And so the government didn’t close on Saturday, even though we might have to go through this whole drama again in six weeks. The former President of the Chamber, Kevin McCarthyIn the end he did the obvious: brought a funding bill to the vote that could only be passed with democratic votes because the hardliners in their own party didn’t want to agree to anything feasible. And the legislation contained none of the specific spending cuts Republicans had demanded, except for one big, bad thing: a cut in foreign aid Ukraine.
Democrats appear to have agreed because they hope to pass on the aid Ukraine separately; the president Joe Biden stated that he believes he has an agreement with McCarthy on this matter. I hope you’re right.
But why did something like this happen? Michael Strain of the rightwing (but almost entirely nonTrumpist) American Enterprise Institute called the fiscal showdown a “‘Seinfeld’ shutdown” a deal about nothing. The comparison is good, but if we’re talking about references to popular culture, I think it would be better to call it the closure of the “network of intrigue”, with citizens shouting from the windows: “I’m angry!” And I I won’t swallow this anymore!”
President of Ukraine Volodmir Zelensky and President of the United States Joe Biden at the White House in Washington, USA Photo: (Doug Mills/ NYT
Only a coup can satisfy this grotesque rage. But McCarthy apparently believed he could reduce criticism of his deal with Democrats by betraying Ukraine, or at least pretending to betray it. This is clearly something Trumpists want. But why?
Despite the pretext that antiUkrainian voices, such as Elon MuskYou could say the problem isn’t money.
Hardliner rights inside and outside of Congress They say they are angry about the amount we are spending to support Ukraine. But if they really cared about the financial burden of aid, they would put in the minimal effort necessary to get the numbers right. No, aid to Ukraine does not undermine the future of our social security, make it impossible for us to secure our border, or consume 40% of America’s GDP.
How much are we really spending on supporting Ukraine? In the 18 months since the Russian invasion began, American aid totaled $77 billion. That seems like a lot. And that’s a lot compared to the tiny amounts we normally allocate to development aid. But total federal government spending is currently about $6 trillion per year, or more than $9 trillion every 18 months, so Ukraine accounts for less than 1% of federal spending (and less than 0.3% of GDP). omitted. The military share of this spending is less than 5% of the US defense budget.
By the way, definitely not US They are the only ones who bear the burden of aid to Ukraine. In the past, Donald Trump and others have complained that European countries are not spending enough on their own defense. But when it comes to Ukraine, European nations and institutions have collectively committed to significantly more aid than we have. In particular, most of Europe, including France, Germany It is United Kingdompromised much greater aid as a percentage of GDP than the American pledge.
Former President of the United States Donald Trump attends a campaign rally in Erie, Pennsylvania. Photo: Maddie McGarvey / NYT
But back to the cost of aid to Ukraine: given the smallness of the item relative to the budget, claims that Ukraine is doing other necessary things, such as border security, are somehow impossible, meaningless. Trumpists aren’t known for quoting correct numbers or bothering to give correct numbers but I doubt they really believe that the monetary cost of aid to Ukraine is unsustainable.
And the benefits of helping a democracy under attack are enormous. Remember: this was before the war Russia It was widely viewed as a major military power, and most Americans considered it a critical threat (and one whose military associations and some Republicans praised it). Now that power has collapsed.
The unexpectedly successful Ukrainian resistance to Russian aggression has also made other autocratic regimes that might be tempted to wage wars of conquest aware that overthrowing democracies is not easy. To be completely frank and honest, Russia’s setbacks in Ukraine have certainly reduced Russia’s chances China Breaking in Taiwan.
Finally, what even Republicans used to call the free world has become stronger. NATO has risen to the occasion, confusing cynics, and is increasing its numbers. Western weapons have proven their effectiveness.
There are big rewards for spending that is only a small fraction of what we spend on Iraq and in Afghanistan, and we must not forget that it is the Ukrainians who are fighting and dying. Then why do Trumpist politicians want to cut off Ukraine?
Unfortunately, the answer is obvious. Despite what hardline Republicans say, they want it Wladimir Putin win. They consider the cruelty and oppression of the Putin regime to be admirable qualities that the United States should emulate. They support a wouldbe dictator at home and are sympathetic to real dictators abroad.
So don’t pay attention to all these complaints about how much we spend in Ukraine. These complaints are not justified by the actual cost of help, and people who say they are concerned about costs don’t really care about money. They are essentially enemies of democracy inside and outside the United States. / TRANSLATION BY GUILHERME RUSSO