The reasons for this uncertainty are many, but all trace to one main source: a sense that the United States’ own post-World War II bipartisan foreign policy consensus is fraying around the edges. That challenge was both exposed and accelerated by the rise of Donald Trump and a selfish, simplistic, “America First” ideology in the Republican Party. Parallel to that, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party increasingly questions the U.S.-Israel relationship, as well as long-standing commitments to other Middle East partners such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
For now, U.S. allies can breathe easier, thanks in large part to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and his willingness — albeit much too belated — to resist far-right forces in his own party at the risk of his position. With his support and skillful management of the legislative process, large majorities of the House got an opportunity to work their will, which was to support $95 billion in aid to Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan and others in the Indo-Pacific. (Crucially, the package includes not only $17 billion to help Israel defeat Hamas and hold off Iran and its proxies, but also $9 billion in humanitarian aid, much of it destined to help Palestinian civilians.) President Biden can soon sign the legislation.
The Ukraine measure is by far the most important of the bills, since the country faces the most immediate threat. It is low on ammunition and under relentless Russian military pressure that might lead to major losses or even defeat. The $60.8 billion worth of assistance will provide Ukraine with much-needed artillery shells and air-defense assets, without which it might not be able to withstand President Vladimir Putin’s bid to subjugate a neighbor, likely followed by similar aggression against others.
A core U.S. interest — Europe’s security — is at risk. Though it’s unconscionable that 112 of the 214 GOP representatives voting were “nays” on the Ukraine aid (all 210 Democrats who voted were “ayes”), the House’s top Democrat, Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.), was right to acknowledge that “traditional conservatives, led by Speaker Mike Johnson, have risen to the occasion.” Mr. Jeffries, too, rose to the occasion by allowing Democrats to vote for a procedural rule that advanced the measures. He intimated that Democrats would help Mr. Johnson if he faced a far-right revolt over Ukraine. This deft hint at what would have been a remarkable bipartisan rescue of a GOP speaker seems to have helped ultimately defuse Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s (R-Ga.) threats to unseat Mr. Johnson.
This is a historic moment. A de facto bipartisan coalition government has maintained U.S. global credibility. Yet it feels more like an inflection point than a conclusion. The world, and the United States, are changing. It is changing so fast, in fact, that part of what happened over the weekend was a vote to force eventual Chinese divestment of TikTok or an outright ban. This cellphone app, which 150 million Americans, generally young people, use for information and entertainment, barely existed a decade ago. Now U.S. politicians from both parties regard it as a possible means for the People’s Republic to exercise malign influence over U.S. public opinion.
More conflict over foreign policy priorities, both between and within the two parties, seems inevitable. Mr. Trump has suffered a setback but still controls the GOP. Progressive Democrats are far from done pressing their case against unconditional aid to Israel; 37 of them voted against helping Israel this time, in rare agreement with 21 right-wing Republicans, albeit for different reasons.
U.S. alliances endure, but the stage is set for a recalibration of their terms. This is not necessarily a bad thing, if the result is to place these commitments on a more sustainable basis, politically and financially. U.S. allies in Europe and Asia can indeed contribute more to their own defense; Israel can take concerns about the war in Gaza’s human costs more effectively into account.
Thanks to the votes the House just took, however, the chances are better that tough conversations among allies occur in the context of a U.S. commitment — at least in this crucial U.S. election year. Beyond that, the outlook is cloudier. Whatever happens, U.S. leadership cannot succeed without the quality Mr. Johnson just demonstrated: political courage.
Credit: Source link
