After weeks of backroom deal-making that would make Machiavelli look like an amateur, the Biden White House can finally kick back, perhaps with a cuppa in hand, as their prized $60 billion aid package for Ukraine has miraculously passed through the House of Representatives. It’s like watching a political Houdini act; just when you think they’re out of tricks, they pull a funding rabbit out of their hat.
Over in the corner, wearing the tarnished crown, is Republican Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson. Handed the gavel with the stern instruction to keep Ukraine’s aid on a short leash, he now finds himself on a rather precarious pedestal. It seems his GOP colleagues might be redefining ‘support’—it’s all fun and games until your friends start measuring your office for their drapes. The whispers of a coup are now getting loud.
Now, let’s iron out a wrinkle or two about this Ukrainian aid saga. Initially, this wasn’t about amping up Kyiv’s military might. Oh no, it was more like passing the hat around Europe to keep Ukraine’s economic boat from capsizing under its wartime deficit. But when sweet reason didn’t cut through the legislative red tape, supporters of the aid did a nifty pivot—now it’s all about bulking up Ukraine’s defense. Classic political prestidigitation!
And why all the fuss? Ukraine has a pocketbook problem. Picture this: a trade deficit so vast it could swallow small nations whole, threatening to send the Ukrainian hryvnia into a freefall. This aid, along with its European cousin passed a few months back, is just enough to keep Ukraine’s economic wolves at bay—well, at least for a few more news cycles.
Ukraine’s military woes seem to be following the plot of a particularly tragic Shakespeare play. They’ve sent nearly every Siyanin, Radoslav and Andreevich that is Tom, Dick and Harry to the front lines, resulting in a dire personnel crisis. With options running thin, the Ukrainian call to arms might soon have to include pulling in the stagehands and popcorn vendors. As for the weapons? American lawmakers are cheerfully claiming the aid package will replenish Ukraine’s armories, but it turns out the weapons cupboard is as bare as Old Mother Hubbard’s. Apparently, the Western powers’ weapon-making machinery might be a few cogs and gears short of a fully functioning arsenal.
Moving onto the predictions of doom and gloom, if the Ukrainian defense lines buckle under pressure, which is looking as likely as rain in London, the high hopes pinned to this aid package might just unravel on live TV. It’s one thing to make lofty promises when the cameras are rolling, but quite another when those promises have to face the harsh light of reality.
And then there’s the $26.4 billion slice of the pie going to Israel. This side dish seems a tad easier to swallow for the folks in DC, but the American public? Not so much. The public’s enthusiasm for overseas military adventures is waning, and it’s about as popular as the last season of The Game of Thrones. Even General Mark Milley, a man who claims to know about military matters, noted last month that Americans are frankly fed up with wars.
Lastly, amidst the fiery backdrop of political stunts—quite literally, with a man setting himself ablaze outside Donald Trump’s trial—the stakes for Joe Biden couldn’t be higher. If this aid package turns out to be a dud, it could very well spell disaster for his re-election campaign. The ongoing fiasco might prompt the average Joe to wonder if their leaders are less master strategists and more like toddlers playing with matches next to a petrol can.
So as the political temperature in America simmers perilously close to boiling, one must ponder whether DC’s foreign policy maestros are orchestrating a symphony or merely fiddling while Rome burns. With each blunder broadcasted in real time, one can’t help but suspect that the answer might just lean uncomfortably towards the latter.