Follow us on social

google cta
Original

Congress wants crack at Biden's new $13.7B Ukraine aid package

Digging in for the long war apparently needs a constant replenishment of funds, even before the last $20 billion is fully spent.

Analysis | Europe
google cta
google cta

The White House dropped this little nugget on the Friday before the Labor Day weekend: it wants a new aid package totaling $13.7 billion, on top of the already approved $40 billion for Ukraine from May. We are just now getting some idea of what and why it wants the money now, but there are number of questions remaining.

Apparently members of Congress are noticing too, as they got back from break today. Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) told Defense News that he is asking the Secretary of Defense for a run down.

“I’m not opposed to it; I just want to know what’s in it,” said Tester. Armed Services Committee members Sens. Tim Kaine, D-Va., and Thom Tillis, R-N.C., are also looking for a briefing, according to the website.

So what do we know?

According to our own reporting, the White House and Pentagon have announced over $12 billion in weapons transfers to Ukraine this summer. This is from the $19 billion earmarked for military assistance out of that $40 billion package (the rest going to humanitarian and economic aid). There should be some $6 billion left for weapons, according to the math. But the Defense News article is vague: It just suggests (via a quote from Armed Services Committee Chair Jim Inhofe) that there is only "roughly" $2.8 billion left in Presidential Drawdown Authority funds, which takes directly from the stockpiles. There are other streams available too.

According to Defense News, the new package is in addition to all that and would require Congressional approval. The $13.7 billion reportedly includes $11.7 billion for "security and economic assistance" (some $7.2 billion of that for military aid) through December. It also seeks an additional $2 billion to reduce domestic energy costs driven up in part by the war.

A further breakdown:

The $7.2 billion in new Ukraine (military) aid includes another $3.7 billion in presidential drawdown authority and a further $1.5 billion to replenish items sent to Ukraine from U.S. stockpiles. Another $3 billion, under the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, would allow the Pentagon to contract for new weapons and equipment for Ukraine.

Separately, the Pentagon would get just under $1.6 billion to continue the U.S. troop presence bolstering NATO’s eastern edge after Russia invaded.

Inhofe, of course, is cross that there isn't more money in the request, noting that the money from the first package expires Oct. 1. He says they should have enough for $2 billion per month in PDA funds, which is what they had in the last pot of dough.

“This aid package is insufficient to provide the Ukrainians with what they need to win,” Inhofe said on Twitter. “The Biden admin is now explicitly arguing to provide Ukraine with less military aid than Congress gave them several months ago in a massive bipartisan vote. Congress will have to lead again.”

“It’s clear that Congress will have a lot of work to do to improve a Ukraine aid package when we return."

The White House apparently wants to push this through the major continuing resolution bill that funds the government through December. Some Republicans are instead calling for a "clean" stand-alone bill (which would be more open to debate).

What we do know is there is a lot of money and weapons sloshing around and it is difficult to keep track of it all. We also know that the White House is digging in for the long war, even reportedly planning for a separate named command with a general and its own budget. We also know the Pentagon is running out of its own stockpiles. It's a Washington shell game — look away for a second and you may lose the thread. We'll do our best to watch, and keep updating.


U.S. Northern Command personnel move medical supplies for distribution at New York's Javits Medical Station as part of the U.S. military's COVID-19 response (U.S. Army Photo by Pvt. 1st Class Nathaniel Gayle)
google cta
Analysis | Europe
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.