The ongoing debate in the United States over military aid to Ukraine has taken another turn with Congressman Clay Higgins tabling a bill aimed at halting the transfer of Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) to the war-torn country.
The bill is symptomatic of a growing divide within the U.S. political landscape regarding support for Ukraine in its defence against Russian aggression.
The Provisions of the Bill
Higgins’ bill proposes a twofold prohibition:
- It explicitly bans the transfer of ATACMS munitions to Ukraine.
- It prevents U.S. military or intelligence agencies from assisting Ukrainian forces in using High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) equipped with ATACMS to conduct strikes outside of internationally recognized Ukrainian borders.
ATACMS are long-range precision-guided missiles that significantly enhance Ukraine’s ability to target Russian forces at a distance. These systems have been considered pivotal in countering Russian military advantages. The restrictions outlined in Higgins’ bill signal a broader skepticism toward robust military support for Ukraine, a stance that aligns with an isolationist approach adopted by some members of Congress.
Higgins’ Record: Sympathy for Controversial Causes?
Higgins’ legislative move is consistent with his voting history and broader political affiliations. On March 19th, 2024, Higgins voted against House Resolution 149, which condemned the illegal abduction and forced transfer of Ukrainian children to Russia—a practice recognised internationally as a war crime.
The resolution, widely supported by lawmakers from both parties, was aimed at holding the Kremlin accountable for atrocities committed during the war.
Higgins’ political views are far from conventional: Reports link him to the Oath Keepers, a far-right militia group known for opposing government authority, including actions like the peaceful transfer of power prescribed by the U.S. Constitution.
Leaders of this group have faced convictions for their involvement in the January 6th, 2021, Capitol insurrection.
Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, the founder and leader of the Oath Keepers, and Kelly Meggs, the leader of the Florida chapter of the organisation, received sentences for seditious conspiracy and other charges related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol
Evidence produced at their trial proved that the defendants had been plotting for weeks if not months to oppose the lawful transfer of power following the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election.
Higgins’ association with such a group raises questions about his commitment to democratic norms, and also about his motivations in proposing legislation that could undermine Ukraine’s defence efforts.
Anna Paulina Luna: A Co-Sponsor with a Similar Agenda
Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna, who co-sponsored the bill, has a comparable record of opposing aid to Ukraine. Luna’s legislative history reflects a consistent effort to curtail U.S. involvement in the conflict:
- In 2023, she voted alongside 97 other Republicans to ban the transfer of cluster munitions to Ukraine, a controversial yet effective tool in modern warfare.
- She supported a moratorium on U.S. aid to Ukraine, reinforcing a narrative of “Ukraine fatigue” within certain Republican circles.
- In April 2024, Luna voted against a $60 billion military aid package intended to bolster Ukraine’s defense capabilities.
Luna’s broader affiliations align her with other isolationist lawmakers, such as Florida Representative Matt Gaetz, who introduced the “Ukraine Fatigue Resolution.”
This resolution calls for an immediate suspension of all U.S. foreign aid to Ukraine and demands a negotiated peace settlement, a position critics argue undermines Ukraine’s sovereignty by pressuring it to concede to Russian demands.
Controversies Surrounding Luna
Beyond her legislative activities, Luna has drawn scrutiny for inconsistencies in her personal narrative and controversial affiliations.
- She has described herself as Hispanic since 2019, yet voter registration records from 2015 indicate she identified as “White, not of Hispanic origin.”
- Luna’s identification as a Messianic Jewish Christian has also sparked debate, particularly as it relates to her claims about her background.
- Prior to her political career, Luna worked as a cocktail waitress in a gentleman’s club—a fact critics have occasionally used to undermine her credibility, though it has little or no bearing on her legislative role.
These controversies, while unrelated to her policy positions, have fueled questions about her authenticity and political motivations.
The Broader Implications of the Bill
The Higgins-Luna bill is part of a larger debate within the U.S. about the extent and nature of support for Ukraine. While bipartisan majorities in Congress continue to back military aid, a vocal minority within the Republican Party argues for a more restrained approach, citing concerns about escalating U.S. involvement in the conflict and potential overextension of American resources.
Critics of the bill warn that limiting military aid to Ukraine could embolden Russia, undermining international efforts to hold Moscow accountable for its aggression. ATACMS, with their precision and range, have been viewed as a game-changer in Ukraine’s ability to defend its sovereignty and repel Russian forces. Removing these weapons from Ukraine’s arsenal would likely weaken its position on the battlefield.
Isolationism or Pragmatism?
Supporters of the bill, including Higgins and Luna, frame their position as one of pragmatism, emphasizing the need to focus on domestic priorities and avoid entanglements in foreign conflicts. They argue that the U.S. has already provided substantial support to Ukraine and that continued aid risks escalating tensions with nuclear-armed Russia.
However, this stance has drawn criticism from those who view it as an abdication of America’s leadership role on the global stage. Detractors argue that failing to support Ukraine adequately risks setting a dangerous precedent, signaling to autocratic regimes that territorial aggression will not face significant resistance from the international community.
A Divided Republican Party
The Higgins-Luna bill highlights divisions within the Republican Party over foreign policy. While figures like Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell have championed robust support for Ukraine, others, including Higgins, Luna, and Gaetz, advocate for a more isolationist approach.
This internal split mirrors broader ideological rifts within the party, ranging from traditional hawkish conservatism to the populist, America-first stance that gained prominence during Donald Trump’s first presidency.
The Path Forward
As the bill moves through Congress, its fate remains uncertain. With bipartisan support for Ukraine still strong, it is unlikely to gain the traction needed to become law. Nevertheless, the legislation underscores the growing influence of isolationist voices in U.S. politics and the challenges faced by lawmakers in maintaining a united front against Russian aggression.
The Higgins-Luna bill reflects a broader debate about America’s role in global conflicts and the limits of its foreign commitments. While the legislation is unlikely to alter U.S. policy significantly, it serves as a reminder of the ideological divides shaping American politics in an increasingly polarized era.
For Ukraine, the stakes remain existential, as it continues to rely on international support to defend its sovereignty and resist an aggressor intent on reshaping the global order.
Main Image: Main Image: https://clayhiggins.house.gov/newsroom/
