Sen. McConnell backs funds for Ukraine despite skeptics
WASHINGTON — Mitch McConnell often tells the story of a letter his father, a foot soldier in World War II, wrote to his mother while he was stationed in Eastern Europe in 1945, as the United States was liberating the region from Nazi rule.
“I think the Russians are going to be a big problem,” A.M. McConnell wrote, foreshadowing the communist takeover to come.
Almost 80 years later, his son is still warning of Russia. From his perch as the long-time Republican leader in the U.S. Senate, McConnell has emerged as perhaps the strongest advocate in Congress for sending billions of dollars in American assistance to Ukraine as the country fights Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion, aligning himself with President Joe Biden and majority Democrats in the process.
It’s hardly a change in outlook for the Kentucky senator, who was first elected to the Senate in 1984 and was shaped by the era when President Ronald Reagan was fighting the Cold War and U.S. foreign policy was centered on the Soviet threat.
But while McConnell still thinks of himself as a Reagan Republican, many in his party no longer do.
As he faces the end of his fourth decade in the Senate, McConnell’s unwavering advocacy for Ukraine has set him apart from many of his GOP colleagues, many of whom are deeply skeptical or outright opposed to U.S. involvement abroad — particularly in Ukraine. It’s an increasingly prevalent view in the Republican Party, shaped under the influence of former President Donald Trump, who has railed against “forever wars” and praised Putin.
“Honestly, I think Ronald Reagan would turn over in his grave if he saw we were not going to help Ukraine,”
McConnell said in an interview with The Associated Press this week. He called the Ukraine aid, which Biden has asked Congress to pass as part of a $105 billion request for Israel and other countries, a “no brainer.”
The Republican dissension has created a pivotal political moment, one that could forever shape the fate of Ukraine and the strength of American influence abroad. Stressing urgency, the White House has pushed Congress to approve the massive foreign aid package, which would also aid Israel in its war with Hamas and replenish American military stockpiles at home, by the end of the year.
But while earlier rounds of assistance passed Congress easily, the path for aiding Ukraine has grown perilous as the war enters its second brutal winter.
Almost more than any other issue, the debate over Ukraine divides the GOP along generational and ideological lines — especially as Trump is the leading candidate for the GOP nomination next year.
Cutting off assistance from Ukraine would be “a huge setback for the United States,” and the country’s reputation, McConnell said.
He sees the potential consequences as even bigger than the Biden administration’s chaotic and deadly 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan.
The current moment is “a time of unique American vulnerability,” he said.
It is also a uniquely vulnerable moment for McConnell, who rarely ventures far from the views of his GOP conference. While his position is unequivocal on sending Ukraine more assistance, and several colleagues are behind him, many are hesitant to speak in strong terms about the need to keep Putin at bay.
Others are outright opposed to the aid, and they have begun to directly challenge the Republican leader’s support for it in ways that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago.
“One of the things I worry about is we have leadership negotiating with the president,” said Ohio GOP Sen. J.D. Vance, who is in the first year of his term, of McConnell’s recent talks with the White House and the leader’s support for tying Ukraine and Israel aid together. “I want to make sure that leadership is actually being representative of the views of the conference.”
Vance, who has pushed to separate the aid for the two countries, said his views are closer to new House Speaker Mike Johnson and Republicans in the House, which passed legislation last week that would aid Israel but not Ukraine. Vance argues the United States does not have enough of a plan for winning the Ukraine war.
“I think the fact that Speaker Johnson has a little bit more agency is in part because he is the Speaker of the House,” Vance said. “But it’s also important because he has a membership that is much, much more in tune with where Republican voters actually are.”
The Republican schism in the Senate was most pronounced Sept. 30, as the House and Senate scrambled in a rare Saturday session to keep the government open before funding expired Oct. 1. McConnell was insistent that short-term aid to Ukraine would have to be in the deal but relented when several of his colleagues, even some of those who were like-minded, endorsed a House plan that would not include it.