Senate Democrats and Republicans are pushing an image of determined unity in opposing Russian threats to Ukraine, even as disunity and partisan bickering threatens to undermine their message.
After talks on a preemptive sanctions package fell apart in the Senate, a bipartisan resolution supporting Ukraine garnered opposition from anti-war lawmakers this week, even as President Biden on Thursday warned of an attack “within the next several days.”
Lawmakers and experts say that while congressional action is not likely to make or break Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision over whether to launch an invasion, how Congress behaves does hold weight.
“I don’t know that Putin’s going to care a lot about what we say,” Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) told reporters, “but to the degree that he does…a strong statement that comes from the Congress that represents the views of both sides of the aisle, I think that at least that will accomplish a short term objective.”
Biden this week rejected Russian claims that it is drawing down its more than 150,000 troops that have encircled Ukraine, reiterating the threat of swift and severe consequences on Moscow should it launch an invasion.
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said late last month that senators were on the “1-yard line” in hammering out a bipartisan sanctions package to boost those efforts, but talks fell apart over partisan differences.
Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, described it as a “good faith disagreement” with Democrats on the failed sanctions package.
“Everyone has the objective of doing a very significant amount of damage to their [the Russian] economy, which is the price to pay for this. And it is simply a disagreement over the way to get there, but that’s going to dissipate very quickly if there’s an invasion,” Risch said.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), echoed unity in Congress despite failing to put forth the bipartisan sanctions package.
“I think the Congress is very unified in support of Ukraine and in opposition to what Vladimir Putin is doing and if Putin invades Ukraine, you can bet there’s going to be a major sanctions package.”
The White House has suggested sanctions imposed by the president could target Putin’s inner circle, the banking industry, as well as restricting exports to Russia for key technologies and possibly cutting Russian banks off from the international financial messaging system SWIFT.
Biden has further promised that a Russian invasion of Ukraine would terminate a Russia-to-Germany natural gas pipeline, called Nord Stream 2. In May, Biden waived sanctions on key entities involved with the pipeline to preserve U.S. and German relations, a move that was vilified by Republicans.
Nord Stream 2 was a key area of disagreement between Democrats and Republicans in the talks for a bipartisan sanctions package.
Menendez told The Hill that Republicans rejected his Nord Stream 2 sanctions proposal, that would have required the president to impose sanctions on the pipeline within 30 days of a Russian invasion into Ukraine and that it would be immune from a waiver.
“Why 30 days? It was to give the Germans the opportunity to do it [terminate Nord Stream 2] and not break that relationship. But if they didn’t do it, then the president would’ve had to do it in 30 days,” Menendez said.
“The problem is that some of the things they [Republicans] wanted to do – even though we accepted so many things that they wanted to do – but some of the things they wanted to do would break our coalition that we need in Europe and multi-lateral sanctions are always the farthest, most powerful sanctions,” the chairman added.
Menendez further placed responsibility on Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell for undermining the bipartisan sanctions package, when the Republican leader said on Feb. 8 that he was skeptical that sanctions legislation would deter Putin.
“That was a bad thing,” Menendez said.
Like the sanctions package, efforts to put forth a bipartisan resolution proclaiming the Senate’s support of Ukraine and condemnation of Russian aggression faced opposition this week.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) initially threatened to block quick passage of the resolution – a symbolic statement of unity – over concerns that it could be construed as authorizing armed conflict.
“We have some amendments to it. We believe that it should say nothing in this resolution is to be construed as an authorization of war and nothing in this resolution is to be construed as authorizing the use of troops into Ukraine,” Paul said.
Vladislav Davidzon, a nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center who spoke to The Hill from Kyiv, said it’s hard to gauge how the Kremlin is following inaction in Congress, but that “they do take very good notice of that kind of thing.”
“This is a large equation,” he said of Putin weighing the cost and benefit of whether to invade Ukraine. “This is not going to be the data point that makes the difference over whether [Putin] is going to blitz Kyiv tomorrow night, but it’s one more data point that is put into an equation, and it ratchets up the decision making process, up or down depending on whatever data points are involved.”
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told reporters last week that he believed Putin follows what happens in the U.S. Congress.
“He won’t indicate that, but… I think he does follow what we do,” Cardin said.
Jordain Carney contributed to this report.