I Was Wrong About House Republicans on Ukraine
How Kevin McCarthy falsified me.
To date, the hard-working staff here at Drezner’s World had been sanguine about the effect of GOP victories in the midterms on U.S. support for Ukraine. It’s true that some Republicans like Tucker Carlson were opposed to supporting Ukraine. It’s true that the only members of Congress who voted against U.S. military aid for Ukraine were members of the GOP. And it’s true that I’d heard some scuttlebutt that Republicans were calling their members of Congress after the passage of the $40 billion aid bill.
I was unperturbed by these data points. Carlson’s influence during the spring debates over assisting Ukraine ranged from minimal to nonexistent. Despite loud complaints from some quarters, polling in the United States shows that a majority of Republicans support arming Ukraine. Indeed, as the Washington Post’s Aaron Blake notes, at the outset of the war House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy sounded more hawkish than Democrats on this issue:
After Russia invaded Ukraine in February, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) sought to out-hawk President Biden and the Democrats.
He complained that Ukraine hadn’t gotten enough help in advance and baselessly ventured that Russia “probably” wouldn’t have attacked if it had been provided with more weapons. He also pushed for the United States to provide aircraft to Ukraine when the Biden administration viewed that as impractical and of limited utility.
This led to me sounding pretty blasé in Vox last month about the effects of GOP midterm victories: “for the United States, even a Republican wave in November would almost certainly have no effect on US support for Ukraine.”
Then Kevin McCarthy opened his mouth more recently. According to the Washington Post’s Eugene Scott:
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) is signaling that if Republicans win the House majority in next month’s midterm elections, the GOP is likely to oppose more aid to Ukraine in its war with Russia….
“I think people are gonna be sitting in a recession and they’re not going to write a blank check to Ukraine,” he recently told Punchbowl News. “They just won’t do it.”
McCarthy suggested that Americans want Congress to focus on issues closer to home.
“There’s the things [the Biden administration] is not doing domestically,” he said. “Not doing the border, and people begin to weigh that. Ukraine is important, but at the same time, it can’t be the only thing they do, and it can’t be a blank check.”
Scott goes on to highlight other examples of Republicans opposing support of Ukraine. The weird thing, however, is that almost none of these folks are actually in office. Meanwhile, Scott acknowledges that, “most of the congressional leadership, most notably Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), have been steadfast in support for Ukraine.”
Why the switch? Why go against polling (not to mention the traditional “strong on defense” position of the GOP) on this issue?
Unfortunately, GOP strategist Liam Donovan explained the dynamics on Twitter to me:
Unfortunately, this tracks. I should have remembered my Milner and Tingley better. Like trade, this appears to be a case where a vocal minority cares far more about an issue than the more silent majority.
And then you have to add in another factor. To use a technical term of art from Political science, Kevin McCarthy is the biggest chickenshit in American politics right now. Anyone willing to crawl back to Trump less than a month after the violence of January 6th will clearly appease every bully in his path.
So I’d like to apologize: I overestimated GOP leadership in the House. McCarthy will likely kowtow to the loudest elements of his caucus if elected Speaker of the House.
For Ukraine, my wrongness will probably not be significant in the short term. Biden will likely secure more aid for Ukraine in the lame duck session, making McCarthy’s job easier.
For the United States, this is definitely a harbinger of how McCarthy will lead his caucus if elected speaker: by following the loudest, angriest voice in the room.
"Like trade, this appears to be a case where a vocal minority cares far more about an issue than the more silent majority. "
Well, if you've been keeping track since October 1, it sure appears that the folks have a arranged a series of October surprises on behalf of the R party and Vladimir Putin. In particular, a number of big plutocratic types have gone all in on their attempts to rescue and support Vlad's asymmetric strategies (which appears to be all he has to work with at this point, given the wrecking of his army). I think this is a case of plutocrats of a feather stick together.
Given that the American R donor class consists of a bunch of rich guys with the same attitudes toward social issues as the average gamergater, then I don't think it's they're one mind with Vlad the Impotent towards Ukrainians. So every reason to figure they're yelling at McCarthy all the time. (I'd add that the GOP's insistance of promoting their intended destruction of Social Security and Medicare before the election is obviously meant to reassure the plutocrats that they're onboard with the rich guys' tune.) Ergo, Vlad's up shit creek without a paddle so the plutocrats are reaching out to the House R's save their buddy and continue the drive towards worldwide plutocratic oligarchy.
"Biden will likely secure more aid for Ukraine in the lame duck session, making McCarthy’s job easier."
This is key. They'll need money to sustain Ukraine over two years, and that means a big wad of cash.
elm
so