EU agrees massive Ukraine aid deal in ‘message’ to Putin 

1 / 2
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen (L) and European Council President Charles Michel (R) react during a press conference as part of a European Council meeting at the European headquarters in Brussels, on February 1, 2024. (AFP)
2 / 2
From left, Belgium's Prime Minister Alexander De Croo, Estonia's Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, Bulgaria's Prime Minister Nikolai Denkov and Luxembourg's Prime Minister Luc Frieden talk during a round table meeting at an EU summit in Brussels on Feb. 1, 2024. (AP)
Short Url
Updated 02 February 2024
Follow

EU agrees massive Ukraine aid deal in ‘message’ to Putin 

  • Deal comes as doubts over support from Kyiv’s Western backers have buoyed Russia, nearly two years into its invasion of Ukraine
  • Hungary’s Viktor Orban agreed to drop his veto on the four-year package in the face of intense pressure from the EU’s other 26 leaders

BRUSSELS: European Union leaders on Thursday overcame months of opposition from Hungarian leader Viktor Orban to agree 50 billion euros ($54 billion) of aid for Ukraine, in a move they hailed as a strong message to Russia.
The deal to keep funds flowing to Ukraine comes as doubts over support from Kyiv’s Western backers have buoyed Russian President Vladimir Putin, nearly two years into his invasion of the neighboring country.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky thanked the European Union for the funds, which he called “long-awaited.”
“Today the EU has made a long-awaited decision,” Zelensky said in his evening address. “This is a clear signal to Moscow that Europe will withstand and that Europe will not be broken,” he continued.
“The message is clear,” said French President Emmanuel Macron after the Brussels summit wrapped up. “Russia cannot count on any fatigue from Europeans in their support for Ukraine.”
Macron said the deal likewise sent a message to Washington — where billions of dollars in aid are held up in Congress — “that the European Union is here, committed and delivers.”
In an abrupt about-face at the start of the gathering, Orban agreed to drop his veto on the four-year package for Kyiv in the face of intense pressure from the EU’s other 26 leaders.




Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico, right, talks to Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban during a round table meeting at an EU summit in Brussels on Feb. 1, 2024. Orban had been accused of holding hostage Ukraine’s future in a bid to blackmail Brussels into releasing billions of euros for Hungary that have been frozen pending reforms by Budapest. (AP photo)

The Hungarian nationalist appeared to come away largely empty-handed — securing only the promise of a possible review on the spending in two years.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz voiced hope that the EU decision could assist US President Joe Biden in convincing reluctant Republicans to pass Washington’s own $60-billion proposal for support for Ukraine.
“I hope that the message that we’re sending out today and the discussions we’re having today is helping him,” Scholz said.
The EU money will plug holes in the Ukrainian government’s budget to allow it to pay salaries and services, as its outgunned soldiers battle to hold back Moscow’s forces.

Orban — Russia’s closest ally in the EU — had sparked fury from his counterparts in the bloc by thwarting a deal on the aid in December.
Thursday’s talks were expected again to see hours of protracted political arm-wrestling but a deal was swiftly announced after Orban met beforehand with the leaders of Germany, France, Italy and the EU institutions.
“He gave some ground,” said one European diplomat.
“He saw that people were growing irritated, that there was a line not to cross.”
Orban had been accused of holding hostage Ukraine’s future in a bid to blackmail Brussels into releasing billions of euros for Hungary that have been frozen pending reforms by Budapest.
European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said the answer was “a simple no” when asked if Hungary’s prime minister had won any promises to get the blocked financing from the EU.
“Hungary received no gift,” echoed France’s Macron.
In an apparent face-saving measure, Orban claimed he had instead got a guarantee that “Hungary’s money would not end up in Ukraine“
Orban’s opposition over Ukraine had exasperated EU leaders long frustrated at dealing with his role as a spoiler in the bloc.
Warning of growing “Orban fatigue” in Brussels, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said ahead of the summit that it was time for the Hungarian leader “to decide if he is a part of our community.”




Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said ahead of the summit that it was time for the Hungarian leader “to decide if he is a part of our community.” (AFP)

Other leaders insisted that if Orban did not drop his opposition, they would club together as 26 countries to keep aid flowing to Ukraine’s government.
But with Kyiv facing possible budget shortfalls by spring, that option would have taken more time.

The latest EU showdown took place against the backdrop of swelling protests by European farmers, who clogged roads around the summit with 1,300 tractors in a show of strength, lighting fires and pulling down a city statue.
Von der Leyen announced that Brussels would put forward plans to ease rules and red tape criticized by farmers protesting across Europe.
Once the Ukraine aid was agreed, leaders turned more to the question of the future of EU military support for Kyiv.
Accusations have been levelled that key EU nations such as France, Italy and Spain are not pulling their weight on arming Ukraine.
Scholz, whose country is the largest European donor to Ukraine, has called for others to lay out their military support and do more to help Kyiv.
“In my opinion, not all member states are doing enough,” he said.


US House of Representatives passes war powers resolution backing Trump’s attacks on Iran

Updated 8 sec ago
Follow

US House of Representatives passes war powers resolution backing Trump’s attacks on Iran

WASHINGTON: The House narrowly rejected a war powers resolution Thursday to halt President Donald Trump’s attacks on Iran, an early sign of unease in Congress over the rapidly widening conflict that is reordering US priorities at home and abroad.
It’s the second vote in as many days, after the Senate defeated a similar measure. Lawmakers are confronting the sudden reality of representing wary Americans in wartime and all that entails — with lives lost, dollars spent and alliances tested by a president’s unilateral decision to go to war with Iran.
While the tally in the House, 212-219, was expected to be tight, the outcome provided a clarifying snapshot of political support for, and opposition to, the US-Israel military operation and Trump’s rationale for bypassing Congress, which alone has the power to declare war. At the Capitol, the conflict has quickly carried echoes of the long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and many Sept. 11-era veterans now serve in Congress.
“Donald Trump is not a king, and if he believes the war with Iran is in our national interest, then he must come to Congress and make the case,” said Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
House Speaker Mike Johnson warned that it would be “dangerous” to limit the president’s authority while the US military is already in conflict.
“We are not at war,” said Johnson, R-Louisiana, a close ally of Trump, contradicting others. He said the operation is limited in scope and duration, and the “mission is nearly accomplished.”
Republicans largely back Trump, and most Democrats oppose the war
Trump’s Republican Party, which narrowly controls the House and Senate, largely sees the conflict with Iran not as the start of a new war, but the end of a government that has long menaced the West. The operation has killed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which some view as an opportunity for regime change, though others warn of a chaotic power vacuum.
Republican Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, publicly thanked Trump for taking action against Iran, saying the president is using his own constitutional authority to defend the US against the “imminent threat” the country posed.
Mast, an Army veteran who worked as a bomb disposal expert in Afghanistan, said the war powers resolution was effectively asking “that the president do nothing.”
For Democrats, Trump’s attack on Iran, influenced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is a war of choice that is testing the balance of powers in the Constitution.
“The framers weren’t fooling around,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., arguing that the Constitution is clear that only Congress can decide matters of war. “It’s up to us.”
Crossover coalitions emerged among those in Congress. Two Republicans joined most Democrats in voting for the war powers resolution, while four Democrats joined Republicans to reject it.
The war powers resolution, if signed into law, would have immediately halted Trump’s ability to conduct the war unless Congress approved the military action. The president would likely veto it.
Trump officials provide shifting rationale for war
Trump has scrambled to win support for the nearly week-old conflict as Americans of all political persuasions take stock. Administration officials spent hours behind closed doors on Capitol Hill this week trying to reassure lawmakers that they have the situation under control.
Six US military members were killed over the weekend in a drone strike in Kuwait, and Trump has said more Americans could die. Thousands of Americans abroad have scrambled for flights, many lighting up phone lines at congressional offices as they sought help trying to flee the Middle East.
Trump said Thursday he must be involved in choosing Iran’s new leader. Yet Johnson, R-Louisiana, said this week that America has enough problems at home and is not about to be in the “nation-building business.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said that the war could extend eight weeks, twice as long as the president first estimated. Trump has left open the possibility of sending US troops into what has largely been a bombing campaign. More than 1,230 people in Iran have died.
The administration said the goal is to destroy Iran’s ballistic missiles that it believes are shielding its nuclear program. It has also said Israel was ready to act, and American bases would face retaliation if the US did not strike Iran first. The US said Wednesday it torpedoed an Iranian warship near Sri Lanka.
“This administration can’t even give us a straight answer of as to why we launched this preemptive war,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, the Republican from Kentucky, an outlier in his party.
Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who had teamed up to force the release the Jeffrey Epstein files, also pushed the war powers resolution to the floor, past objections from Johnson’s GOP leadership. Republican Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio, a former Army Ranger, also voted for it. Democratic Reps. Henry Cuellar of Texas, Jared Golden of Maine, Greg Landsman of Ohio and Juan Vargas of California voted against.
“Congress must stand with the president to finally close, once and for all, this dark chapter of history,” said Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas.
Rep. Yassamin Ansari, D-Arizona, said that as the daughter of Iranian immigrants who fled their homeland, she opposes the regime but is concerned that a democratic transition for the people of Iran never seems to a priority for Trump or the officials who briefed Congress.
“War carries profound and deadly consequences for our troops, for the American people and for the entire world,” she said. “It’s the most serious decision that a nation can make.”
Other Democrats have proposed an alternative resolution that would allow the president to continue the war for 30 days before he must seek congressional approval. The House also approved a separate measure affirming that Iran is the largest state sponsor of terrorism.
Senators sit in their desks for solemn vote
In the Senate, Republican leaders have successfully, though narrowly, defeated a series of war powers resolutions pertaining to several other conflicts during Trump’s second term. This one, however, was different.
Underscoring the gravity Wednesday, Democratic senators sat at their desks as the voting got underway.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said that every senator will pick a side. “Do you stand with the American people who are exhausted with forever wars in the Middle East?” he asked. Or with Trump and Hegseth “as they bumble us headfirst into another war?”
Sen. John Barrasso, second in Senate Republican leadership, said, “Democrats would rather obstruct Donald Trump than obliterate Iran’s national nuclear program.”
The legislation failed on a 47-53 tally mostly along party lines, with Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, in favor and Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pennsylvania, against.