Despite McConnell Legacy Push, Ukraine’s Financing Is Increasingly at Risk

Senator Mitch McConnell, the longtime Republican leader, has been outspoken in the past year about challenging his party’s isolationist wing, which has questioned continued aid to Ukraine. He risked his influence and reputation to make clear that it was in the United States’ interest to help a beleaguered democracy trying to defeat a Russian invasion led by Vladimir V. Putin, and expressed his confidence expressed that his party would join him.

But the Kentucky Republican’s optimism turned out to be misplaced. Mr. McConnell, who traveled to Kiev last year to demonstrate continued American support for the war effort, is now leading a filibuster against a bill to fund it and is about to see the chance for more aid slip away completely.

The increasingly bitter standoff will be extremely difficult to resolve before funding runs out, despite months of intense efforts by Mr. McConnell, the minority leader, to maintain it.

It’s the latest indication of the minority leader’s waning influence, and how his party — once defined by the interventionist view that the United States should use its power to strengthen democracies around the world — has shifted beneath his feet.

Mr. McConnell has regularly banged the drum to drum up congressional support for Ukraine with near-daily speeches and rounds of media interviews. In addition to his visit to Kiev last May, he recently brought the Ukrainian ambassador to his hometown of Louisville.

Yet Republican politics have changed, putting Mr. McConnell out of step with many of his colleagues and eroding his persuasive power on an issue he has characterized as the most important foreign policy issue of the moment. Opposition to the financing of the war in Ukraine has become a political rallying point for the far right, and Republicans in Congress are increasingly turning against it, in line with polls showing declining public support.

“I think support for Ukraine has waned,” Mr. McConnell conceded, attributing some of that sentiment to former President Donald J. Trump’s opposition to continued aid. But, he added, he still considers it “the right thing to do.”

Yet Republicans now insist that the money is contingent on new border security measures that President Biden and Senate Democrats view as extreme. To make their case, Mr. McConnell and his fellow Republicans in the Senate on Wednesday blocked a $111 billion bill that included about $50 billion in security aid to Ukraine, with more for economic and humanitarian aid and another $14 billion dollars for Israel.

In an interview on Wednesday, Mr. McConnell said he hoped the blockade would send a signal that Republicans are taking border regulations seriously and lead to a breakthrough, though that path seemed unlikely.

“I am no less enthusiastic about the package,” he said. “I think it’s crucial. We will get there.” But he said he did not think it was “unreasonable” to fight over immigration, noting that it was the White House that included border security money in its request for emergency funding.

The decision to tie support for Ukraine to southern border policy deviates from the Republican leader’s original position that the United States should do all it can to support Ukraine. It reflects the reality of rising isolationism among Republicans in Congress, a sentiment at odds with Mr. McConnell’s more Reaganite positions.

“I don’t think the conference shares his position,” said Senator Kevin Cramer, Republican of North Dakota, who said Mr. McConnell retained his leadership status but had faced heavy selling to Ukraine from the start. “He has dealt with fragile issues, so it requires a little more of his capital – perhaps more than he has.”

Mr. Cramer and other Republicans say the divide has less to do with Mr. McConnell’s ability to steer Republicans in the direction he wants and more to do with the changing nature of his party.

“I would say it’s more of an evolution of the members of the conference,” said Sen. John Cornyn, Republican of Texas and a longtime ally of McConnell, who wants money from Ukraine conditional on new immigration restrictions. “We have many relatively newer members who tend to be more liberal. They are not what I would call traditional national security Republicans. Mitch is a traditional national security Republican.”

McConnell, 81, has been struggling with serious health problems after a serious fall in March and has faced questions about his control over his Republican forces and whether he should step aside. He brushed them aside as his condition improved and vowed to serve out the leadership term that expires next year, as well as his Senate term that runs until 2026.

But there is widespread belief that he could step down as leader next year, and his strong push for Ukrainian money was seen not only as an endorsement of his views on world affairs, but also as a final bit of legacy-building for his brand of foreign policy.

“Mitch’s positions on Ukraine are strong and well thought out, and he claims they are in America’s best interest,” said Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine. “Support has waned, but there is still strong support.”

But that reduction has complicated Mr. McConnell’s case for the money, and he came into clear conflict with his fellow Republicans as Congress passed emergency legislation to keep the government open.

In late September, Mr. McConnell warned the White House against adding $6 billion in Ukrainian aid to a relief bill, but ultimately backed it when Democrats insisted — only to see the bulk of his colleagues abandon that plan and backed a measure without the money.

Then, after the Hamas attack on Israel, a group of Senate Republicans tried to force a vote on a House bill that would provide $14 billion in aid to Israel, employing guerrilla tactics in a losing effort, without even informing Mr. McConnell. It was a bold move that stunned other Republicans, who saw it as a challenge to Mr. McConnell’s position on Ukraine.

Now Democrats claim that Mr. McConnell has allowed the issue to drift away by intertwining it with the demand for new border security measures, a policy area that has proven intractable in Congress for decades and is unlikely to be decided anytime soon. are taken. to soften.

Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and majority leader, said a refusal to help Ukraine would be “a failure of Republicans and Republican leadership.”

“It is a moral wrong to tie the fate of Ukraine to the resolution of a domestic political issue,” said Senator Christopher S. Murphy of Connecticut, one of the Democrats who tried unsuccessfully to negotiate a border compromise with Republicans.

But Mr. McConnell’s allies say he is simply trying to find a way to ensure that aid to Ukraine is approved given his colleagues’ position and that embracing the border ultimatum is the best way to do that.

“Ronald Reagan would be turning in his grave if we missed an opportunity to rebuild our industrial base and eliminate Russian military personnel without losing anyone,” McConnell said.

As a political strategist, he also advised Democrats and Mr. Biden to adopt strict border regulations given the potential political backlash they face in November if unrest at the border continues.

“Frankly, if I were the president and I looked at my numbers on this, I would want to do something about it,” Mr. McConnell told reporters about the border. “It could even improve his position.”