Andrew D. Grabber (🧐)🦉🔝🔜💯 |🎃

Yesterday, President Trump said that the US will ask Europe to repay the money the US spent on Ukraine. My thoughts on that: First and foremost, the people of Ukraine are deeply grateful to the United States for all the assistance provided! Indeed, Ukraine has received real and massive military assistance from the United States - $67.8 billion in committed defense articles and services: over 10,000 Javelin systems, over 3,000 Stingers, dozens of HIMARS, Patriot, and NASAMS systems, Abrams tanks, Bradley and Stryker fighting vehicles, howitzers, and millions of artillery shells. Part of the U.S. assistance was provided as non-repayable grants. Aid to Ukraine also included U.S. defense spending and orders placed with American industry. The cost of aid to Ukraine and the economic and security benefits for the U.S. existed simultaneously. First, the U.S. did not transfer $195 billion to Ukraine. This figure represents the total budgetary framework of the U.S. response to the war, which includes not only weapons and financial aid to Ukraine, but also U.S. troops in Europe, the replenishment of U.S. military stockpiles, purchases from its own military-industrial complex, logistics, and agency operations. As of March 31, 2026, out of $195 billion, $177.8 billion had been obligated and $116 billion actually disbursed. Moreover, roughly $4.2 billion within this system already came from allies via the PURL, PURL, rather than from the American taxpayer. Second, nearly $50 billion of this amount was not aid to Ukraine at all - it was U.S. spending on its own troops in Europe. This includes EUCOM, the European Deterrence Initiative, troop deployments, transport, logistics, infrastructure, and sustaining the U.S. military presence. These were real U.S. budget expenditures caused by the war, but Ukraine never received these funds. Presenting them as an American "gift to Ukraine" that Europe must now compensate for is incorrect. Third, nearly $46 billion more was allocated to replenish the U.S.’s own arsenals. The U.S. provided weapons to Ukraine from its own stockpiles, after which the Pentagon received funds to replace them. In effect, Ukraine might have received an older system, while new budget funds went to American manufacturers to produce new weapons for the U.S. As a result, these expenditures simultaneously funded the rearmament of the U.S. military and the operations of American factories. In other words, tens of billions of dollars in military assistance did not go directly to Ukraine - they were converted into defense contracts inside the United States. Through USAI, new systems, ammunition, and military services for Ukraine are funded through manufacturers. Through replenishment, U.S. companies produce replacements for what the Pentagon transferred to Ukraine. The beneficiaries include Lockheed Martin, RTX, General Dynamics, Boeing, BAE Systems, Oshkosh, AM General, AeroVironment, L3Harris, and a large network of suppliers. Fourth, the United States gained just corporate revenue from this spending, but also new production capacity. Funds went toward expanding production of 155mm ammunition, PAC-3 MSE, GMLRS, Javelins, and other systems. The war exposed shortages in the U.S. military-industrial complex while at the same time providing the Pentagon with funding to address them. In other words, part of the assistance to Ukraine became an investment in America’s own defense industrial base. Fifth, direct transfers of money to the Ukrainian government were far smaller than the political claims about "hundreds of billions." The largest block of direct budget support amounted to around $30 billion and was provided mainly through the World Bank for civilian expenditures - salaries for Ukrainian teachers and medical workers, pensions, and social payments. There were also humanitarian, energy, and economic programs. This was real financial assistance to Ukraine. But that is precisely why it should be distinguished from the tens of billions spent by the Pentagon inside the United States. Sixth, the narrative that America was paying instead of Europe does not reflect the scale of European assistance. The EU and its member states estimate their total support for Ukraine and Ukrainians at more than €220 billion. According to U.S. accounting, the United States committed $67.8 billion in military assistance, while total security assistance from allies and partners amounted to around $130 billion. The accounting methodologies differ, so these figures should not be mechanically compared dollar for dollar. But they certainly do not show a situation in which America paid while Europe did not. Seventh, Europe is already financing American weapons for Ukraine. Through PURL, allies transfer funds to the United States for the supply of the American weapons to Ukraine and for the replenishment of American stockpiles. By March 2026, the figure was already approximately $4.2 billion. And in the first half of 2026, European donors purchased at least €3 billion worth of weapons for Ukraine from U.S. defense companies. In other words, part of the current system literally works in the opposite direction: European money → the U.S. military-industrial complex → weapons for Ukraine. Yes, the United States provided aid to Ukraine, but not as some enormous free transfer made in place of Europe. In reality, Ukraine received critically important assistance for which we will remain grateful, Europe spent vast sums of its own money, and a significant share of U.S. spending remained inside the United States itself - in the form of new weapons, replenished stockpiles, a strengthened military presence, and multibillion-dollar contracts for the U.S. military-industrial complex.