In a critical development, President Joe Biden has urgently called on Congress to approve a $100 billion foreign aid package, emphasizing the crucial role it plays in supporting Ukraine and Israel amid their ongoing conflicts. The White House issued a stark warning on Monday, underscoring the imminent threat to Ukraine's ability to defend itself against Russian aggression.
President Biden has proposed a comprehensive $106 billion aid package for Ukraine and Israel, allocating an additional $14 billion for border security. However, the approval of this proposal has encountered delays in Congress. The urgency of the situation was further emphasized by Young, who asserted that the United States is "out of money" to support Ukraine in its ongoing struggle against Russian forces. She implored Congress to act promptly, emphasizing that the time to aid Ukraine is now, not in the distant future.
"A halt in assistance will cause significant issues for Ukraine -- and potentially benefit Russia," warned Young, highlighting the grave consequences of cutting off the flow of U.S. weapons and equipment to Ukraine. She stressed that such a move could jeopardize Ukraine's gains and increase the likelihood of Russian military victories.
As we have learned in class, we know that it will take a majority vote in the Senate for it to progress. We can hope that this gets passed as our allies need our support quickly.
Source ABC News
15 comments:
As Jeremy said, there needs to be a majority vote in the Senate in order for the foreign aid package to progress to the next step although if it does progress than it might not be the original bill Biden proposed because Senate Republicans made it clear that they want to make "major modifications" to the aid package. Their goal in those major modifications is to get policy wins and also crafting a bill that would favor their House colleagues. I think that there should be changes in the aid package if there is a concern that by the end of the year we will run out of resources to provide equipment from US milirtay stocks meaning we may be running low because of how much help those two countries have received, there should be modiffications so that the US can still send out help to ukraine and Isreal but also so that there isnt major concern within our country's security.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-republicans-seek-concessions-bidens-106-billion-request/story?id=104259837
Unfortunately, there is also recent precedence pointing to the possibility that Republicans may not vote for the foreign aid package. Last month, the Republican-led House passed a bill that included assistance for Israel, but notably not Ukraine. Furthermore, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson has continually opposed any further aid to Ukraine, stating. "The Administration is continually ignoring the catastrophe at our own border." As the Senate votes on the laws the House passes, this creates yet another avenue for Ukraine's lifeline to falter. I believe America will find a loophole regardless, as they have often had in history (look at Lend-Lease for that), but as of right now, the most direct method of foreign aid seems unlikely.
I agree with Dayrin's comment that there should be some modifications to the aid package if there is a possibility of running out of resources to provide equipment. This would require a majority vote within the House for modifications, but I doubt this would happen because of the extremist views of the right-wing that are in favor of not aiding our allies. They constantly have been pushing for legislation cutting funds to Ukraine but still want to increase funds for Israel. I believe their stances on the Ukraine-Russia conflict are mislead and that we should continue aiding them but not completely stopping. In my opinion, when it comes to the topic of Israel, I believe Israel has plenty of top-tier American military supply and weapons to combat Hamas. They not only have plenty of tanks and deadly modern missiles that Hamas lacks, but also the Iron Dome, a defense system that utilizes radar to dismantle and neutralize attacks. While I disagree with the Israel government's treatment of the Palestinian people, seeing this from the US's perspective with Israel as an ally, I believe it would be smart to provide them smaller amounts of aid due to the amount of technology and military weapons we have been sending to them. Reducing this amount would be able to alleviate some of the concern about running out of resources for military stock as well.
Just to touch on the specifics of why Republicans are opposing this, they want major changes in terms of border policy and limiting immigration, like bringing back Trump era restrictions, (not just money) in exchange for supporting the passage of this package. However, this seems unlikely to occur, as Democrats have pushed back pretty hard on these policies (which I would tend to agree as, as that seems pretty much against the spirit of America, and not to mention very hard to implement. Immigration policy as a whole is definitely far from perfect though, but that's another topic).
Anyways, I also think that sending aid to Ukraine is necessary, crucial, and time sensitive, not to mention the fact that most of the money would be staying in the US and funding domestic production of weapons that are then sent to Ukraine, and that refusing to do so in order to further one's own (maybe questionable?) agenda is not the most admirable, but I suppose that's just politics.
I do believe public opinion and news coverage of policies, especially in relation to humanitarian foreign aid crises, does play an impact in government decisions. But recently it feels as if Ukraine's situation has been overshadowed on news stations. These days, coverage is mainly focused upon Israel-Hamas or the word of the year (which is "authentic" if anyone was curious). Even social media, which was once flooded with people calling to rush to Ukraine's aid, has now gone relatively quiet on the event. This phenomenon isn't limited to Ukraine-Russia, but also the events in Congo in which 6.9 MILLION people were recently uprooted because of rebel attacks. I truly believe if more attention is brought to Biden's foreign aid package, there will be broader public support and subsequently influence the decisions of the politicians meant to represent us.
Similarly to Chin-yi's comment, the situation in Congo deserves our utmost attention and sympathy, but sadly, the media has failed to garner such sentiments. Because of the lack of media attention, why would the Biden administration make more of an effort to make more public approaches to support? Because the Israel-Hamas conflict and the Ukraine-Russia war have been primary focuses of the American people, if Biden makes moves concerning these conflicts, he'll receive more attention and support as well. With this support, he develops a platform to run on for re-election, and isn't that what politicians want????? I'm glad that the Israel-Hamas and Israel-Palestine situation has gained even more attention and dialogue. Still, I also sympathize with the American government's inability to tend to every single foreign conflict. I just wish that we spent less money on battles like these. Once I become a tax-payer of the country, I would most definitely feel uncomfortable knowing that my money took part in the killings of others, even if our government felt it "right" to do so.
I'm glad that the Congress is finally able to discuss this issue after their struggle to elect a Speaker of the House. However, just as the election for the Speaker deepened polarization, I'm also worried that this conflict will only further divide Congress. Rachel mentioned how Republicans are asking for something in return for passing this legislation. I support compromise, but what they ask for seems unrelated with the issue of intervention, and it will only foster more disagreement and frustration when trying to pass this already-controversial bill.
While I understand it is important to support our allies abroad, the Congress also needs to spend its time debating domestic issues and coming up with compromise to solve its domestic problems. Personally, I'm tired of hearing about the U.S. spending money on out-of-nation affairs when there are issues at home to attend to. For example, politicians need to start thinking to address the accumulating U.S. debt, the worsening of climate change, and the persisting issue of gun violence.
I agree with Zen that paying taxes for the money to be spent on killing people abroad makes me feel uncomfortable. It reminds me of Henry David Thoreau, who refused to pay taxes because he disagreed with slavery and the U.S. invasion of Mexico during Mexican-American War in the 1840s. I think that underscores the importance of electing the right people into government, representatives who share the same priorities you. This is also a reason why people themselves go into interest groups and the government, because they want to advocate for their idea on how government should run.
Adding onto Carole's points about focusing on domestic problems, while aiding Israel and Ukraine isn't necessarily a bad thing, the U.S. does have significant issues to tend to at home (such as the border, healthcare, housing costs, education lag due to COVID, inflation, and more). Congress needs to start thinking about domestic problems instead of pandering to what the media is paying attention to at the moment (although I guess we can hardly blame them for doing so).
I think Brendan wrote up a post a few months ago about how funding Ukraine isn't AS costly as it seems because most of the aid is weapons that would have been thrown out anyways. There is still significant financial aid of course but Ukraine funding is fairly cost-effective considering the U.S. simultaneously cripples Russia, an international rival.
Republicans would do well to recognize that of the two foreign conflicts, aid for Israel is probably the more unnecessary initiative considering Israel is a fairly developed country fighting against a (relatively) unsophisticated terrorist group.
Again, foreign aid isn't necessarily a bad thing but this bill should be a lot more cut and dry than it is. If Republicans really want to cut foreign aid, they should consider doubling the border security budget by cutting aid to Israel instead of dragging their feet on amending the bill.
Also a tangent elaborating on Zen and Carole's points on taxes. It is overall pretty odd to me that the government can take the money that you earn with your labor and fund things that you morally oppose (like wars, private prisons, incarceration for cannabis, etc.)
The implications of failing to approve this aid package promptly are extremely severe.
I think President Biden and Director Young make a compelling case - Ukraine is rapidly running out of vital military supplies to defend itself against Russia's unjust invasion, and disruption to US assistance could essentially hand victory to Putin. As we've learned, that would have devastating consequences for global democracy and sovereignty.
The proposed $100 billion total aid package indicates sustained American commitment to supporting key allies against authoritarian aggression. As Young bluntly stated, America cannot rhetorically champion causes like freedom while refusing to back up our words with action when it counts most. I remain optimistic enough members will make the right choice, but it clearly requires immediate bipartisan cooperation.
I believe the implications of Biden's aid package to Ukraine and Israel are severe. With the next presidential election looming, and with President Trump already stating that if he's elected as president he will "not commit to sending aid to the war-torn country" (talking about Ukraine), it is clear that if Biden loses the election to Trump then Ukraine will stop receiving U.S. military aid and will likely lose the war against Russia if it continues until then. Shalanda Young's worry that any halt in assistance to Ukraine could be significantly damaging suggests that Ukraine is currently dependent on U.S. aid to maintain a fighting chance in the war against Russia, and although Trump is not making any claims on who he wants to win in the war, it is clear that not supporting Ukraine is essentially the same as allowing Russia to win. Even further, with such a heavy divide amongst Americans on whether or not the U.S. should support Israel or Palestine in the war happening in the middle east, it is likely that this aid package will diminish support for the Biden administration, and chances are polls will skew towards Trump in the next presidential election.
Now that we can see the result of the Senate vote on providing money for foreign aid, I would agree with Kaushal’s point that the implications of failing to approve this deal are severe. The U.S. not only helps Ukraine by providing aid, but sets a precedent for other countries to do so and warns aggressors such as Russia of the response invasions can warrant from other countries in the world. However, I also think the impasses that Congress can get in trying to push legislation across are more worrying when dealing with issues important in the moment: funding Ukraine is a time-sensitive issue, given that the country is actively involved in a war, yet it takes time to draft, amend, and vote on bills that will have an effect. I know figures such as Chuck Schumer have mentioned the idea of offering some amendment that would turn enough Republicans to prevent this vote from being just down party lines, but until both sides are willing to support some sort of compromise—even if this means watering the bill down—the US is going to have a tough time dealing with policy abroad, and will be indirectly sending the message that the country is indecisive.
I agree with Vishal’s point, that there are more issues to deal with and so some compromise, perhaps regarding Israel aid, might need to be reached, and I think that in general, when votes are right along party lines and debates turn into a “shouting match,” (per Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/world/us/after-failed-test-vote-prospects-dim-new-ukraine-aid-us-congress-2023-12-07/) this sort of process sorts a bad precedent for how the US will be able to agree legislation when needed more urgently.
I believe that the urgency emphasized by President Biden regarding the $100 billion foreign aid package for Ukraine and Israel is crucial given the rising tensions. What's critical here is understanding the potential repercussions of any delay in approving this aid - it could not only weaken Ukraine's position but also potentially embolden Russian military advances.
Moreover, this scenario highlights the broader implications of foreign aid beyond direct assistance to Ukraine and Israel. It underscores the interconnectedness of global geopolitics and how decisions made in Congress impact international relations and national security. The aid package's approval is not solely about aiding foreign nations but also about upholding strategic alliances, safeguarding global stability, and protecting U.S. geopolitical interests.
I think that sending this money is very important to send to Ukraine. The outcome of this war sets an important precedent for not just the US, but also the rest of the world. If Russia wins then it sends the message that there's a threat to other countries' individual sovereignty. Furthermore, the US has already sent over $75 billion in aide, and it would almost be a waste to not see this through. However, I think whatever congress decides, they should be mindful of the timeframe prioritize the safety and security of our allies.
It’s very concerning that there is pushback on something so crucial as this aid package. As Rachel said, the fact that some Republicans are using their refusal of support for the package as means to further their own agendas is worrisome as well as a bit disappointing. Especially, since it seems as though many of them previously supported aid, such as Mitch McConnell.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/senate-republicans-block-ukraine-and-israel-aid-as-they-demand-border-policy-changes
Also as said in this article, halting support to Ukraine would be a “gift” to Putin. Like Biden puts it, “they’re willing to literally kneecap Ukraine on the battlefield and damage our national security in the process”. Hopefully, he and the Republicans will be able to find some quick compromise on fixes for the border system to push forward the aid package.
The decreasing public support for sending money overseas worries me too, but is also understandable. With so many domestic problems in times where cost of living is high and everything is expensive, it makes sense that many Americans would prefer their money go towards fixing issues they can immediately benefit from. But, the United States as well as many other countries have a lot to gain/lose depending on the outcomes of both the Russia-Ukraine war and Israel-Hamas war. Hopefully for us, it will be short-term pain for long-term gain.
Post a Comment