Republican Congress Could Actually Boost U.S. Support for Ukraine

As the Republicans look set to take back a slim majority in the House of Representatives, the reaction coming from Kyiv is one of absolute calm. Although Ukraine's war effort depends heavily on continued shipments of Western military aid and economic assistance, figures in president Volodymyr Zelensky's government remain confident that the change in power on Capitol Hill will not result in a change of priorities in Washington, at least as far as Ukraine is concerned.

"I have met numerous times with representatives of Congress and the Senate," Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov told Newsweek as part of a briefing organized by the Odesa Media Center on November 4. "I have a clear understanding that bipartisan U.S. support for Ukraine will continue as before."

Reznikov even saw reason to hope that the U.S. midterm elections might lead to increased assistance from Washington.

"A majority of the American people support Ukraine in this war against Russia, and the American people are very pragmatic," he said. "They like to win, and they also understand that it is important for them to partner with Ukraine in this fight against the evil that is coming from the Kremlin and which is threatening the entire world."

"For this reason, it is in the direct interest of the United States to support Ukraine all the way through to victory," Reznikov added, "and I believe that, even after the elections, U.S. support will either remain at the same high level, or else it will grow."

Republican Ukrainian-American Congresswoman Victoria Spartz of Indiana, like Reznikov, is optimistic that the new Republican majority in the House of Representatives can actually help improve the effectiveness of U.S. assistance to Ukraine.

"Despite some exceptions, which is normal in a democratic country," Spartz said, "the American people are supportive of Ukraine, and the Republicans in Congress are as well."

"Republicans are generally much better at providing proper security and military assistance in any conflict," she added, "and we'll be responsible for holding the Biden administration's feet to the fire in order to make sure that they deliver everything to Ukraine that they've promised."

Spartz also suggested that some Democrats might be pleased to have a Republican majority in Congress pressuring the White House to expand the range of military aid that it is currently sending to Ukraine.

"I'll be honest with you, a lot of Democrats have been very frustrated with the Biden administration on this issue," she said, "but they've been afraid to challenge an administration of their own party."

In Kyiv and Washington alike, much has been made of a recent comment from likely incoming Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy of California, who said in an October interview with Punchbowl News that the American people, burdened by economic problems at home, were "not going to write a blank check to Ukraine."

McCarthy's words were seen in some quarters as a signal that a Republican majority in Congress might seek to cut back U.S. assistance to Ukraine. Spartz, however, offered a different interpretation of the Republican leader's statement.

"I think that Congress should never send a blank check to the president for any sort of program or effort," she said. "As Congress, it's actually our number one duty to provide proper oversight on what the government is spending."

"We need to have more direct assistance to the Ukrainian military, more humanitarian aid to the Ukrainian people, but more demands for the Ukrainian government to establish the necessary anti-corruption institutions and legal system to make the country an attractive destination for foreign investment," Spartz continued.

"A blank check does not help achieve that goal," she added.

Rather than placing American aid to Ukraine in jeopardy, the new Congress appears ready to continue working across the aisle in order to keep the shipments flowing. If anyone in the Kremlin has taken encouragement from the Republicans' victory, Spartz suggests that those figures in Moscow are likely to come away very disappointed.

"Republicans understand that peace through strength is in America's interests," she said. "In order to prevent this conflict from expanding further onto the territory of our European allies, we need to make sure that Ukraine is getting everything it needs so that it can stop Russia on the battlefield."

"Ukrainians share our values and our commitment to freedom," Spartz added. "There are missiles and artillery destroying houses in Ukraine every day, and the survivors are getting up and preparing to fight another battle. Americans appreciate that kind of bravery a lot, no matter which party they voted for."

Josh Rudolph, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund's Alliance for Securing Democracy, was heartened to hear Representative Spartz's enthusiasm for maintaining U.S. support for Ukraine, especially given the presence of several less internationalist members in the incoming Republican caucus.

"While prominent Republicans like Mitch McConnell and Mike Pence have a clear understanding that support for Ukraine is in the U.S. national interest," Rudolph explained, "there is still an extremely partisan and populist MAGA wing of their party that is reflexively against anything that Biden supports."

"Back in May, there were 57 Republican members who voted against funding for Ukraine assistance," he added, "and that portion of the Republican caucus remains influential due to the party's slim majority in the House and because of their fundraising power."

Still, as Spartz noted, the majority of Republicans in the new caucus are likely to remain supportive of Ukraine provided that proper oversight is maintained.

"I'm really hopeful about [Texas] Rep. Michael McCaul, who will chair the Foreign Affairs Committee," Rudolph said. "He strongly supports Ukraine, and he also says that he will be leading an effort for more oversight and accountability. That's an area of potential bipartisan cooperation that could make US support for Ukraine even stronger."

Such a compromise should not be difficult to reach. Despite rumors that security assistance to Ukraine has been misused, critics have yet to present a clear example of significant corruption arising from the Western provision of weapons and funds to the government in Kyiv.

"Assistance really hasn't been a 'blank check' thus far," Rudolph argued. "There are dollar limitations authorized by the various assistance bills, and there have been extremely detailed, itemized lists of the materiel that is being sent. Everything has been very well accounted for."

Rudolph also sees the potential for workaround solutions to reduce the risk of Ukrainian-American relations becoming an issue of partisan contention on Capitol Hill.

"I would recommend that the current Congress try to push through $100 billion in security assistance to Ukraine during the lame duck session, and also to appoint an inspector general to oversee the distribution," Rudolph suggested. "That would essentially provide for two full years of security assistance to Ukraine while assuring Republicans that the money is being spent properly."

By taking steps to ensure that majorities in both parties on Capitol Hill continue to buy into the Ukrainian cause, Washington can also exert a positive influence on the future democratic development of Ukraine, a country with the potential to be a strong U.S. ally in Europe.

"Security assistance is not something that the US should attach policy conditions to. What we want Ukraine to do with that money and those deliveries is to win the war," Rudolph said. "But when it comes to reconstruction aid, that's where you would want to attach anti-corruption conditions."

"And that, too, could be an area where we might see some bipartisan agreement," he added.