House action could achieve something where words are failing on Ukraine aid

Finding the right words is important. They provide clarity, while the wrong words create confusion and distortions that obscure the truth.

A story — of dubious veracity — told by former President Trump at a rally continues to reverberate, particularly in Europe. In it, he claims he told the leader of a “big” European nation that if it had not paid its fair share to NATO that the U.S. would not honor its Article Five commitment under the NATO Treaty. Indeed, he claimed he would encourage Russia to do “whatever the hell it wants.”

What is disconcerting is that the media continues to use the former president’s language in framing the issue, but that language distorts the true state of play.

NATO is not a golf club where you pay dues. NATO members don’t pay money to NATO beyond the small amount that supports a secretariat.

What this is about is an agreement that was reached in 2014 under the Obama administration that NATO members would spend a minimum of 2% of their GDP on their own defense. Most were slow in moving toward that target. Trump’s cajoling during his presidency might have moved the needle incrementally, but the Russian invasion of Ukraine two years ago and Biden administration pressure moved the needle more.

In 2014, only three NATO members met the 2% target. This year, 18 of the 31 members are expected to reach the target, up from 11 last year. Keep in mind that in the last decade, we have had a pandemic that disrupted the economies of Europe and diverted resources elsewhere.

If you want to get into the weeds, the 2% target doesn’t really tell you all that much. If that 2% is spent mainly on salaries and pensions, as opposed to weapons systems and readiness, then 2% does not amount to much.

Since the invasion of Ukraine, Europe has stepped up and provided much more aid to the brave and determined Ukrainians than the U.S., particularly if you count the $90 billion it has spent hosting millions of Ukrainian refugees. That said, the United States’ military aid has been particularly crucial, especially air defense.

Then there is the $60 billion package of aid for Ukraine passed by the Senate and languishing in the House where a majority support the legislation but are not being allowed to vote. Half that money will be devoted to replenishing the U.S. arsenal. And the vast majority of the other half will provide military aid. The weapons go to Ukraine, but the money largely stays in the United States.

If voters/taxpayers have an image of pallets of cash being shipped to Ukraine, then they don’t understand how this all works.

There also is a bill in Congress at the moment that would unfreeze the $6 billion in Russian assets held in U.S. banks and frozen in the wake of the invasion. The bill would allow that money to be diverted to Ukraine. That bill along with the foreign policy aid package for Ukraine, Israel, humanitarian aid and the Asian theater need to be passed as soon as possible.

If Speaker Johnson is too afraid of President Trump and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s threat that allowing a vote on Ukraine aid would trigger a vote that could remove him as speaker, then he needs to step aside and allow a discharge petition to bring the measure to the floor for a vote. There is a good chance that — for a brief moment — sanity would prevail in the House, and the measure would pass.

That desperately needed action would speak much louder than mere words.

• Keith Peterson, of Lake Barrington, served 29 years as a press and cultural officer for the United States Information Agency and Department of State. He was chief editorial writer of the Daily Herald 1984-86.