Nearly 20 months after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and with no end to the fighting in sight, there are increasing indications that the West is growing weary of the war.
The recent omission by the U.S. Congress of Ukraine aid from a short-term funding package, eroding support among Americans to supply the war-torn nation with weapons and Slovakia’s decision to halt military assistance to Kyiv are just the latest warning signs. While many believe the White House will find ways to continue funding through the November 2024 presidential election, there is no telling what may happen afterward.
Ukraine supporters argue that withholding aid would help Moscow prevail and also have repercussions across the Asia-Pacific region, potentially emboldening China to launch an offensive against democratic Taiwan.
Experts, however, are divided over the issue. While some believe such a move would encourage China to believe it might outlast the U.S. in a Taiwan conflict, others argue that events in Ukraine will be less impactful as neither Beijing nor Taipei will fundamentally change their deep-rooted opinions about Washington’s commitment to the self-ruled island.
A casualty of infighting
The U.S. Congress has approved $113 billion in assistance for Ukraine, including about $44 billion in military aid, since Russia invaded in February 2022.
But despite U.S. President Joe Biden’s renewed assurances of continued support, providing additional aid through Congress is likely to become increasingly difficult as the issue becomes a bargaining chip in the battle between Republicans and Democrats over border control, the federal deficit and immigration restrictions.
Many House Republican rebels, mostly supporters of former U.S. President Donald Trump, are largely opposed to providing more aid for Ukraine, arguing that Washington should instead spend money at home or boost its ability to compete with China.
And given that former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's ouster last week was due to his decision to work with Democrats on government funding, his successor is likely to fight on funding issues, including Ukraine aid.
As the future of Washington's support for Kyiv hangs in the balance, the Biden administration is weighing alternative funding methods, such as foreign military financing, to keep the weapons flowing.
So far, U.S. military funding for Ukraine has come in two forms: under the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative and the Presidential Drawdown Authority. The Pentagon said that it currently has $1.6 billion left to replace weapons sent to Ukraine, no funds left under the assistance initiative and $5.4 billion worth of funding through the drawdown authority.
As long as it takes?
For now, there is still a bipartisan majority in Congress in favor of Ukraine aid, with Matthew Orr, Eurasia analyst at U.S.-based geopolitics and intelligence firm RANE, saying that U.S. policy toward Ukraine is only likely to fundamentally shift if Republicans — and specifically those aligned with the Trump-wing of the party — win the 2024 elections.
Nevertheless, there is still the serious risk that a failure to pass a support bill due to procedural delays and political infighting in the Republican Party could stifle U.S. military support for Ukraine in the near term.
This political turmoil sends the message that the U.S. will not support Ukraine for “as long as it takes,” which is the Biden administration's stated policy, Orr said. Kyiv should be “very concerned about this,” he added, as Moscow’s strategy appears to rely on outlasting the West, with war fatigue causing Western support to decline, ultimately forcing Kyiv to the negotiating table.
To make matters worse, fatigue also seems to be present in Europe, and for the moment it is more pronounced in Central and Eastern European countries that have long been some of Kyiv’s closest partners. Many have largely burned through their Soviet-era military kit by sending it to Ukraine.
This is the case in Slovakia and Poland, both of which recently saw electoral campaigns dominated by nationalistic messages.
In Slovakia, the electoral winner, Robert Fico, campaigned to withhold military aid to Ukraine and potentially block its NATO membership, while Poland's ruling party — one of the most hardened supporters of Ukraine in the earliest days of the war — has run a campaign scapegoating Kyiv on agriculture issues to appease Polish farmers.
“The perception of some European countries reconsidering support is based on the idea that further military aid is only prolonging the war to the detriment of delayed economic recovery,” said Roger Hilton, defense fellow at Slovakia-based think tank GLOBSEC.
The slowly fading support on both sides of the Atlantic comes as Ukraine’s much-touted counteroffensive struggles, with experts describing the fighting in eastern Ukraine as “attritional” with “high human costs, extreme artillery usage and minimal gains.”
Potential lessons for China
As Western support for Kyiv wanes, some experts have expressed concern about the conclusions Beijing may draw.
Mark F. Cancian, an international security expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, argues that if Washington withdrew its support from Ukraine, it would encourage China in its belief that it might outlast the U.S. and its allies in any war.
A Russian victory could also send a message to the international community that it is now acceptable for strong countries to impose their will on weaker ones, said James D.J. Brown, a professor of political science at Temple University, Japan.
This would prompt apprehension among Washington’s Asian allies and partners — many of which have backed Ukraine — about the United States’ commitment to their own security.
It would also be a sign that the Russian economy was able to weather crushing Western sanctions, Brown said, in yet another lesson for Beijing.
“If Russia's fragile economy can manage this, the stronger Chinese economy can almost certainly do so, too,” he said.
Still, what’s happening in Ukraine should not be seen as a perfect analogue for how easily the West would tire in a cross-strait war. Taiwan is seen as far more strategically important to Washington than Ukraine, given the importance of keeping key maritime trade routes open around the island and in the South and East China seas.
According to Chase Blazek, an Asia-Pacific analyst at RANE, Taiwan should rest assured of its place in U.S. strategic planning, as China's capture of the island would effectively cede U.S. military dominance and economic security in the western Pacific — an unacceptable loss for Washington.
As for the impact of Ukraine war fatigue on Beijing's objectives with Taiwan, Zhiqun Zhu, an international relations professor at Bucknell University in Pennsylvania, believes Beijing “will follow its own pace to promote gradual cross-strait integration.” If unprovoked, he said, Beijing is unlikely to use force against the island. Most importantly, Zhu said, the U.S. must not make China feel that the door to peaceful unification has been slammed shut.
While the Ukraine situation is a noteworthy consideration for China, experts say its significance in Beijing’s broader assessment of the Taiwan issue should not be overstated.
“President Xi Jinping has his own agenda and timetable concerning Taiwan, independent of the U.S. position,” Wu said, adding that Xi’s decision is more intricately tied to the evolving dynamics across the Taiwan Strait. “Factors such as economic fluctuations, political trajectories and shifts in public sentiment will play more critical roles than the level of U.S. support.”
With your current subscription plan you can comment on stories. However, before writing your first comment, please create a display name in the Profile section of your subscriber account page.