Follow us on social

Hawley

Hawley amendment to create special watchdog for Ukraine aid rejected

The Republican senator said Americans deserve to know the $113 billion appropriated for Kyiv is well-spent and accounted for.

Analysis | Europe

A measure that would create a special inspector general to oversee U.S. Ukraine aid has failed. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) had hoped to attach an amendment to a broader bill repealing the 2022 and 1991 Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMFs).

The vote Tuesday night was 26 for and 68 against Hawley's amendment. All but two votes for the measure came from Republicans. The two Democrats in favor were Sens. Jon Tester of Montana and Jon Osoff of Georgia. Sen. Kristin Sinema, an Independent from Arizona, also voted for the amendment. Republicans were decidedly split, with 22 voting against their colleague.

A final vote for the AUMF bill is expected this week.

Hawley has joined other Republican colleagues in calling for oversight of the over $113 billion in aid that has been appropriated for Ukraine since the beginning of the war a year ago. Of that total, over $75 billion has been spent.

Earlier in March, Hawley (R-Mo.) and Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) introduced a standalone bill that would create a Special Inspector General for Ukraine Assistance (SIGUA) to oversee all military and non-military U.S. assistance, direct the new office to submit quarterly reports to Congress on obligations and expenditure of U.S funds and the provision of weapons and equipment, and track the Ukrainian government’s compliance with anti-corruption measures, among other provisions.

"(Ukraine) is now the largest recipient of United States overseas aid, we need to have one watchdog that is fully accounting for everything we spent and how it’s being used," Hawley told Fox News this week "It’s very simple."

He said he envisioned the SIGUA to be much like the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan (SIGAR) John Sopko, who the senator called "tough and tenacious."

Sopko, who has been SIGAR since 2012, found that at least $19 billion in U.S. taxpayer funds sent to Afghanistan was lost to waste, fraud and abuse from 2002 to 2020. It could have been much more than that, given that Sopko's office only combed through $63 billion of the $134 billion the U.S. appropriated for reconstruction during that period.

But this is only part of the story. SIGAR had a heck of time even tracking the funds in the early days of Sopko's tenure. At one point, his office reported that at least $45 billion spent before 2010 (SIGAR was created in 2008, mind you; he wasn't on the job until 2012) on rebuilding Afghanistan couldn't readily be found. According to Sopko at the time, this wasn't an abuse or fraud issue, but accounting chaos: The Pentagon didn't record everything the same way, and as a result, was only able to turn over data for $21 billion of the $66 billion it spent during that time period.

This only speaks for the need to get one's arms around the billions that have already been sent to Ukraine in the form of weapons and economic assistance, supporters of Hawley's efforts say. "Oversight on aid today means a safer Europe tomorrow. It is not in America's, Europe's or Ukraine's interest for the us to send over $115 Billion in aid, much of it lethal arms, without taking care to ensure it doesn't get redirected to corrupt bureaucrats or worse, potential terrorist cells which could render the entire region vastly more dangerous for decades," charges Saurabh Sharma, president of the conservative American Moment.

"Senator Hawley's amendment is a practical solution to helping prevent a long tail of undesirable outcomes," he added.

Nevertheless, Hawley and Vance will now have to find another way to create SIGUA after today's vote. Critics of the legislation, which included Hawley's own GOP colleague, Sen. James Risch from Idaho, said a SIGUA would be duplicating some 60 auditing and reporting processes already in place to keep track of the money. In other words, this isn't Afghanistan and they don't need a SIGUA.

"(We) have found zero siphoning of U.S. dollars," Risch said on the floor before the vote. "This is an expenditure that is not necessary because it is being looked after already."

Senator Josh Hawley, R-Mo. (DoD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Dominique A. Pineiro)
Analysis | Europe
Diplomacy Watch: Is new Ukraine aid a game changer?

Diplomacy Watch: Is new Ukraine aid a game changer?

QiOSK

When the Ukraine aid bill hit President Joe Biden’s desk Wednesday, everything was already in place to speed up its impact. The Pentagon had worked overtime to prepare a massive, $1 billion weapons shipment that it could start sending “within hours” of the president’s signature. American officials even pre-positioned many of the arms in European stockpiles, an effort that will surely help get the materiel to the frontlines that much faster.

For Ukraine, the new aid package is massive, both figuratively and literally. Congress authorized roughly $60 billion in new spending related to the war, $37 billion of which is earmarked for weapons transfers and purchases. The new funding pushes Washington’s investment in Ukraine’s defense to well over $150 billion since 2022.

keep readingShow less
​Macron’s strategy: A 'Gaullist' betrayal of de Gaulle​

France's President Emmanuel Macron attends a tribute ceremony for the Vercors resistance fighters and civilian victims as part of the commemorations of the 80th anniversary of the Liberation of France, at the cemetery in Vassieux-en-Vercors, southeastern France, on April 16, 2024. Photo by Bony/Pool/ABACAPRESS.COM

​Macron’s strategy: A 'Gaullist' betrayal of de Gaulle​

Europe

President Emmanuel Macron is pursuing an old Gaullist dream: a militarily and geopolitically autonomous Europe under the leadership of France.

The present strategy by which Macron is pursuing this goal is to present France as the military vanguard of Europe in the defense of Ukraine, through the suggestion that French and other NATO troops could be sent to that country:

keep readingShow less
What are Americans' biggest foreign policy priorities?
gopixa via shutterstock.com
gopixa via shutterstock.com

What are Americans' biggest foreign policy priorities?

Global Crises

Americans give higher priority to countering the power and influence of Russia and China and finding a solution to the conflict between Israel and Palestinians than they did six years ago, according to a new survey released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center.

Conversely, policies aimed at promoting human rights, protecting refugees, and strengthening the United Nations are not as compelling to many citizens as they were in 2018, according to the survey, which was conducted during the first week of April.

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest