Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, delivered the following remarks today on the Senate floor regarding the war in Ukraine:

“My views on America’s interest in Ukraine are well-known. I spent the better part of the past three years here on this floor pointing out the glaring connections between European security and the security of America’s interests across the globe – core national security interests that determine our prosperity.

“Ukraine’s victory and stability in Europe is squarely in the interest of the United States. Europe is our largest trading partner. Russia is a thuggish autocracy with an economy smaller than Italy’s. There is simply no equivalence. There is no grand realignment opportunity that has gone unnoticed.

“So let me start with this: the most harmful possible outcome of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – for U.S. interests – is a single headline: ‘Russia wins, America loses’. We can’t let that be how this ends. But look at where we are right now: On one side, fellow members of the most successful military alliance in world history – with a combined GDP of more than $17 trillion dollars – are openly planning for a world in which America does not call the shots, and where our word no longer carries weight. These are the very closest allies and partners who have worked hand-in-glove with America, bought American equipment, and taken America’s lead. But if America turns its back on them, they will look elsewhere for guidance, for coordination, for weapons, and even for trade. On the other side, Putin’s Russia and its $2 trillion GDP, where Kremlin officials now say that America’s current ‘foreign policy configurations’ now ‘largely align with our vision’… and that hiccups in U.S-Ukraine relations are ‘useful’ because they drive a wedge between America and our European allies. Well, it’s not hard to imagine why.

“Freezing lethal assistance and intelligence support to Ukraine made Russia’s job easier. It was easier to hit Ukraine’s defenders – along with its schools, hospitals, and nurseries. And after three years of immense progress toward a stronger and more capable trans-Atlantic alliance – with greater commitments to burden sharing and European leadership – the West that had resolved to check Putin’s neo-Soviet ambitions is now in danger of being consumed by internal recrimination. What welcome news for an autocrat whose grip on power depends on the endurance of a wartime economy!

“The will to force Putin to make serious concessions in the interests of lasting peace is fragmented. And too many on this side of the Atlantic seem to believe, foolishly, that his appetite will be satisfied in eastern Ukraine. This is the same mistake made by the architects of the Minsk One and Minsk Two agreements. Circumstances are not crying out for a Minsk Three. Somehow, this doesn’t sound like the makings of a successful deal for America. Somehow, these don’t seem like the conditions for advancing America’s interests in European peace and security… let alone pretending to mediate a dispute between equals.

“‘Russia wins, America loses’. It’s not too late to avoid this outcome. But it’ll require that America and our allies operate from the same set of facts.

“First, the dollars and cents. America’s total Ukraine-related spending comes in at $175 billion. Not $350 billion, but half that much. As a share of GDP, eleven European countries have allocated more Ukraine-related spending than the United States. In real terms, total European aid is double U.S. spending. More military aid than America. More budgetary assistance than America. Period.

“And our allies’ increasing investments have been good news for American security and the strength of our alliance. They’ve meant expanding arsenals and industrial capacity… along with bigger defense budgets for buying American. For now. But what if – even having established the correct math – you think it’s still too much to spend on helping to degrade a major American adversary without putting a single American servicemember in harm’s way? What if you still think we’re getting a raw deal?

“Consider where most of that Ukraine-related spending – $120 billion – has gone: To investing in U.S. capabilities and expanding our own defense industrial capacity! We’re already $120 billion closer to restoring the sort of forces and capacity we’ll need to deter conflict in the Indo-Pacific than we were three years ago. Or consider the value of the operational and tactical lessons the U.S. and our allies are drawing from Ukraine’s battlefield experience.

“The conflict in Ukraine is a battle lab, a glimpse at the future of warfare, and our Ukrainian partners are innovating faster than American industry is often able. Concerned about the next major conflict? We’re learning how to prepare better for it. U.S.-made systems are literally feeding performance data back to us.

“The American people are not getting fleeced. Far from it. But if we mistake surrender for peace, we’ll be risking far worse. China is watching what we do. So are America’s allies and partners in Asia.

“To believe that we can torch our credibility in one region and not tarnish it in another is foolish. When we treat withholding assistance to Ukraine like a cudgel… And insist that the victim of aggression is the side that has to make concessions… What should we expect other partners to conclude?

“I’ve heard that Ukraine needs to be prepared to ‘do difficult things’. I’m curious which difficult things our frontline partners haven’t been doing for the past three years… Like defending besieged towns and cities. Like burying their sons and daughters. Will Russia be expected to do difficult things, too, like ending its onslaught? By what means are we prepared to compel them?

“War is hell. And the worst consequences are always borne by innocent civilians in flight and by brave soldiers holding the line. Ending the war in Ukraine is a noble aim. Preventing war, even more so. But peace is different than surrender. And being honest about who’s to blame doesn’t hinder lasting peace – it enables it.

“Why should we be less willing to call Russia out for its brutal aggression than we are to call Hamas or Hizballah out for theirs? Would we be afraid to call Iran out if it had nuclear weapons? Is that the lesson we want the world to draw from this conflict?

“Ronald Reagan epitomized peace through strength – by words and actions. He called the Soviet Union an ‘evil empire’ at the same time as he dealt productively with Gorbachev. In July of 1983, he spoke to the people of the captive nations of the Soviet Union and communist regimes. He said: ‘…to every person trapped in tyranny, whether in the Ukraine, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Cuba, or Vietnam, we send our love and support and tell them they are not alone. Our message must be: Your struggle is our struggle, your dream is our dream, and someday, you, too, will be free.’

“In the fall of the Soviet Union, Ukraine got its chance at freedom. Putin intends to extinguish it. Ukraine is serious about a just and stable peace. How do we know? The Ukrainians preferred it overwhelmingly until their neighbor chose war, instead. Again. And Again.

“I’ll reserve my skepticism, my disdain, and my condescension for the authoritarian thug who treats the slaughter of innocent children like a sport. And anyone who cares about not getting played for a sucker should do the same. In the face of our hesitation, Putin has escalated. He’s insulted the sincere pursuit of peace. It’s a crystal-clear reminder that what he’s after isn’t an end to the bloodshed.

“America cannot afford to get played. So let’s not.”