[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 18, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2570-S2573]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                                Ukraine

  Mr. CRUZ. Madam President, I rise today to lay out exactly why I 
intend to vote for the aid package to provide our Ukrainian allies with 
the weapons and support they need to fight Vladimir Putin's invasion.
  First, it is important to understand why--thanks in large part to 
President Joe Biden--we are in this dangerous situation to begin with. 
What is maddening about Russia's invasion of Ukraine is that it was 
utterly preventable. This did not have to happen, and it was caused by 
two specific mistakes by Biden and his administration. The first 
mistake was Biden's catastrophic surrender and withdrawal in 
Afghanistan. The second mistake was Biden's weakness and appeasement on 
display and his capitulation to Putin on the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline.
  Putin didn't just wake up yesterday and decide he wanted to invade 
Ukraine. In 2014, Putin previously invaded Ukraine, but he stopped 
short of invading the entirety of the country. Why is that? The reason 
is simple: Russia's principal source of revenue is oil and gas, which 
is transported via pipelines that go directly through Ukraine. Putin 
knew that when the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline was complete, he could invade 
Ukraine and not have to worry about potentially destroying Ukrainian 
energy infrastructure because he would have in place an alternative 
pipeline to get his gas to market.
  Last spring, President Biden formally waived the sanctions that 
Congress had put in place on Nord Stream 2, sanctions that I authored, 
bipartisan sanctions that passed this body twice and that President 
Trump signed into law twice. Last summer, President Biden surrendered 
to Putin, lifted the sanctions, allowed Putin to build the pipeline, 
and announced a deal with Germany to allow the pipeline to be 
completed. When he announced that deal, that capitulation, the 
governments of both Ukraine and Poland put out a joint statement 
saying: Mr. President, if you do this, Vladimir Putin will invade 
Ukraine.
  In August, Biden surrendered in Afghanistan. In September, Nord 
Stream 2 was physically completed, and then Putin began building up his 
forces on Ukraine's border. Even then, our Ukrainian allies pleaded 
with us: Sanction Nord Stream 2 now so that Putin will know he can't 
turn it on later. The President, the Prime Minister, Parliament, and 
civil society of Ukraine all said so again and again and again.
  I authored a new set of sanctions mandating immediate sanctions, 
which the Ukrainian Government formally called on the Senate to take it 
up and pass it. The Biden administration fought tooth and nail against 
those sanctions in January. I remember standing right here and saying: 
Mr. President, if you do this, we will see Russian tanks rolling toward 
the streets of Kyiv.
  Sadly, 44 Democrats voted with President Biden against sanctions on 
Russia, against sanctions on Putin; and the appeasement from the White 
House and 44 Democrats led, within days, to the invasion of Ukraine.
  That being said now, the difficult question is what should we do now 
that this war is unfolding and, specifically, whether it is in 
America's vital national security interests for Ukraine to

[[Page S2571]]

fight and defeat Putin's invasion. My conclusion is that, yes, it is.
  There is no doubt, $40 billion is a large number; and although much 
of that spending is important--in fact, some of it is acutely needed in 
the military conflict--I would have preferred a significantly smaller 
and more focused bill. But our Ukrainian allies right now are winning 
significant victories with the weapons and training that we provided 
them already, and it is in our national interest for them to keep doing 
so. They will not be able to fight Putin and have any chance of 
prevailing if we cut off military assistance.
  So why is this in America's national security interest? The answer 
lies in some questions that my fellow Americans are rightly asking. 
They are asking: What would Russia's invasion of Ukraine mean for our 
problems here at home, including, for example, food and energy? They 
are asking: Is the cost of this bill really necessary? They are also 
asking: Isn't China our biggest long-term enemy?
  These are all entirely legitimate questions. They are important to 
ask. They are the same questions I asked myself before deciding how to 
vote on this bill. Another question Americans are rightly asking is: 
Why aren't we doing anything about our problems here at home?
  I emphatically agree that President Biden and congressional Democrats 
have failed on the issues here at home that Texans and Americans 
rightly care about and we should fix. Right now, we have a raging 
border crisis that President Biden won't do a damn thing about. We have 
skyrocketing inflation. We have gas prices at record highs. We have a 
baby formula shortage that has left parents all over the country 
scrambling to try to feed their babies. These are real problems that 
the Democrats caused and now refuse to even try to fix; and in multiple 
instances, such as the gas prices, these are problems that Democrats 
have deliberately made worse, inflicting pain on millions of Americans.
  All of that can be true at home, and it doesn't mean the world has 
suddenly become safe and that our enemies do not mean us harm. At the 
same time that we need to secure our border and address the domestic 
crises, we also need to stand up and confront the very real threat 
posed by Russia and by China. We can't let the fact that Biden and the 
Democrats have created massive domestic and economic failures cause us 
to ignore threats to U.S. national security posed directly by Putin's 
invasion of Ukraine.
  On the question ``Why is what Russia does in Ukraine relevant for our 
national security,'' I want to answer this by making four points.
  No. 1, what Putin is trying to do is to reassemble the Soviet Union 
and, beyond the Soviet Union, the Russian Empire from even earlier. If 
Putin succeeds in doing so, it would be disastrous for global stability 
and for American security.
  The Cold War between America and the Soviet Union was incredibly 
costly and incredibly dangerous. We don't want to see Russia become the 
Soviet Union once again. When the Soviet Union was big and strong and 
mighty with a much bigger military, the lives of Americans and the 
lives of our allies were in much greater jeopardy.
  It is overwhelmingly in America's interest to prevent Putin from 
reassembling the Soviet Union, because we do not want our enemies to 
become stronger and use that strength against us.
  No. 2, Putin is trying to seize control of energy. If he is 
successful, it will be felt by Americans filling up their cars with gas 
or trying to heat their homes in the winter. We have already seen what 
Putin has done with Nord Stream 2, and he is not going to stop there. 
We don't want to see a world where Putin controls energy.
  No. 3, the United States made a formal commitment to help Ukrainians 
defend themselves. Why is that? Well, after Ukraine successfully 
declared independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States 
signed an agreement called the Budapest Memorandum on Security 
Assurances. Under the terms of the agreement, Ukraine gave up its 
nuclear weapons in exchange for explicit assurances that the United 
States would protect Ukraine's territorial sovereignty. Ukraine had the 
third largest nuclear arsenal on the face of the planet, and they 
voluntarily, willingly, gave it up. And we made a promise in exchange 
for that.
  And No. 4, if we don't provide Ukrainians with weapons and they don't 
defeat Putin, Putin will be emboldened and may well eventually invade a 
NATO country that the United States has a treaty obligation to defend. 
That would be an incredibly serious escalation that nobody wants to 
see.
  Some have further asked, ``Why should America keep these 
commitments?'' Why should we keep our commitment in the Budapest 
Memorandum? Why should we keep our treaty commitments to the NATO 
countries? And the answer is, because one of the ways we protect 
American national security is, when we make an agreement with a 
country, when we make a formal agreement, a treaty, we honor our 
commitments.
  We want countries to know that America stands by our friends and that 
we stand by our word and that our treaties mean something.
  If countries learned that under weak and feckless Presidents our 
formal binding documents aren't worth the paper they are written on, it 
undermines the ability of any President of the United States to 
negotiate agreements with our friends and allies to keep Americans 
safe.
  Another question I have heard is, why so much money? Sure, it is 
important to help Ukraine win, but why should we spend so much? Again, 
I would have preferred for this to be a smaller bill. But, in fact, 
enormous amounts of money are both justified and necessary. Of this $40 
billion, there is $9 billion for replenishing our own stockpiles, 
American stockpiles which have been badly depleted in recent months as 
we sought to help our Ukrainian allies.
  We are already beginning to see the risks and effects of depleted 
stockpiles. Just a few weeks ago, Taiwan's Ministry of Defense 
announced there would be dramatic delays in the delivery of some 
weapons, including howitzers and Stingers. Making sure we have the 
weapons we need to defend ourselves is incontrovertibly a good thing, 
and $9 billion of this $40 billion, I do not know a Senator in this 
body who could reasonably object to replenishing our own military 
stores and weaponry to keep America safe with America's military.
  There is also $10 billion in this bill for Ukrainian weapons and 
training, and altogether, $24 billion in military funds in this bill. 
Ukrainian weapons and training--the very things they have been using to 
defend themselves and that if we don't replenish, will cause them to 
collapse.
  The Ukrainian military right now is using tens of thousands of 
artillery rounds and ammunition every couple of days. Already last 
month, there was a growing concern that Ukrainian forces engaged in 
heavy ground combat against Russian units would quickly go through that 
amount of ammunition.
  They have largely burned through the stockpiles of Russian-style 
ammunition they are familiar with and used in the opening weeks of the 
war. And last month, U.S. officials assessed that 40,000 rounds of 
artillery were only expected to last a few days. New efforts to 
resupply our Ukrainian allies are critical.
  There is also about $5 billion for food in this bill. Ukraine is 
rightly known as the bread basket of Europe. It is the sixth top 
exporter of wheat in the world, and there is a growing risk of global 
famine because of the disruption Russia's invasion is causing in 
Ukraine.
  Devoting money now to stop countless people from starving to death in 
famine is a wise and prudent investment for American national 
interests.
  Then there is $9 billion in economic support funds for the Ukrainian 
government. Will a certain portion of that money be wasted? Absolutely. 
Will there be corruption? Almost certainly. If it were up to me, I 
would cut that amount from this bill. Might some of it end up funding a 
yacht for an oligarch? Very possibly. But unfortunately, this is what 
happens when Democrats have control of Congress and write the bill.
  When you have a bill authored by a Democratic White House and a 
Democratic Senate and a Democratic House, the result is you get waste 
and corruption and pork and fat and bloat in a bill.

[[Page S2572]]

  So the question facing each of us Republicans is whether you are 
willing to cut off the missiles and cut off the bullets that we are 
sending to Ukraine and allow Putin to win simply because there is a 
portion of this bill that is waste and corruption that the Democrats 
have insisted on.
  The reality is that a Putin victory in Ukraine will be much, much 
more expensive for American taxpayers in the long run than this bill. 
And let me underscore that point. If Putin wins, the consequences for 
America and American taxpayers will be hundreds of billions of dollars.
  From a purely fiscally conservative view, ensuring that the 
Ukrainians have enough military equipment to defend themselves and to 
give Putin punishing defeats is overwhelmingly in our interest. And let 
me underscore as well: It is the Ukrainians doing the fighting. I do 
not want to see U.S. servicemen and women in harm's way. There is a 
reason I have vocally opposed a no-fly zone in Ukraine, because that 
would unreasonably increase the chances of an American pilot in an 
American jet engaging in combat with a Russian pilot in a Russian jet, 
and that escalation is not justified.
  But ensuring the Ukrainians have the weapons to defend themselves is 
very much in our own national security interest.
  And now I want to talk about a question that many Americans have not 
necessarily been asking but that is of staggering importance to our 
national security. And that is, ``What does the war in Ukraine have to 
do with China?'' The answer is, ``An enormous amount.''
  Last summer, we watched the catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan 
unfold. We watched the surrender to the Taliban from Joe Biden. We 
watched the incompetence of this administration in abandoning Americans 
and leaving them behind, abandoning Bagram airfield before we 
evacuated.

  When that happened, all across the globe, America's enemies looked to 
Washington and took a measure of the man in the oval office, and, 
tragically, they concluded that President Biden was weak and feckless 
and ineffective. And a weak American President is dangerous.
  When the catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan happened, I said 
publicly that the chances of Putin invading Ukraine just rose tenfold. 
I also said, at the same time, the chances of China invading Taiwan 
just rose tenfold.
  We have now seen the first of these two things happen, because Putin 
understood the disastrous surrender and withdrawal in Afghanistan to 
mean that President Biden was weak, and weakness is provocative.
  If Putin wins in Ukraine, it will confirm to Xi in Communist China 
that he can confidently invade Taiwan and that America will be too weak 
and feckless to stand with our allies.
  But if Ukraine defeats Putin with the help of American weapons and 
military aid, Xi will see aggression as a recipe for failure and that 
the United States has the strength of will to stand by its allies to 
ensure that they have what they need to defend themselves.
  China is--mark my words--the most dangerous geopolitical adversary of 
the United States for the next 100 years. China has the military might 
of the Soviet Union with a much, much stronger economy and an economic 
engine.
  China also carries out policies of murder and torture and genocide 
and slavery and lies and deception. A Chinese invasion of Taiwan would 
be catastrophic for American national security. Right now, today, over 
90 percent of the world's most advanced semiconductor chips come from 
Taiwan. If China were to conquer Taiwan, it would give the Chinese 
Communist Party a stranglehold on the global supply of semiconductors.
  After that, if Xi wanted to turn off the supply of semiconductors to 
Americans, he could do so instantly. It is simply irresponsible to 
allow that to happen, and it is impossible to overstate the catastrophe 
that would impose on Americans.
  Overnight, it would be impossible to acquire or repair pretty much 
everything we rely on in modern life: Cars, planes, medical devices 
like pacemakers, clean water, refrigerators, all rely on 
semiconductors--of course, so do vehicles, boats, tanks, missiles that 
we rely upon for our national defense.
  And even if China didn't turn off the supply of those chips, they 
would be able to control what went into them, including potentially 
planting spyware and espionage directly and immediately threatening 
American security.
  And it goes without saying, the Chinese Communist Party would also 
immediately control the price of semiconductors and what they go into, 
which would drive up the cost of pretty much everything to Americans.
  If you think $40 billion is a lot of money, just wait and see the 
disaster if the Chinese communists lock up semiconductors on the world 
stage and use them to extract monopoly profits from Americans while 
simultaneously spying on us using those same semiconductors.
  Just as we don't want to see a world in which Putin controls energy, 
we should not want to see a world in which Xi controls semiconductors.
  I began this speech by talking about the consequences of failing to 
stop Nord Stream 2. I very much wish that these consequences had not 
come to pass, but the terrible reality is that President Biden failed 
in Afghanistan and failed again with Nord Stream 2, which played the 
decisive role in shaping the current crisis.
  The reason we should help the Ukrainians defeat Putin by giving them 
weapons is the same reason we need to keep our thumb on China. And it 
is not what some of my colleagues on the Republican side have said: It 
is not to defend democracy across the globe; it is not to defend 
international norms. That sort of empty nonsense is the sort of things 
John Kerry says.
  The reason we should support our Ukrainian allies who are fighting 
and killing Russian soldiers is because it protects American national 
security, it keeps America safer, and it prevents our enemies from 
getting stronger, from threatening the safety and security of 
Americans, and from driving up the costs, the economic damage to 
Americans, by hundreds of billions or even trillions of dollars.
  America needs to be strong--strong enough to stand up to Putin, 
strong enough to stand up to communist China, strong enough to defend 
the greatest Nation in the history of the world.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I came to speak to the Senate about 
Police Week as we honor the law enforcement officers who made the 
ultimate sacrifice.
  Before I do that, we know that Putin was shocked by two things. He 
was shocked by the amazing resistance and the strength and the 
resiliency of the Ukrainian people and the effectiveness of their fight 
back. Putin really couldn't believe that happened.
  The other thing that Putin was shocked by was the skill with which 
President Biden put together this international coalition of countries 
that were not part of this in the past, part of something--Germany, 
Switzerland, Sweden, Finland--countries that now a couple of them want 
to be in NATO, and that really is the skill of the leadership of 
President Biden.
  And I know, in spite of the Senator from Texas's comments--I know 
that most mainstream Republicans support what President Biden has done, 
support his work on putting together sanctions--first, providing aid 
for the Ukrainian people, the humanitarian aid, refugees going to 
Moldova, going to Poland, going to other parts of Eastern and Central 
and Southern Europe, and the skill with which he has gotten and the 
success with which he has gotten weapons to the Ukrainian people and 
the skills with which he put together sanctions.
  The Presiding Officer, as a member of the Banking and Housing 
Committee, has been part of that with sanctions, and it has really made 
a difference in keeping these countries together at the fastest pace we 
could do it but keeping them together.
  So most Republicans support what President Biden has done. But, you 
know, I am not saying that the Senator from Texas is part of this, but 
I have heard Congresswoman Cheney, who is nothing if not a conservative 
Republican, daughter of a very conservative

[[Page S2573]]

Vice President, active in the Republican Party and Republican 
leadership--she talks about the Putin wing of the Republican Party.
  Again, I am not saying that she includes the Senator from Texas in 
that category. I don't know if she does or she doesn't. I didn't hear 
her mention names, but I do know that she thinks that a number of 
Republicans are part of this Putin wing of the Republican Party, and it 
is despicable, but it is true, and it is disappointing to all of us.
  And I would add, too, that the Senator from Texas, maybe he missed 
the news as he was talking about chips, computer chips, about 
semiconductors. Intel made a huge announcement that they are coming to 
Ohio. They are going to invest billions of dollars. They are going to 
hire 5,000 building tradespeople--5,000 tradespeople--over a 10-year 
period to build these fabs. Imagine the size of that. I have never seen 
anything like that.
  So I am excited about what we are doing, and that is why it is so 
important what Senator Wyden and I and others are doing on making sure 
that we pass the USICA--the Innovation and Competition Act. It is so 
important to our country. It is so important to workers. We are finally 
putting workers at the center of our economic policy, and that is a 
thrill.
  And as President Biden said on the Senate floor, we are finally 
burying the term ``Rust Belt.'' We are burying it in Columbus with 
Intel. We are burying it in Northwest Ohio with solar manufacturing. We 
are burying it in Southwest Ohio with a new generation of jet fuel and 
jet engines. We are burying it in Cleveland with what we are doing with 
NASA. We are burying it in Youngstown with our manufacturing camps and 
all that we are doing for America Works.
  Mr. CRUZ. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. BROWN. Sure.
  Mr. CRUZ. Just a moment ago, the Senator from Ohio made reference to 
the alleged existence of the so-called Putin wing of the Republican 
Party.
  I would like to ask the Senator from Ohio, Is it accurate that the 
Senator from Ohio and 43 of his Democratic colleagues in January of 
this year voted against sanctioning Nord Stream 2, sanctioning Russia, 
sanctioning Putin, despite the fact that Ukraine begged the Senate to 
pass those sanctions and Putin invaded Ukraine just days after 44 
Democrats sided with Russia and Putin?
  Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I take back my time.
  I have heard no Democrat talk about--I have heard nobody talk about 
the Putin wing of the Democratic Party. No Democrat believes that.
  I hear just down the hall 100 yards, Congresswoman Cheney talk about 
the Putin wing of the Republican Party. I am not in intraparty fights; 
I am only pointing that out.
  I want to get to this. We expect a vote soon after 6, and I want to 
get back to my remarks. I appreciate the engagement of Senator Cruz on 
this issue