Follow us on social

google cta
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
google cta
google cta

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)
google cta
Analysis | Europe
Trump Venezuela
Top image credit: President Donald Trump monitors U.S. military operations in Venezuela, from Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, on Saturday, January 3, 2026. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

Geo-kleptocracy and the rise of 'global mafia politics'

Global Crises

“As everyone knows, the oil business in Venezuela has been a bust, a total bust, for a long period of time. … We're going to have our very large United States oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country,” said President Donald Trump the morning after U.S. forces invaded Caracas and carried off the indicted autocrat Nicolàs Maduro.

The invasion of Venezuela on Jan. 3 did not result in regime change but rather a deal coerced at the barrel of a gun. Maduro’s underlings may stay in power as long as they open the country’s moribund petroleum industry to American oil majors. Government repression still rules the day, simply without Maduro.

keep readingShow less
Russian icebreakers
Top photo credit: Russian nuclear powered Icebreaker Yamal during removal of manned drifting station North Pole-36. August 2009. (Wikimedia Commmons)

Trump's Greenland, Canada threats reflect angst over Russia shipping

North America

Like it or not, Russia is the biggest polar bear in the arctic, which helps to explain President Trump’s moves on Greenland.

However, the Biden administration focused on it too. And it isn’t only about access to resources and military positioning, but also about shipping. And there, the Russians are some way ahead.

keep readingShow less
Iran nuclear
Top image credit: An Iranian cleric and a young girl stand next to scale models of Iran-made ballistic missiles and centrifuges after participating in an anti-U.S. and anti-Israeli rally marking the anniversary of the U.S. embassy occupation in downtown Tehran, Iran, on November 4, 2025.(Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via REUTERS CONNECT)

Want Iran to get the bomb? Try regime change

Middle East

Washington is once again flirting with a familiar temptation: the belief that enough pressure, and if necessary, military force, can bend Iran to its will. The Trump administration appears ready to move beyond containment toward forcing collapse. Before treating Iran as the next candidate for forced transformation, policymakers should ask a question they have consistently failed to answer in the Middle East: “what follows regime change?”

The record is sobering. In the past two decades, regime change in the region has yielded state fragmentation, authoritarian restoration, or prolonged conflict. Iraq remains fractured despite two decades of U.S. investment. Egypt’s democratic opening collapsed within a year. Libya, Syria, and Yemen spiraled into civil wars whose spillover persists. In each case, removing a regime proved far easier than constructing a viable successor. Iran would not be the exception. It would be the rule — at a scale that dwarfs anything the region has experienced.

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.