Ukraine might benefit if Сongress rejects Biden's funding extension request - Ukrainian expert

Ukrainian expert Resurgam has explained that while the White House has the capacity to allocate an additional $10.7 billion - comprising $5.3 billion from reassessments of previous years and $4.1 billion for USAI - the $5.4 billion allocated under the Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA) presents a unique challenge. Resurgam points out that unlike USAI or FMF funds, PDA does not involve actual money but is merely an authorization, not a direct source of funding.

According to Resurgam, "Because of how PDA operates, there can be a ‘cash gap’ between the equipment provided to Ukraine and the replacement equipment."

For instance, Resurgam explains, "Suppose Ukraine received 10 Bradleys from U.S. stockpiles under the PDA, with their total value estimated at $100 according to the formula. Biden's PDA limit was $1,000. This means he used $100 of the PDA limit, leaving him with $900 in presidential authority. However, to replace the Bradleys taken from the stockpile, you don’t just order replacements at the nominal $100 value used under the PDA. Instead, you need to order new Bradleys, which cost $300 each. As a result, the actual funds available for replacement are not $900 but $700. This discrepancy arises because the PDA authorization used only $100, but the cost to replace the equipment is higher.”

Resurgam further elaborates on the dilemma, stating, “Biden can use the PDA to provide weapons from stockpiles, but these weapons won’t be replaced in the stockpiles at the same rate they are provided. The PDA is more about authorizing the use of U.S. military stockpiles without needing additional approval, rather than about replenishing those stockpiles with the same quantity of equipment.”

The expert notes that during the 2022/23 aid revaluation, over $5.3 billion under the PDA program remained largely unutilized due to the lack of real funds for replacement and maintenance. “For example, a U.S. plane carrying Bradleys can't fly if there's no money to refuel it,” Resurgam adds.

In theory, President Biden could allocate equipment using these funds, but Resurgam warns this would mean the equipment provided to Ukraine wouldn't be replaced, leading to real financial challenges and potential Congressional scrutiny. “At the critical moment in 2023/24, Biden wasn't prepared to take on that political responsibility. The same issue will likely affect the aid package for 2024,” Resurgam states.

The current package faces a similar "cash gap," where Biden has some authority but lacks the actual funds to fully utilize it without facing political consequences for depleted stockpiles. Resurgam explains that if Congress does not approve Biden’s request to extend the $5.4 billion from the PDA, the White House will face a tough decision: “1. Let the available authority ‘expire’ without using it. 2. Use all available resources now, which might lead to a share of the potential financial gap for 2024, which could be beneficial for us.”

Resurgam warns that letting these funds go to waste, especially when Biden has a way to use them without needing Congress, would be a major political scandal right before the election. “This scandal would come at a time when Democrats are launching ads featuring Harris aimed at the Polish-Ukrainian diaspora in key states, and when the media is already scrutinizing Biden over issues like long-range strikes. It would also be a blow right before Biden’s meetings on September 22-23 with Zelenskyy and the ‘Ukraine support group.’ This would give Republicans a powerful opportunity to attack not just Biden, but the Democrats as a whole, affecting their chances in the Senate and the House of Representatives.”

In modern international politics, Resurgam notes, “There’s a rule that’s almost Machiavellian: 'If you want something and they’re not willing to give it to you, make the consequences of ignoring your request worse than the trouble of granting it.'”

In this scenario, if Congress extends the $5.4 billion, Biden would still struggle to fully use these funds due to the specifics of the PDA and the resulting financial gaps. “Some of these funds might remain unspent and be carried over as ‘available presidential authority’ into 2024, but without real money to back them up, this would put Biden in a position where he’d need to take political responsibility for providing weapons that won’t be replaced with new ones,” Resurgam concludes.

If Congress does not extend the funding, Biden and his team will find themselves in a difficult political position. Resurgam suggests, “It might be easier for Democrats to push Biden to approve the full amount now, even though it means he’ll have to take political responsibility for the funding gaps in 2024. This is preferable to deferring the issue to future years, as happened in 2022 and 2023. Back then, Biden had the authority on paper, but using it carried potential political risks he was not prepared to handle alone.”

Resurgam adds that if Biden doesn’t use the funds now, some of them could end up as “dead weight” due to these funding gaps. “This would expose Democrats to severe criticism right before the election, which could undermine Biden’s efforts, especially in a tight race where every percentage point of support counts. This could ultimately impact Biden’s decision about whether to run for re-election.”

Finally, Resurgam notes that while the PDA doesn’t specifically require the replacement of supplies sent to Ukraine, other U.S. strategic defense documents do set a “critical limit” on stock levels in military warehouses.

“Maintaining these stock levels is crucial, even though it’s not explicitly required under the PDA terms for Ukraine,” Resurgam concludes.