Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky will meet House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) during his visit to Washington on Tuesday. Zelensky seeks Johnson's support for a $60 billion Ukraine aid package that is currently stalled in the Senate.
Subject to Democrats accepting a Republican push for border reforms, the Ukraine package deserves the GOP's support. Ukraine, a non-NATO member, might be Vladimir Putin's current target. Still, Putin holds deeply felt imperial claims against two of America's best NATO allies, Estonia and Poland. When it comes to Ukraine, Russia must be compelled to a concessionary negotiating stance so that Putin is diminished in his interest in and ability to pursue future aggression. Johnson should recognize as much. But he should also use his influence with Zelensky to make two key demands.
JUDGE QUESTIONS IF AMTRAK TAKING UNION STATION IS CONSISTENT WITH CONGRESSIONAL INTENT
First, he must push the Europeans to do far more for Ukraine. The European Union and its media cheerleaders claim that the political union is doing more than its fair share for Ukraine. This is an absurd fiction. If the U.S. passes this $60 billion package, it will have provided greater total aid than the EU, Norway, and the United Kingdom combined. But where Ukraine is bordered by four EU member states, the U.S. is 4,000 miles from the war-torn country. We would not expect the EU to do nearly as much for Guyana as did the U.S. were Venezuela to invade that nation. Why should the U.S. be expected to do nearly as much as the EU for Ukraine? U.S. arms supplies will continue to be critical, but the EU could and should provide Ukraine with far greater funding to consolidate its long-term future against Putin.
It's not only aid that matters here. Far too many European NATO members continue to view the alliance through the motto of, "We like to let the Yanks do the hard lifting." This means that the U.S. is forced to continue providing the key elements of NATO's deterrent force posture. This poses an unacceptable risk to U.S. military readiness in terms of a prospective war with China. Johnson should thus push Zelensky to make a louder case for more aid from the Europeans. Johnson should also make that case directly. With a U.S. presidential election on the horizon, the EU's attention span on Republican politics is increasing.
Second, Johnson should make clear that Zelensky needs to adopt a less autocratic stance at home and a more diplomatic stance toward partners abroad.
Zelensky's early wartime leadership was a testament of remarkable courage and fortitude. But that was last year. This year, Zelensky is different. His frustration with Hungary's Xi-Putin pet Viktor Orban is understandable. But Zelensky has taken an increasingly arrogant stance toward even those partners who have saved his nation from annihilation. The Ukrainian president has repeatedly and very publicly attacked foreign politicians who have suggested that he show a little more gratitude for their weapons supplies. He has acted petulantly when facing political disagreements, canceling a briefing to Congress last week, for example. At home, Zelensky has faced rising criticism for an increasingly autocratic stance toward the media and political rivals such as Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko. And while Zelensky's anti-corruption efforts are improved, they remain inadequate. Johnson should emphasize these concerns and the bearing they have on how Americans judge Zelensky's requests for continued aid.
Top line: Ukraine should get this aid package. Ukraine's fight is noble and necessary for Western security. But Zelensky needs to do more to consolidate America's support. Johnson's emphasizing of these two concerns offers key ways to do so.