John – I’ll give you the answer that our President should have given from day one: We have two choices, we can keep the aggressive Russian Army where they are, or we can let them murder tens of thousands more Ukrainians and place their Army on the border of four more NATO countries. There are no other choices. There is no magical third option where we get “peace.” Putin won’t agree to peace as long as he thinks he can keep advancing. Which one of those choices is more likely to draw American forces into the fight? The answer should be obvious: the one where Putin takes Ukraine, realizes the West has given up, and continues his aggression against the Baltic states (NATO allies). This scenario absolutely brings us to the brink of a shooting war. There is no question about that. Maybe not this year or next, but surely our children will one day have to again be in Europe fighting for our allies. Putin’s own words in his comments and speeches over the years have always indicated his imperialist ambitions and we should listen. So, despite the critic’s claim that “we are perpetuating a war” by assisting Ukraine, the truth is that THEIR preferred option brings us closer to war. Unfortunately, President Biden has never made this very simple argument of why it matters to AMERICAN INTERESTS. This isn’t about lofty arguments of “defending democracy” or “standing up to dictators.” This is about stone-cold American interests. The modern American way of life is dependent on a stable world and the global economy that we have effectively led since WWII. The world before WWII was always in relative chaos, and it's not a world you want to return to. If we allow that world to come back, where dictators can just invade other countries because they want their territory and resources, what do you think happens to global commodity prices, supply chains, and availability of basic necessities? Massive disruptions. Even if Putin stops at Ukraine, the economic consequences are large, considering Ukraine’s abundance of grain exports and critical minerals like nitrogen, neon, and iron. Now imagine China claiming control of Taiwan and their production of 90% of the world’s advanced semiconductors. And imagine Iran as it creates chaos in the Middle East, raising up global oil prices with it. And can you see how giving up on Ukrainian allies makes it easy for China to assume we will also give up on Taiwan? There is a clear domino effect based on our actions now. These are the simplest geopolitical reasons why stopping Russian aggression matters, and unfortunately our leaders rarely give you these reasons. OTHER QUESTIONS: “They are corrupt, how do we know where our money is going? What is it spent on?” Lets get a few points clear right up front: 1) I have been adamant that any additional funds must be accompanied by strict accountability measures, which is exactly what this aid bill does. Those that accuse Ukraine of rampant corruption are not totally wrong – it’s a problem in all ex-Soviet states and especially in Russia – but Ukraine is one of the few countries that has taken significant steps in rooting it out. There is no evidence it has seriously affected the use of our aid and our weapons. 2) On average we have only spent 5-10% of our annual defense spending on this war. From a purely economic view, it is a small investment for an enormous strategic gain: halting Russian aggression that could have led to greater war with NATO, re-establishing deterrence, and seriously damaging the Russian army. 3) Most of the money (around 80%) in the most recent bill is actually spent on the American industrial base and American DoD requirements. 4) The Ukrainians have been getting our old dusty equipment while we buy new equipment to replace it with. 5) We have benefitted massively in a future war against China by “waking up” our largely dormant defense industrial base. Some details: The bill includes rigorous oversight by multiple inspectors general and careful end-use monitoring of equipment. In fact, the legislation requires in person monitoring – by U.S. personnel or vetted third party monitors. To be clear, much of the money in the bill is to replenish U.S. military equipment, including expiring munitions and supplies that would otherwise be wasted. The bill requires a cost-matching requirement from other U.S. allies and requires a repayment agreement from the government of Ukraine. Furthermore, this bill includes the REPO Act which authorizes the seizing of Russian frozen assets that will be used to pay for Ukraine economic assistance so that we don’t have to. How can we be confident that equipment is used as intended? We do this with scanners and software that tracks equipment and ensures there isn’t fraud or corruption with on-site visits and even front-line units sending pictures of equipment. For some munitions, Ukrainian forces are required to return spent casings to show they have been used. Inspectors general for the Defense Department, State Department, and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) are continuously conducting audits and investigations to make sure equipment and funds reach their destination and aren’t diverted. We have been working with Ukraine since before the Russian invasion to eradicate corruption. When I was in Ukraine in May 2022 to conduct oversight and see the situation firsthand, I was highly focused on our efforts to prevent the diversion of funds and equipment. It is clear that significant strides have been made since then. President Zelensky has clearly been eager to address instances of corruption, including firing and prosecuting ministers and advisors suspected of impropriety. By all indications, Ukraine has made and continues to make significant efforts to root out corruption. In fact, Ukraine ranks among the world’s top performers in the anti-corruption index. Yet another indication of progress is that their reform efforts have led to the European Union granting them candidate status and they are working on becoming full members of the EU. “So do we just have to keep giving them aid forever?” No. The Ukrainian defense industry is rapidly building up on its own but it needs our support. Their economy is actually growing now, but again, still needs military support to keep it safe. And we are supplying (finally) more advanced weapons that will create tactical victories that lead to strategic victories. The primary strategic goal for the United States is pushing Putin back far enough that he agrees to peace negotiations. Our overall mission is re-establishing deterrence and thus lasting peace, and that only happens if Putin regrets his decision to invade. We will know that moment has come when he is at the negotiating table. We can't get him to that table by retreating. “What about our border?” I agree, our border is much more important. For months I have outlined reasonable positions on border policy for our leadership to take to the Democrats and strike a deal. Senator Lankford attempted to do this in the Senate, as well. What became clear (and you may not want to hear this, but it's true), is that the “hardline” right doesn’t want a deal on border security. Lies were told about what was in the Lankford deal, and so my attempts in the House were also severely degraded. You have to understand the political lay of the land in Congress. The truth is that our far-right members will never vote for any Ukraine package even if it has major border policy wins in it. They would rather see Russia win than get some progress on securing the border. They have made this very clear over and over. They won’t take a 50% win, they only want a 100% win, which of course means we end up with ZERO. I have heard them behind closed doors say “It's better to lose, and appear like we are fighting.” They do not want any progress on the border. So why is this a problem? Because it destroys our leverage against the Democrats. They know we don’t have a real majority when our members publicly say they won’t vote as a team, and so Democrats know they don’t have to give an inch. Furthermore, the Republican position strangely and suddenly became “We don’t need new laws, only a new President can fix this.” But this is insane. We absolutely need new laws that a better President (Trump) could benefit from. If you recall, Trump had serious challenges securing our border with our own laws. He had to make the “Remain in Mexico” deal with Mexico to get the border under control. The majority of the Republican plan to secure the border, HR2, is changes to immigration law. Of course, we need new laws and of course, we need a new President. Both things can be true. In summary, I don’t think our leadership team leaned in hard enough, early on, even though I gave them what they needed and offered a plan to do it. But what ultimately made any deal on border security impossible was that our hard right-wing simply didn’t want it. That’s the truth. I don’t like where we are now, but I can tell you with a clear conscious that I am one of the only members who did everything possible to push our leadership toward a deal. Most members just waved their hands with vague “demands” and now use that as an excuse to vote to allow Russia to win. I can’t vote with a clear conscious to allow Russia to win and advance us closer to a real war, just because I didn’t get the package I wanted. It is a great honor to represent the district, and I will continue serving it with honesty and integrity. You will always get straight answers from me, not talking points. It is often much easier to vote “no” and avoid tough explanations of difficult topics. But I refuse to be that kind of representative. These issues are complicated and extremely consequential for our children’s future, and we deserve leaders that are willing to examine them carefully before taking votes. I promise to always be that kind of leader. Sincerely, Dan Crenshaw Member of Congress PAID FOR BY DAN CRENSHAW FOR CONGRESS Dan Crenshaw for Congress | 5900 Memorial Drive, Suite 215, Houston, TX 77007 Unsubscribe [email protected] Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Sent by [email protected]