March 1, 2022
Press Release from Congressman Cohen’s website.
WASHINGTON – Representatives Steve Cohen (TN-09), Co-Chairman of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, also known as the Helsinki Commission, and the Commission’s Ranking Member, Joe Wilson (R-SC), along with Liz Cheney (R-WY), Tom Malinowski (D-NJ), Mike Waltz (R-FL) and Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) have introduced the bipartisan Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act of 2022.
This proposed legislation would enhance the President’s current lend and lease authority to simplify bureaucratic barriers with regard to military equipment for Ukraine.
The scope of this bill would be limited to materials for use in protecting civilians during the current Russian military invasion, and the broader national security concerns of the United States.
This bicameral bill is a companion to the Senate version introduced by Senator John Cornyn (R-TX).
“President Franklin Roosevelt’s Lend-Lease program, enacted in 1941, very likely permitted Britain to keep fighting the Nazis in World War II, and ultimately helped roll back tyranny across Europe. This similarly necessary Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act will, I hope, allow the brave people of Ukraine to defend themselves against unwarranted Russian aggression without obligating U.S. troops,” said Representative Steve Cohen.
“I am grateful to introduce this bipartisan bill to ensure that red tape does not stand in the way of the courageous people of Ukraine as they fight for their families and the sovereignty of their country.
There is historical precedent for lend-lease dating back to World War II, which was instrumental in defeating Hitler’s Nazi Germany. This war perpetrated by Vladimir Putin against Ukraine has united the world in its resolve against corrupt authoritarians and in admiration for the Ukrainian people.
The US, along with our valued allies, must continue to supply Ukraine with the military equipment they need to repel this attack, and this legislation expedites and expands that process,” said Representative Joe Wilson.
“The United States must take aggressive and decisive action to aid Ukraine as they fight Putin’s brutal invasion. I’m proud to join Senator Cornyn and Representative Wilson in introducing legislation that will ensure the United States can continue to provide equipment and armaments without delay,” said Representative Liz Cheney.
“Ukrainians have proven they’re willing to stand and fight for democracy against one of the largest armies in the world,” said Representative Tom Malinowski. “They deserve a fair shot to protect their country, and this legislation will give President Biden even greater flexibility to deliver to them the weapons they need.”
“The United States must provide all available military assistance to the Ukrainian people in their fight for freedom and sovereignty. This program will provide Ukraine with additional flexibility and resources to continue their fight against Russian invaders and further bolster European security,” said Representative Mike Waltz.
“When it comes to key national security issues, partisanship should stop at the water’s edge. The Ukrainian people have shown incredible bravery in the last few days to protect their country, and I’m pleased that Republicans and Democrats are working together to make sure we have their backs.
This bill will give the President the authority to lend and lease military equipment directly to the Ukrainian government to protect civilians and to give the Ukrainian Armed Forces the tools they need to continue to fight back against Russia’s unwarranted aggression,” said Representative Elissa Slotkin.
Background:
As part of the President’s Arms Export Control Act authority, he can currently lend and lease defense articles to U.S. partners and allies when it is in the United States’ national security interest. However, bureaucratic barriers and other limitations make these authorities impractical for the current crisis facing Ukraine.
So what is this Lend Lease idea?
Lend-Lease Act
HISTORY.COM EDITORS, NOV 4, 2019
The Lend-Lease Act of 1941 stated that the U.S. government could lend or lease (rather than sell) war supplies to any nation deemed “vital to the defense of the United States.”
Under this policy, the United States was able to supply military aid to its foreign allies during World War II while still remaining officially neutral in the conflict.
Most importantly, passage of the Lend-Lease Act enabled a struggling Great Britain to continue fighting against Germany virtually on its own until the United States entered World War II late in 1941.
In the decades following World War I, many Americans remained extremely wary of becoming involved in another costly international conflict. (40 million casualties in WWI)
Even as fascist regimes like Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler took aggressive action in Europe the 1930s, isolationist members of Congress pushed through a series of laws limiting how the United States could respond.
But after Germany invaded Poland in 1939, and full-scale war broke out again in Europe, President Franklin D. Roosevelt declared that while the United States would remain neutral by law, it was impossible “that every American remain neutral in thought as well.”
Before passage of the Neutrality Act of 1939, Roosevelt persuaded Congress to allow the sale of military supplies to allies like France and Britain on a “cash-and-carry” basis: They had to pay cash for American-made supplies, and then transport the supplies on their own ships.
By the summer of 1940, France had fallen to the Nazis, and Britain was fighting virtually alone against Germany on land, at sea and in the air.
After the new British prime minister, Winston Churchill, appealed personally to Roosevelt for help, the U.S. president agreed to exchange more than 50 outdated American destroyers for 99-year leases on British bases in the Caribbean and Newfoundland, which would be used as U.S. air and naval bases.
That December, with Britain’s currency and gold reserves dwindling, Churchill warned Roosevelt that his country would not be able to pay cash for military supplies or shipping much longer.
Though he had recently been re-elected on a platform promising to keep America out of World War II, Roosevelt wanted to support Great Britain against Germany. After hearing Churchill’s appeal, he began working to convince Congress (and the American public) that providing more direct aid to Britain was in the nation’s own interest.
In mid-December 1940, Roosevelt introduced a new policy initiative whereby the United States would lend, rather than sell, military supplies to Great Britain for use in the fight against Germany.
Payment for the supplies would be deferred, and could come in any form Roosevelt deemed satisfactory.
“We must be the great arsenal of democracy,” Roosevelt declared in one of his signature “fireside chats” on December 29, 1940.
“For us this is an emergency as serious as war itself. We must apply ourselves to our task with the same resolution, the same sense of urgency, the same spirit of patriotism and sacrifice as we would show were we at war.”
Lend-Lease, as Roosevelt’s plan became known, ran into strong opposition among isolationist members of Congress, as well as those who believed the policy gave the president himself too much power.
During the debate over the bill, which continued for two months, Roosevelt’s administration and supporters in Congress argued convincingly that providing aid to allies like Great Britain was a military necessity for the United States.
“We are buying…not lending. We are buying our own security while we prepare,” Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
“By our delay during the past six years, while Germany was preparing, we find ourselves unprepared and unarmed, facing a thoroughly prepared and armed potential enemy.”
In March 1941, Congress passed the Lend-Lease Act (subtitled “An Act to Promote the Defense of the United States”) and Roosevelt signed it into law.
Roosevelt soon took advantage of his authority under the new law, ordering large quantities of U.S. food and war materials to be shipped to Britain from U.S. ports through the new Office of Lend-Lease Administration. The supplies dispersed under the Lend-Lease Act ranged from tanks, aircraft, ships, weapons and road building supplies to clothing, chemicals and food.
By the end of 1941, the lend-lease policy was extended to include other U.S. allies, including China and the Soviet Union. (Isn’t that interesting?)
By the end of World War II the United States would use it to provide a total of some $50 billion in aid to more than 30 nations around the globe, from the Free French movement led by Charles de Gaulle and the governments-in-exile of Poland, the Netherlands and Norway to Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, Paraguay and Peru.
For Roosevelt, Lend-Lease was not motivated primarily by altruism or generosity, but was intended to serve the interest of the United States by helping to defeat Nazi Germany without entering the war outright—at least not until the nation was prepared for it, both militarily and in terms of public opinion.
Through Lend-Lease, the United States also succeeded in becoming the “arsenal of democracy” during World War II, thus securing its preeminent place in the international economic and political order once the war drew to a close.
So whay are we not moving ahead with Lend Lease 2022?
rollcall.com
Posted March 2, 2022 at 7:25pm
During President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address on Tuesday night, his remarks on Ukraine drew perhaps the most bipartisan applause from representatives and senators. But the unity was deceptive.
Republicans pressed the case Wednesday that they are more interested than Democrats in quickly providing new weapons to Ukraine and in imposing punishing new sanctions on Russia.
Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., offered legislation that would provide the $6.4 billion supplemental spending that the Biden administration says it wants for responding to the Ukraine crisis. Rubio’s proposal appears to spend more on new weapons than the administration has privately told lawmakers it wants in the package.
Republicans are calling for such a bill to move forward promptly, but Democrats instead want to include it in the fiscal 2022 omnibus spending package that Congress hopes to send to the White House before a stopgap federal spending law expires March 11.
That’s right folks, while people are dying in Ukraine, our federal government is playing party politics and delaying the aid that Ukraine desperately needs.
Republicans have also accused the White House of wanting the Pentagon’s share of the aid package subtracted from the total amount for defense in the forthcoming omnibus, though Democrats insist they want no such thing.
Biden on Wednesday announced new sanctions against Russia, including on Russian military and defense entities. But, except for restrictions on commerce involving oil extraction equipment, the list did not include a ban on U.S. purchases of Russian oil and gas.
A large group of GOP senators said at a news conference last Wednesday that it is time for America to stop buying energy from Russia, and they also called for requiring in law that any bank that does business with Russia cannot do business with America, among other ideas for sanctions.
“We should do everything we can to tighten the noose on the Putin economy,” said Rob Portman, R-Ohio.
Biden said in his State of the Union address that the U.S. is committed to helping Ukraine.
“We are giving more than $1 billion in direct assistance to Ukraine,” Biden said. “And we will continue to aid the Ukrainian people as they defend their country and to help ease their suffering.”
But it is not yet known what new weaponry might be going to Ukraine beyond that already announced.
Rubio’s bill appears to be the first detailed legislative proposal made public that spells out how to allocate the $6.4 billion the administration has said Ukraine needs now to address its many pressing requirements.
Some lawmakers want upward of $10 billion for Ukraine, but almost all are behind spending at least $6.4 billion.
Rubio’s bill would provide $2 billion of that total to the State Department for Ukraine’s humanitarian and infrastructure issues, he said in a statement. Another $4.4 billion of it would go to the Pentagon.
Of the defense money, $1 billion would replace defense assets that the U.S. military has transferred to Ukraine or NATO allies.
But most of the bill’s funds would be for new initiatives. These include $1 billion to give Ukraine weapons it has sought: “small arms, grenade launchers, and ammunition, man-portable missiles and rockets in a ready-to-fire configuration, night vision goggles, drones, communication equipment, bullet-proof armor, rations and medical kits,” Rubio’s statement said.
Also, in the package would be $1 billion to supply NATO allies — such as Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia — “replacement planes, tanks, munitions, anti-air and anti-tank weaponry” for themselves and to replace assets they sent to Ukraine.
Another $1 billion would go toward Defense Department cyber defenses to protect critical infrastructure and nuclear command and control systems.
Last, $400 million would help the Defense Department to deliver humanitarian assistance to Ukraine. Rubio said his measure “encourages the administration to consider the efficacy of using the military” to deliver the humanitarian supplies, his statement said.
By contrast, top Defense Department officials have said, in essence, that the billions of dollars they are asking Congress for is to repay the Pentagon for money it has already spent or already announced it will spend.
Neither the administration nor congressional Democrats have provided much detail about what is in the White House’s $6.4 billion request for Ukraine aid, except to tell reporters it includes $3.5 billion for the Pentagon, $2.9 billion in security assistance for NATO allies, as well as money for humanitarian supplies.
But on Tuesday, Mara Karlin, the assistant secretary of Defense for strategy, plans and capabilities, told the House Armed Services Committee that “most of” the administration’s request focuses on the cost of sending thousands of additional U.S. troops to Eastern European NATO allies and a substantial portion of the rest would be to replenish Defense Department inventories that were tapped to send weapons and ammunition to Ukraine. Karlin did not cite any new weaponry as part of the package.
U.S. officials were more precise behind closed doors about how much of the request is forward-looking and how much is not, according to Michael Waltz of Florida, the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee’s Readiness panel.
Waltz said Wednesday that all of the administration’s proposal is aimed at paying back the Pentagon, not buying additional supplies for Ukraine.
“Just briefed that 100% of the Defense Dept portion of the $6.4B aid package the Biden admin is requesting from Congress is to pay for the U.S. troops deploying to Europe and to replenish U.S. war stocks NOT new lethal aide for Ukraine,” Waltz tweeted. “Zelensky needs more ammo NOW!”
So, there you have it folks. History has once again given us a possible solution to a current problem.
Unfortunately, our federal government, bogged down in party politics and bureaucracy is once again showing us what we all know, Washington is broken.