A worrisome headline in Politico on August 28 read: “Trump holds up Ukraine military aid meant to confront Russia.” The story went on to report that “The Trump administration is slow-walking $250 million in military assistance to Ukraine, annoying lawmakers and advocates who argue the funding is critical to keeping Russia at bay.”
This was the situation: President Donald Trump asked his national security team to review the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which was created back in 2015 to help fight Russian-supported militants waging war on Ukraine; most recently Congress had approved $250 million for that initiative. The ostensible reason: to ensure that the money is being spent in the best interests of the U.S. Since the move came soon after President Trump had argued that Russia should be reinstated in the G-7, it raised numerous red flags.
The next day, August 29, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) tweeted: “Get this: In the same week that @realDonaldTrump absurdly proposed inviting Ukraine-invader Putin back into the G-7, Trump is slow walking security assistance to Ukraine. The U.S. must stand should to shoulder with Ukraine & strong against Putin.” Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) issued a statement in which he underscored: “Enough is enough. President Trump should stop worrying about disappointing Vladimir Putin and stand up for U.S. national security priorities. We have a responsibility to help Ukraine defend its sovereignty and deter Russia from further aggression. The administration should stop playing games and immediately release these funds approved by Congress, which are supported by the State Department and Pentagon.” Indeed, on August 30 Politico reported that the Pentagon had completed the review of military aid ordered by Mr. Trump and concluded that the aid should continue.
Interestingly, on September 1, Vice-President Mike Pence delivered a message starkly different from that of the president, assuring Kyiv that the U.S. supports Ukraine’s territorial integrity, as it has done since Russia seized the Crimean peninsula. He stated: “We will continue to stand with the people of the Ukraine on your security, on territorial integrity, including the Ukraine’s rightful claim to Crimea.” He did not, however, mention anything about the U.S. military aid package.
On September 2, the reactions to the president’s questioning of military aid for Ukraine continued. The bipartisan Senate Ukraine Caucus – comprising Democrats Jeanne Shaheen, Dick Durbin and Richard Blumenthal, and Republicans Rob Portman and Ron Johnson – said the aid is “vital to the long term viability of the Ukrainian military” and pointed out that the funding “has helped Ukraine develop the independent military capabilities and skills necessary to fend off the Kremlin’s continued onslaughts within its territory.” In a letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, they wrote: “We strongly urge you to direct the Department of Defense to obligate these funds immediately.”
At last report, the funds were still on hold. Furthermore, if the funds are not released by September 30, they will no longer be available. Thus, we are left wondering: What is the true intent of this move by the Trump administration, which, admittedly had provided lethal weapons to Ukraine? What is behind the president’s decision to single out Ukraine in this review of funding? In the meantime, the Ukrainian National Information Service has issued an Action Item encouraging friends of Ukraine to contact the White House (online via whitehouse.gov/contact or by calling 202-456-1414) to express disapproval of this slow-down of military assistance to Ukraine and to urge its immediate resumption. Such funding is vital to Ukraine’s and Eastern Europe’s security. As Reps. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) and Mike Quigley (D-Ill), the co-chairs of the Congressional Ukraine Caucus, emphasized, “The President of the United States should be a champion for liberty, not a pawn for dictators. This funding cannot be delayed.”