How McConnell and Schumer beat hardline conservatives on Ukraine

Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden might have been in lockstep on aiding Ukraine, but some things the Senate minority leader had to shoulder alone.

Like battling his own party for the better part of the year.

“I don’t want to take a bit away from Chuck. He didn’t have any Ukraine problems, I had all of them. But, we agreed on the overall goal,” McConnell said in an interview on Tuesday. “It was not possible for him to help me with my members. Nor was it possible for the president to help me with my members. It was a Republican family argument.”

That argument has been settled, for now, as a majority of GOP senators took McConnell’s side in the long-running fight over $95 billion in foreign aid on Tuesday. McConnell punctuated the win over his party’s non-interventionist wing by flipping the votes of more than a half-dozen past opponents, tweaking Tucker Carlson for his vocal anti-Ukraine commentary and taking a victory lap in an extended press conference.

Beyond the intraparty GOP battle, though, Congress’ passage of $60 billion in aid for Ukraine traces back to something simple but rare in modern politics: an ironclad pact of trust between leaders of opposite political parties. It’s all the more surprising given the years of animus between Schumer, the majority leader and relentless political tactician, and McConnell, the outgoing minority leader celebrating what may be his foreign policy coda as the top Senate Republican.

Forgetting past fights over Senate control, former President Donald Trump and the Supreme Court, Schumer and McConnell made two consequential agreements that aided the Biden administration’s foreign aid request over the seven-month saga: keeping Ukraine assistance bound to Israel aid, and eventually moving forward together on a package without a border security component.

The synchronicity effectively “pulled the rug out from under the right wing guys,” as Schumer put it.

“We never deviated,” Schumer said on Tuesday of his partnership with McConnell. “We talked to each other every other day about strategy or what to do or what could happen. And it shows you when you have a bipartisan force, it can get things done.”

That’s true over in the House, too, where Speaker Mike Johnson and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries are still building their partnership but delivered the same goal. Jeffries’ members helped boost Johnson’s foreign aid package across the finish line last week, and now Democrats in that chamber seem poised to block a looming vote to boot the speaker

Together, both chambers approved close to what the White House requested of them six months ago, minus border security money that was lanced by Trump. There were times it looked improbable as McConnell absorbed regular criticism from a handful of conservative critics, a bipartisan border deal collapsed, Trump locked up the GOP nomination and House Republicans pilloried the Senate’s focus on Ukraine.

McConnell and Schumer worked closely on funding the government earlier this year and found surprising collaboration during Biden’s presidency on everything from infrastructure to gun safety. But lest you think it’s all sunshine between the two erstwhile rivals, McConnell said this after the Ukraine fight: “It’s not personal. We just happen to agree on the issue.”

Working a new speaker

The two Senate leaders and the Biden White House developed surprisingly solid relationships with Johnson, who had to overcome his own history of opposition to Ukraine funding as a rank-and-file member to even allow a vote to come to the floor — plus a daily threat to his job security. McConnell steadily found common cause with Johnson, who “neutralized the former president on this issue,” in McConnell’s words, by appearing with Trump earlier this month and tweaking the bill.

“That changed everything,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who voted against the initial Senate bill but flipped his vote for the final legislation.

Biden directed his senior aides to employ a two-pronged strategy: privately make clear to Johnson the stakes for Europe and the rest of the world if Russian President Vladimir Putin claims Ukraine, leaning heavily on intelligence — and lay off attacking the new speaker. Counselor to the President Steve Ricchetti spoke to Johnson regularly in the month before the bill neared the president’s desk and served as Biden’s conduit to Jeffries, too.

For months, chief of staff Jeff Zients’ day began with a meeting of senior aides — including Ricchetti, Director of Legislative Affairs Shuwanza Goff, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and others — gathered around the large oval table in his office to discuss how to present the case about the dire situation in Ukraine.

“The president’s foundational leadership direction in all of this is to keep talking, keep working. Obviously, there were people who thought for months that this could not get done or that it was dead,” Ricchetti said. “From a historical perspective, from our national security standpoint, there just couldn’t have been anything more important.”

Despite their opposing beliefs, Schumer and Johnson spoke “a lot” in recent weeks, Schumer recalled, and he saw a major temperamental difference between the speaker and the conservative House Freedom Caucus’ most rowdy members.

“He wasn’t one of these people who was just angry and wanted to stick it to the other side, even though his ideology was different,” Schumer said.

McConnell’s mission

How Congress spent seven months debating Ukraine aid is best viewed in the context of larger political forces. Former Speaker Kevin McCarthy objected to Schumer and McConnell’s initial spending tranche in September, then was ousted by conservatives after funding the government. The painful race to succeed him produced Speaker Johnson and a lengthy negotiation over adding border security — which then prompted Trump’s work to kill it.

All along, McConnell was steadfast on Ukraine, even as conservatives clobbered him. When the border piece failed, he sat down with Schumer to make sure the aid package moved forward anyway.

“If we didn’t have that it probably would have died,” said Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) of McConnell’s single minded determination.

Biden’s aides worked to sweeten the deal for both parties, helping Johnson craft a key component that sells off Russian assets, restructures some of the foreign aid as a loan and cracks down on TikTok.

Not that long ago, it appeared a majority of both chambers’ Republicans were opposed to sending Ukraine billions more, even in the more Kyiv-friendly Senate. A sea change in the Republican Party, counter to McConnell, looked imminent. Now, that’s less clear.

“We made this one hurt for the establishment, but we’ve got a long way to go,” said Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), a leading critic of Ukraine aid.

And, even now, the Senate minority leader knows the next debate is closer than it may appear: “No arguments are ever won or lost long term.”

It’s been about 16 months since Congress last sent Kyiv money, and the war began drifting away from Ukraine in recent months as it lost ground to Russia while Washington debated further aid. The intelligence this month crystallized the matter for many on-the-fence Republicans.

Holding their fire

On the Democratic side, Schumer held his caucus to just three defections — despite a rising tide of Democrats who want more conditions on Israel aid. That frustration over how Israel has handled the war in Gaza at times threatened to fracture the 51-member Democratic Caucus, and even prompted Schumer to call for new elections in Israel.

But Schumer did not stray from the bill he hatched with McConnell.

“I can’t think of anything in the last 15 years, where the consequences of failure would have been more momentous than they were here. And Chuck and Mitch wouldn’t let that happen,” said Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.).

Congressional Democrats and the president had to show patience and doggedness — and for Biden, that meant not browbeating Republicans that Democrats believed would eventually get to yes.

“Even if it would be a day of momentary political advantage to get out and beat the shit out of them, he didn’t,” Schumer said of the president.

Still, Biden kept up the public pitch for backing Ukraine, particularly in the winter months as Russia was able to gain new ground. And when Johnson was elected speaker in October, after months of Biden warring with McCarthy, the White House grabbed the opening for a new relationship with the senior-most elected Republican.

In the months that followed, the White House closely consulted with congressional leaders and the House’s national security hawks like Chairs Mike Turner (R-Ohio) and Michael McCaul (R-Texas). Ricchetti and Goff stayed in touch with Johnson and his aides over phone calls and meetings at both the speaker’s office and in Ricchetti’s White House office. And Biden and McConnell still spoke directly.

“I didn’t think we could give up. We just had to keep trying. I have kind of a specialty in long games,” McConnell said on Tuesday. “And this was a lot longer than it should have been.”

Still, it’s reasonable to wonder what will happen the next time Ukraine needs aid. McConnell will only be leader for eight more months. Trump may become president. Johnson could be run out of the speakership.

Vance, perhaps unsurprisingly, believes it is unlikely Congress will pass another package of similar size again. Schumer, however, sees something to build on.

“I feel I’m in a unique position. After McConnell goes, I’ll be the leader with the most experience. I have my caucus behind me, but I am able to make it work with Republicans. And you put all that together, and I think we’ll be able to do it again,” Schumer said.