The proposed $874.2 billion fiscal 2024 (FY24) defense budget that the House Armed Services Committee will begin vetting June 21 provides $80 million in military assistance for Ukraine but closes out further funding for Kyiv for the current fiscal year, which ends Oct. 1.
Since the Russian invasion started in February 2022, the United States has authorized more than $100 billion in assistance for Ukraine, according to the U.S. State Department, including $40 billion in military gear and munitions.
That figure presumably includes $2.1 billion in “security assistance” announced by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) on June 9 and a $325 million tranche released by the Pentagon on June 13, the same day as six House Armed Services Committee subcommittees swiftly and unanimously approved their components of the FY24 national defense budget.
Other than an $80 million allocation for an MGM-140 Army tactical missile system (ATACMS) “for the Armed Forces of Ukraine,” the Pentagon’s FY24 budget doesn’t include additional funding for Ukraine.
That allocation is below the $86.6 million increase for “combat support forces” for the U.S. Navy’s $4.436 billion Somalia Persistent Presence program and its $1.8 billion allocation for “communications/electronic warfare.”
The U.S. Army is also seeking nearly $400 million to continue battling ISIS in Iraq ($242 million) and Syria ($156 million).
Any future Ukraine aid packages would be addressed in supplemental spending that Congress would have to approve, the DOD stated.
Military aid for Ukraine doesn’t come from the DOD budget but from the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI), which allows the Biden administration to draw down funding without congressional approval to order and send weapons to the embattled nation from industry rather than pull them from U.S. stocks.
Ukraine is addressed twice within the 412-page draft FY24 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), filed as House Bill 2670, which Congress will debate through the summer before the new fiscal year begins.
Regarding the $80 million ATACMS allocation, the proposed NDAA “directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the congressional defense committees, not later than Dec. 31, 2023, on the progress of using USAI for the procurement of and availability of ATACMS to the Armed Forces of Ukraine.”
Under a section called “Mission Support to Ukraine,” the draft NDAA states that the House Armed Forces Committee “seeks to better understand how the Department of Defense is prioritizing and approving or disapproving requests from the Government of Ukraine for smaller dollar value and lower quantity capabilities made by small businesses or non-traditional providers.”
The committee requested that Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin appear before “not later than” Dec. 1 to provide “details on any request made by the [Ukraine] Ministry of Defense or National Police that have not been adjudicated within 90 days of submission or request.”
The committee also requested that the Pentagon provide “any request for support for systems, capabilities, or platforms made by the government of Ukraine and denied; justification for denied or partially denied requests for support; and methods to improve the acquisition of non-programs of record, defense articles, and services for the provision to Ukraine under the Presidential Drawdown Authority or the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative.”
Audits, Oversight, Questions
But some Capitol Hill Republicans want to plug the spigot until the administration and Pentagon provide an audit of what has been spent and install greater oversight on any further allocations.Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), in a June 12 letter to Government Accountability Office (GAO) Comptroller General Gene Dodaro, requested “a full GAO review of DOD’s accounting of all equipment provided to Ukraine” since February 2022, criticizing the Biden administration for its May disclosure that it made a $3 billion accounting “error” in overestimating the value of provided assistance.
Rubio said the administration “appears now to be using the depreciated value of the equipment” to send more aid without proper accounting.
“This will ensure U.S. taxpayers are not footing an even larger bill to replace the equipment needed to defend the [United States] and its interests,” he wrote.
A growing number of House Republicans are also demanding audits and greater accountability, with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) preemptively saying that a supplemental Ukraine assistance package anytime in the near future is unlikely.
House Armed Services Committee Chair Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), who had repeatedly criticized the Biden administration for not sending more aid to Kyiv, including long-range missiles, has also said that what further assistance Ukraine may receive depends on the success of its offensive.
If the House were to consider a supplemental military spending bill, Rogers said, it would address challenges presented by China in the South China Sea and assistance to Taiwan, not Ukraine.
Some Democrats are also questioning Ukraine spending, including Rep. Rosa DeLauro (R-Conn.), ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee, who said any supplemental spending for Kyiv should be accompanied by a similar boost in domestic allocations.
The issue is certain to emerge as the defense budget goes before the full 59-member House Armed Forces Committee next week, kicking off a summer of hearings on the Pentagon’s proposed spending plan.
“I heard the National Defense Authorization Act may have money for Ukraine in it,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) wrote on Twitter. “The NDAA should only fund our military for our defense. I want to be able to vote for a good NDAA, but I will not if it funds Ukraine. We should be pushing a peace deal, not funding a war.”
