To view this email as a web page, click here

.
AEI's weekly digest of top commentary and scholarship on the issues that matter most

Sustaining Military Support

Arming Ukraine Without Taxpayer Dollars

January 25, 2025

Donald Trump has promised to continue to arm Ukraine as he seeks a just and lasting end to the conflict. Marc A. Thiessen and General Jack Keane (ret.) explain how the administration can do this without spending taxpayer money.

 

 

On the other hand, Trump’s determination to increase tariffs on major US trade partners will impose serious costs on American consumers and businesses. In a new report, AEI economist Joseph W. Glauber explores the potential harms of heightened trade barriers to the US agricultural sector.

 

Pentagon reform must be an essential part of the administration’s broader efforts to strengthen American hard power. In a new AEI report, Mackenzie Eaglen shows how providing real military budgetary growth now can arrest our relative decline against military rivals and enable long-term savings and efficiencies.

 

Trump’s first few days in office have been in keeping with the assertive and partisan tone set in his inaugural address. In a survey of the political landscape, Yuval Levin highlights the dangers of over-reading the public mood and mandate, much as Joe Biden did in 2021.

 

The flurry of executive orders reflects the president’s commitment to wield executive power in novel and aggressive ways. Putting his actions in the wider context of presidential history, Jack Landman Goldsmith cautions that relying solely on hard power, at the expense of persuasion and consent, is unlikely to deliver long-term success or national unity.

 

Food Aid Cargo Preference and Sourcing Mandates: How More Rent-Seeking Legislation Could Waste Precious Resources

Currently, 50 percent of all food aid shipments must be carried on US-flagged vessels, and new legislation seeks to increase that requirement to 100 percent. In a new AEI report, AEI Agricultural Policy Studies Director Vincent H. Smith and Stephanie Mercier estimate the costs of these requirements. Using US Department of Agriculture and US Agency for International Development data on individual food aid shipments between 2013 and 2024, they find that US-flagged vessels charge rates 40 percent higher for packaged goods and 100 percent higher for bulk shipments. These costs make US food aid significantly less effective, preventing US aid agencies from helping two to four million desperately poor children and adults avoid the consequences of extended hunger and malnutrition annually. If the US wants to maximize the humanitarian and soft-power impact of food aid, it should decrease, not increase, these shipping mandates.

More from AEI
RESEARCH AND COMMENTARY

California’s Insurance Crisis

Roger Pielke Jr.
The Honest Broker

The Demographic Shift

Mark J. Warshawsky
AEIdeas

Medicare Advantage Enrollment Has Surged. Big Savings for Beneficiaries Help Explain Why.

Benedic N. Ippolito et al.
The Evidence Base

How Trump Can Permanently Fix the Student Loan Program

Preston Cooper
Washington Examiner

The "Tradwife" Dilemma

Christine Rosen
Commentary

PODCASTS AND VIDEOS

What Kind of Man Is Good Enough for Your Daughters?

Ian Rowe and Nique Fajors
The Invisible Men

Was Martin Luther King Jr. Conservative?

Dan Wiser et al.
The National Affairs Podcast

Priorities for Election Administration Reform

John C. Fortier et al.
The Voting Booth

Russia Is Weaker Than Most Believe. George Barros Explains.

Danielle Pletka et al.
What the Hell Is Going On?

Told a Story

Nat Malkus and Emily Hanford
The Report Card with Nat Malkus

QUOTE OF THE WEEK

If Trump wants to succeed and enable his successor to carry on his legacy into the 2030s, he will have to avoid the fate of his predecessors.

How? Don’t overreach. Use power wisely. Focus on numbers—market indexes, jobs, inflation, income, border crossings, crime rates. Throw America an unforgettable 250th birthday party in 2026 and help Los Angeles recover for the Olympics in 2028. These are the tests of a successful second term. Donald Trump has four years to pass them.

Matthew Continetti