Much of the funding will go to Kyiv, though portions will go to U.S. European Command, oversight-related offices, and U.S. defense-industrial initiatives.
The $1.7 trillion omnibus spending package the House of Representatives passed today, sending it to the president’s desk, will authorize $45 billion in additional spending on responses to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. That will bring total U.S. funding on that front to over $100 billion since the start of the invasion this year.
In a tweet this afternoon, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky thanked congressional leadership and senior appropriators for congressional approval of the legislation.
Around $9 billion of the Ukraine-related omnibus funding is allocated for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, a Pentagon fund that disburses aid to Ukraine’s military for weapons, training, salaries, and other expenditures, per a congressional summary of the omnibus bill’s Ukraine support sections.
The Biden administration has used this funding for 28 tranches of military assistance since the start of the Russian invasion in February. The latest package, announced on Tuesday to coincide with Zelensky’s visit to Washington, puts total U.S. military transfers to Ukraine at $22 billion, and it includes Patriot missiles for the first time. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in a statement that the package is a response to Russia’s efforts to “weaponize winter by freezing and starving Ukrainian civilians and forcing families from their homes. “
In addition, the omnibus allocates over $13 billion in funding to the Ukrainian government for infrastructure and energy-related functions, in addition to nearly $2.5 billion in humanitarian aid.
While much of the $45 billion in the omnibus will ultimately go to Kyiv in the form of economic and military aid, substantial portions of that funding are also expected to be allocated to U.S. government agencies’ own responses to the conflict.
The bill allocates $2.5 billion to the Department of Health and Human Services for Ukrainian-refugee resettlement.
Significant portions of the $45 billion also go directly to the U.S. military, including $7 billion for U.S. European Command’s operations and just under $12 billion to replenish U.S. weapons stocks depleted by weapons transfers to Ukraine.
Previous supplemental Ukraine appropriations funds have gone to other Pentagon programs, including those to shore up U.S. critical mineral supply chains. On December 19, the Defense Department announced a $25 million project with Perpetua, an Idaho-based company, to facilitate the opening of a U.S. facility to mine minerals needed for the production of small arms, using Ukraine-related funding.
The U.S. has previously passed three tranches of Ukraine-related funding, including one package that was part of a broader continuing resolution in September, amounting to over $65 billion. The $45 billion aid package approved today is larger than the Biden administration’s initial request for $37 billion more. According to Center for Strategic and International Studies senior adviser Mark Cancian, it will probably last through next May, even though it’s intended to last through the end of September 2023.
In a speech to Congress this week, Zelensky cast U.S. aid to Ukraine as “an investment in the global security and democracy that we handle in the most responsible way,” rather than an act of charity. That comment in particular was widely seen as a response to growing GOP discontent with seemingly open-ended Ukraine-related expenditures.
One thing that both Russia hawks and GOP Ukraine aid detractors agree on, however, is the need for robust oversight of U.S. assistance — one issue that has become a flashpoint in the debate surrounding aid packages.
While the Ukraine-assistance package includes $6 million for the Pentagon inspector general to investigate funding in the bill and an additional $7.5 million for the Government Accountability Office to assess all U.S. responses to the Ukraine invasion, that’s not likely to placate the staunchest critics.
Nevertheless, many Republican lawmakers remain supportive of continued U.S. assistance to Kyiv, with some senior House members attacking the Biden administration for not taking a more forward-leaning stance toward backing Ukraine.
After Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Biden administration voiced support for labeling Russia an “aggressor state” rather than designating it a “state sponsor of terror” — a label that comes with certain sanctions penalties — incoming House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Michael McCaul slammed the proposed move, calling it “just symbolic” during an interview on CNN.
“What they actually need are the weapons,” he continued.