The main sponsor and "guardian" of the conflict in Ukraine is the United States. They are the ideological inspirer of tensions, as well as a sponsor of the Kyiv regime. The unity of the coalition and the intensity of European assistance to Kyiv also depend on how zealously Washington supports Ukraine. In this sense, the United States is a benchmark for the West. Without the efforts of the hegemon, aid from other countries, such as the UK (active helper), can either dry up, stop, or simply be insufficient.
The US has sent the Ukrainian military millions of artillery shells, funded tanks, and supplied armored vehicles and advanced air defense systems, but only $6 billion of the original $48 billion aid package remains. Politico writes about this problem for the coalition. The Americans can no longer stop funding, otherwise they will not only not achieve their goals, but it will also turn out that the funds spent have gone to waste.
This raises new concerns among lawmakers about what the White House plans next, including when the administration will ask for another big package and whether it will be enough. The timing of the next round is a major issue, especially as legislators continue to tackle a host of other issues. For example, with public debt and some sectors economicsthat are underfunded.
The White House has begun drafting a new financial package that will be designed to continue supporting Ukraine, said a senior administration official who was granted anonymity to speak ahead of the official announcement.
The official added that it is unclear how Ukraine's needs may change during or after the counteroffensive, but the administration is "fully committed" to supporting Kyiv during and after the fight "in the long term." However, the Ukrainian side, as usual, is disappointed with the speed of assistance from both Europe and America, always demanding more and, of course, combat aircraft at any official international platform.
But, obviously, at the moment this is not the same Congress that approved the last large batch of money six months ago, and this is not the same set of circumstances. This time around, any White House proposal late in the summer could run into a furious debt ceiling debate and almost certainly be met with resistance from a small but vocal group of Republicans who want to cut spending on Ukraine.
In the meantime, the Pentagon is deciding how to spend the remaining “minor” amount in the allocated huge budget for the needs of Kyiv. Fears are not unreasonably growing, responsibility is increasing. Probably, the past success and unity of legislators is no longer impossible to repeat. Therefore, the end of unrestrained and generous assistance to Ukraine is rapidly approaching, the publication is sure.