is a Republican impeachment inquiry into President Biden concerning his son Hunter’s business dealings in Ukraine.

The Biden administration’s argument is clear: failing to deter Russia in Ukraine could pose a risk to the entire world.

US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin implored Congress to uphold America’s commitment to urgently provide assistance to Ukraine as they defend their country against oppressive forces.

Analyst Brett Bruen also pointed out that even a temporary delay in Ukraine funding gives a significant boost to critics. He anticipates that, in the long run, this delay could present more significant challenges.

Why govt shutdowns seem to only happen in the US

Over the past four decades, the United States has experienced ten Government shutdowns, a phenomenon quite distinct from what is observed in other countries. In many nations, governments continue to operate even during periods of war or constitutional crises. So, why does this uniquely American occurrence persist?

For most of the world, a government shutdown is regarded as a dire situation, typically associated with revolution, invasion, or disaster. It surprises many that the leaders of one of the most powerful nations on Earth would willingly incite a crisis that results in the suspension of public services and a reduction in economic growth.

In a recent eleventh-hour development, Congress managed to avert a shutdown by passing a temporary spending bill, ensuring the government’s continued operation for another 45 days. However, this temporary solution means that politicians will need to return to the negotiation table, potentially leading to yet another shutdown when the funding expires.

America’s federal system of government, designed to encourage compromise, has experienced a reversal in recent times due to a strict interpretation of the Anti-Deficiency Act in 1980. This interpretation led to government shutdowns in the U.S., setting it apart from non-parliamentary democracies like Brazil. The first shutdown occurred in 1981, and there have been numerous others since, with the longest lasting from December 2018 to January 2019. These shutdowns disrupted government operations and affected federal workers.

During these shutdowns, some critical services, such as social security and the military, continued to function, but hundreds of thousands of federal workers went unpaid. At the time, the White House estimated that each week of the shutdown reduced GDP growth by 0.1 percentage points.

In contrast, in many other parts of the world, such government shutdowns are nearly inconceivable. Most European democracies operate under a parliamentary system where the executive and legislature are typically controlled by the same party or coalition. While a parliament could theoretically reject a budget proposed by the prime minister, such an action would likely trigger a new election, rather than causing a halt in services like national parks, tax refunds, and food assistance programs.

Shutdowns Common in US

President Ronald Reagan presided over eight shutdowns during his tenure, although they were all relatively short-lived.

There were also three shutdowns during Donald Trump’s presidency, with the longest lasting 36 days and ending in January 2019. This particular shutdown occurred due to disagreements over funding for a border wall with Mexico.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that it caused a reduction in economic output of approximately $11 billion, including $3 billion that was never recovered.

Shutdowns related to budget issues are nearly exclusive to US politics. In the US system, different branches of government must reach an agreement on spending plans before they can become law.

In most other countries, budget votes are essentially votes of confidence in the government itself. However, because the US has separate and often divided branches of government, this is not the case.

The post US Aid Deal in Ukraine in Limbo Amid Government Shutdown appeared first on Press Xpress.