Inside the House GOP Foreign Policy Divide on Ukraine
If the West is going to effectively deter its adversaries, Europe must hold up its end of the bargain, not America.
Ian Cruz is an undergraduate student at Georgetown University in the School of Foreign Service. He is majoring in international politics and is in an accelerated master’s program in German and European studies.
On April 20th 2024, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 8035 to address the conflict in Ukraine, budgeting $60.84 billion in aid for the Ukrainians. Despite the wide margin of support in the House (311 yeas to 112 nays), the bill represents a significant divide within the slim House Republican majority.
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), while not initially, was a proponent of Ukraine aid, which has reopened wounds in the Republican conference as the party charts its future vision in the foreign policy realm. This is symbolized by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s (R-Ga.) threat of a motion to vacate — which now has two other GOP backers.
The difficult reality for Speaker Johnson is that a majority of the majority (112 out of 218 Republicans) opposed Ukraine aid, resulting in a reliance on unanimous support from Democrats. This group of Republicans went beyond the membership of the House Freedom Caucus. House Republican Conference Chair Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), the number three in House GOP leadership, was among the 112 nays, further illustrating the lack of unity within the party.
The Republican establishment cannot brush this vote aside and blame the Freedom Caucus for this vote total. In addition, 61% of Republicans believe the United States should not send more weapons and military assistance to Ukraine, meaning it is not an obscure position.
This skepticism of Ukraine aid even extends to non-MAGA Republicans, indicating the position is gaining traction across multiple wings of the party. Accordingly, it will become increasingly difficult for Speaker Johnson to justify more aid to Ukraine while losing support from his party.
Demands from Johnson’s right flank are not radical by any stretch of the imagination. The growing frustration that Ukraine continues to receive American financial support while nothing is being done to address domestic issues, especially the border crisis. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) said that voters are “pissed” that the government is prioritizing Ukraine aid over the border. This serves as another example to show Washington is out of touch with Middle America.
The lackluster bipartisan deal led by Senator James Lankford (R-Okla.) was rightly shot down by prominent conservatives, including former president and presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump. The proposal would have permitted 150,000 illegal aliens to cross into the U.S. per month (5,000 per day) before a new “shutdown” authority could be invoked. These are unacceptable terms for conservatives, and show the discontent the beltway uniparty has for the American people suffering the effects of the border crisis.
Moreover, a growing wedge between Republicans is the role of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Fears of a second Trump administration resulted in Congress passing a bipartisan bill to prevent presidents from unilaterally leaving the alliance.
Arguments aside over the merits of leaving or staying, it is unlikely that Trump would pull the United States out of NATO. Thus, the bill reveals the deep paranoia amongst the uniparty of Trump ending the conflict or retaking American foreign policy in a non-interventionist direction.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine highlights the need for Europe, not America, to bolster its defenses, especially if some NATO members think they could be Putin’s next target. Out of thirty-two NATO members, nineteen are not reaching the agreed spending level as outlined in the North Atlantic Treaty, including large economies like Germany and France.
If NATO is going to effectively deter its adversaries, Europe must hold up its end of the bargain. Greater burden sharing among allies will undoubtedly make the alliance stronger and expand its capabilities — this includes pushing back against China.
Speaker Johnson does present a reasonable argument about the need for the United States to at least tacitly support Ukraine. Russia and China’s “no limits” agreement is a significant threat to Western civilization and its security. Like Biden’s failed withdrawal from Afghanistan, a failure in Ukraine could transmit the image that America is frail, thus emboldening China.
However, it is essential for the United States to be a force for peace. The United States cannot overextend itself by committing to support another endless war when we have glaring threats at home. Fighting a war without a long-term strategy does little to convince Americans to share Washington’s commitment to the war effort.
Consequently, Republicans should continue to push the White House to present a plan of action to Congress to ensure American aid, if any, is having its intended effect. While it makes sense for Washington, or any power, to pursue strategic ambiguity, as to not show our hand to the entire world, Americans still have every right to ask questions about the conduct of and seek an end to the war.
This recognizes that Trump will be more successful by keeping his Ukraine plans undefined, as to not tip off the Russians. Given Trump was seen as unpredictable by foreign leaders, his ambiguity is an asset because it brings unorthodox leaders, like Putin and Kim Jong-un, to the negotiating table.
Trump’s “America First” disposition and desire for "everyone to stop dying” is more assuring to the American people as he focuses his foreign policy around advancing the interests of Americans rather than the swamp. This is why his victory in November is all the more important.
Given the current political climate and distrust Americans have for President Biden and his actions in Ukraine, it would be smart for the GOP to keep their cards close to their chest. Moreover, conservatives in Congress should continue to make any aid that their colleagues so desire contingent on securing our Southern border, all the while demanding the Biden administration take action to put our own country first and improve the lives of the American people.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider becoming a patron of our publication! Your enthusiasm and support means a lot to all of us at The American Postliberal — and we promise we’ll work hard for your investment in our project.
 |
|