Opinion: 7 March, 2024
By Published March 7, 2024 8:00am EST
A president faces congressional recalcitrance to fund a faltering ally in a war against an adversary with designs on Europe. Such was the situation in 1941 when President Roosevelt faced isolationists in the U.S. Senate over backing the British against Nazi Germany.
As the Russian-Ukrainian war enters a pivotal year, supporters of Ukraine face similar political opposition in the House of Representatives where the Speaker has declared a Senate-passed funding bill dead on arrival. Like the UK in 1941, Ukraine is in a precarious position. Without more military assistance, Ukraine will increasingly lose more territory like the recent fall of Adviivka.
How to resolve the impasse and help Ukraine? Of all people, former President Donald Trump has suggested a workaround — convert the cost of the weapons transfers into a loan. Trump even specified that the loan would bear no interest and would only be paid “if Ukraine ever strikes it rich.”
This has a historical precedent. During a Caribbean cruise after his reelection in 1940, President Roosevelt conceived of a mechanism whereby the U.S. could lend or lease military equipment and ammunition to countries considered vital to the defense of the U.S. FDR likened Lend Lease to loaning a garden hose to a neighbor whose house was on fire. By not styling the assistance as a grant to the UK, FDR assuaged concerns about “foreign aid.”
FDR had previously wrong-footed his political opponents. Instead of giving the British 50 naval destroyers, FDR insisted they be paired with a transfer to the U.S. of British bases in the Caribbean and western Atlantic. How’s that for the art of the deal?
It’s in the vital national interest of the U.S. to continue to enable Ukraine’s military to stop a regenerated Putin from threatening NATO and drawing us into war. Considering these stakes, insisting on loans seems harsh given that Ukraine is fighting for its existence.
Churchill likened Lend Lease to “a sheriff collecting the last assets of a helpless debtor.” But without new military assistance, Ukraine’s prospects will sink.
FDR’s maneuvering to help the British provide a guide.
We should employ such creativity, seize on Trump’s idea and take yes for an answer.
Take the win.
Michael Allen is a founder and managing director of Beacon Global Strategies LLC. Allen has spent his career in the national security arena including in the White House, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the private sector. Allen is a frequent commentator on national security and foreign policy issues on CNN, MSNBC and Fox and is the author of ”Blinking Red, Crisis and Compromise in American Intelligence after 9/11.” (Potomac Books, 2013). He is @michaelallenJMA on Twitter.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trump-suggested-workable-novel-way-help-ukraine-consider
This was suggested a week or two ago. It’ll be interesting to see what the republicans do. If a package comes out with these conditions, then indeed all we elected in congress were followers. It’s hard to see if any of them are actually leaders with their own thoughts and convictions. All they do is sit around and bullshit and wait for someone to tell them what to do. Not saying I wouldn’t take the deal only that the whimps we elected are nothing more than a POS with a mouth.
Just seize all ca$h of the corrupt oligarchs in Ukraine plus all frozen ruSSian assets in the West and we can arm Ukraine to the teeth.
I don’t think these oligarchs have a lot left.
Most of their assets became worthless.
^bert
The US give the USSR weapons in WW2 and never repaid any lend lease, so apply the same to Ukraine.
The far right “America First” faction, led by Charles Lindbergh, was remarkably similar in outlook to the far left Russia-sympathizer FDR: the horseshoe of politics.
FDR was far more keen on bankrupting Britain and dismantling its empire than helping to defeat the Ribbentrop-Molotov powers.
He succeeded.
The far left socialist government of Clement Atlee in 1945 condemned Britain to mediocrity and failure with gigantic Ponzi schemes like the NHS and the socialist welfare state. Thatcher tried to reverse it and had some success, only for Blair to wreck it all over again.
Trump is something of a far right analogue of FDR. If he sincerely wants to help Ukraine, he just needs to call off his pro-putler attack dogs in Congress.
That is not a workable alternative, it is nonsense. The amount of money Ukraine needs for the next two years pales in comparison to the money the US will spend on increased troop levels in Europe and globally, and reorganizing the anti-terror and small operation forces back into large scale sustained conflict stance. If Ukraine is beaten, defined as Russia maintaining occupation of any Ukrainian land, you can multiply that bill by 1,000, and it will take decades to clean up the global mess.
You’re probably correct Anonymous. I have doubts about any of Trumps promises. Recall how he said he helped Ukraine by giving us $300 M in javelins. Yeah too bad he doesn’t go further and say the condition was that javelins were to stay Kyiv. So he may make promises but honestly I’m done with promises and no deliverables from all the politicians. And by the way don’t tell me he kept all his promises in his first term. Recall building the wall and Mexico will pay for it….
He gave way less than 300 million in Javelins, as it was the entire aid package.
I think the Javelins cost about 50 million, with some of them bought of Ukrainian money.
There were only a few dozen launchers sent, and Ukraine could only use them in case of a full scale invasion.
They had never seen the light in the Donbas, where they were needed.
Also, I didn’t even talk about what Ukraine had to do to get this aid, but I think there has been enough talk about that.
^bert
Despite this being Trump’s idea, I’m sure he would find a way to sabotage it. Just like he was for adding new border policies to the arms delivery bill, before he ordered Trumpish Senators to vote against it. Be realistic, if he was serious, he would have told his followers in Congress to put this into a bill. But in four months, they came up with a big fat nothing. How much more evidence does anybody need that Trump wants Ukraine to surrender to his buddy Putin?
Of course the source of this non-sense is Fox News, posted by the guy that has Trump his dick in his mouth and Putin’s in his rear end.
^bert
make russia pay reparations as part of the lend lease act since they started this invasion and 10 year war after the Euromaidan in 2014
Thanks RSM for posting this article.
I see nothing wrong with the proposed approach as a compromise to move military support forward. The US would never make Ukraine pay up but this would give political cover to Republicans who want to support Ukraine from some of their base.
The real question is whether Speaker Johnson and Republican leadership will take advantage of this idea. Not sure that will happen due to inertia and lack of true leadership. Also depends on whether the give me everything I want now even though we cant pay for it and who cares we are being inundated with “undocumented” migrants democrats would go along. Quite frankly I doubt it – calling Republicans pro Putin and blaming the entire impass on Republicans is just too juicy to pass up in an election year.