US Congress Loads Defense Bill With Europe-First Muscle

[Emrys]

Bill locks in long-term support for Ukraine, mandates troop levels in Europe, and codifies the Baltic Security Initiative as US strategy hardens against Russia.

WASHINGTON DC – In a year when even routine defense policy has been pulled into the gravitational force of US politics, the National Defense Authorization Act – or NDAA – has morphed from a must-pass annual ritual into a sprawling manifesto.
...

Europe strategy

The FY26 NDAA not only enshrines the Baltic Security Initiative as a mandatory Pentagon program but also tightens Congress’s grip on US force posture in Europe in ways rarely seen outside a crisis.

The bill directs the Secretary of Defense and US European Command to “deepen security cooperation” with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania – transforming a patchwork of assistance efforts into a statutory mission to implement NATO’s Strategic Concept and deter Russian aggression.
...
And Congress didn’t stop there. In a sweeping assertion of authority over Pentagon basing decisions, the NDAA prohibits reducing US forces in Europe below 76,000 for more than 45 days, blocks EUCOM from returning or divesting real estate, and bars the removal of major equipment from the theater.
...

Global look at Moscow’s rebuild

...
Lawmakers want real-time assessments of whether the Kremlin can rebuild beyond its 2022 force levels, how sanctions are actually biting, and what Moscow has learned – tactically and doctrinally – from its war in Ukraine.
...
The message is clear: In Congress’s eyes, US strategy can no longer treat Russia as a purely European problem.

Domestic politics never far away

...
If the NDAA reaches Trump’s desk largely intact, Congress will have baked a Europe-first strategy into US law, constrained the Pentagon’s flexibility for years, and rewritten the playbook for competition with Russia and China – all while advancing the GOP’s domestic agenda inside the military.

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/65767

It's hard to see how this reconciles with the broader vision of the National Security Strategy which has excited so much well-deserved pessimism and criticism since it was released. There's much to raise hackles in the NDAA, too, but it seems that so far, Congress is less-rosy-eyed about Russia, more equivocal about Europe, and more supportive - on paper, at least - of Ukraine and continuing defence relationships with hitherto partners in Europe and NATO.

How it may be reshaped in its passage through Congress and what further mischief Trump and his wannabe sellout junta get up to before he signs it, we'll have to wait and see. The Republicans are keen to see it pass because of its elements that serve their domestic agenda and aims to reshape the military etc. Given that a number of Republicans are vocal supporters of Ukraine and extremely suspicious of Russia, and even of Trump's clumsy self-serving efforts at rapprochement with Putin at Ukraine's expense, the NSS as published may not be the last word in the US's security posture for the rest of the decade.

The whole article's well worth a read.

X-Posted in Editorials & Other Articles - https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016419136

[Lovie777]

1. The shithole administration have put.....

The USA in danger, and no country trust us now, and I don’t blame them.

[newdeal2]

2. What if Trump ignores them?

I doubt this SCOTUS will overrule the commander in chief.

[msongs]

3. commander in chief will just do what he wants and ignore all this malarkey nt

[rampartd]

4. the pro nato stuff means we must pass it

trump being trump means he will spend the appropriations on whatever he wants no matter what is in the bill.

[Emrys]

5. Here's a summary and analysis of the NDAA by journalist Doug Klain:

Last edited Tue Dec 9, 2025, 02:45 AM - Edit history (1)

Doug Klain
@DougKlain

After weeks of backroom negotiations, Congress is poised to pass a defense spending bill filled with some rather good provisions to assist Ukraine and put up obstacles to the Trump admin's attempts to divert Ukraine aid or cut off intel support.

Here's what's in the bill 👇🧵

Doug Klain
@DougKlain

Just read through the new National Defense Authorization Act text to see what provisions are in for Ukraine. I’ll have a thread up later with the full breakdown but TL;DR is Congress is poised to pass some rather good legislation to assist Ukraine.

First, here's the text itself. I'll be citing some of the key sections related to Ukraine below.

After the House and Senate passed their own versions, a conference committee worked over recent weeks to reconcile the differences—this is the result.

https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20251208/RCP_xml%5B2%5D.pdf



Sec. 1241: The new National Security Strategy may not view Russia as a major threat to US interests, but Congress sure does. This requires the administration to submit a formal assessment of the threat Russia poses to the United States and its allies.



Sec. 1242: Regardless of any US peace proposals, Congress is extending its prohibition on the use of funds for the recognition of Russian sovereignty over occupied Ukrainian territory, in keeping with decades of policy and helping to deter Russia from future aggression.

Sec. 1243: Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI)

Here's where we're going to get into the weeds on the only military assistance to Ukraine mentioned. As a reminder, the US has zeroed out almost all assistance to Ukraine under the Trump admin.



First, reminder on how the US (used to) militarily aid Ukraine:

Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA)=direct transfers of arms from US stocks.

Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI)=issuing contracts to build new arms for Ukraine.



The Trump administration likely has billions in remaining PDA and USAI authorities, but has not used them this year (this NDAA also mandates reporting on exactly how much remains).

This bill authorizes $400m to USAI for this year and next, and allows it to be used until 2029.
Remember in June when the Pentagon seized 20k anti-drone interceptors built for Ukraine?

Sec. 1243(7) creates new requirements to make that more difficult, and requires the Pentagon to ensure whatever is seized is ultimately replaced for Ukraine.

Trump administration redirects 20,000 anti-drone missiles meant for Ukraine, Zelensky confirms
"We counted on this project — 20,000 missiles. Anti-Shahed missiles. It was not expensive, but it's a special technology," President Volodymyr Zelensky said.
https://kyivindependent.com/trump-redirects-20-000-anti-drone-missiles-meant-for-ukraine-zelensky-confirms/

Here’s an important point to note: The Trump administration doesn’t want to provide arms to Ukraine without getting paid to do so. Congress is reasserting that it is indeed in the US interest to arm Ukraine. The American public also agrees, according to recent polls.



Repeatedly this year, the Trump admin has threatened to end intelligence support for Ukraine. Sec. 1244 creates new oversight mechanisms requiring Congress to be notified immediately if that happens, signaling there would be serious backlash to such a move.



Sec. 1245: Oversight of US arms sales for Ukraine.

Here's a lengthy but important section. The Trump admin replaced military assistance with arms sales to Europe, largely through the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL). But few have understood how it's working.
Congress is creating new reporting requirements to understand exactly how the admin is using PURL, what it's sending, and to ensure that it isn't double-dipping by getting reimbursed by Europe for arms already paid for by Congress under USAI.

A key goal here is to make sure congressionally appropriated funds to arm Ukraine are being used as intended—essentially, it doesn't want the Trump admin forcing Ukraine or allies to reimburse the US for weapons it already sent or pledged to send.

Sec. 8363: The Abducted Ukrainian Children Recovery and Accountability Act from @ChuckGrassley and @amyklobuchar.

Here's a big win: the Senate passed this legislation to support operations to return Ukrainian kids stolen by Russia, and it made it into the final NDAA.

So what to make of all this?

First, this is the first and likely only legislation passed by Congress to support Ukraine in 2025.

Second, it's hard to force the admin to arm Ukraine. That USAI money isn't mandatory spending. But the NDAA does minimize potential harm.

It's also remarkable to step back and realize just how much US support for Ukraine has ended. It's unlikely it will ever return to levels seen under the last administration as long as Trump is in office, and this legislation does not guarantee new arms to Ukraine.



This NDAA is also better than what either the Senate or House originally passed on their own, and hard work clearly went in to finding ways to continue supporting Ukraine despite an admin that isn't interested in doing so.

Votes to pass this NDAA are expected in the coming days.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1998089651681435759.html

I'll also make this its own GD and E&OA OPs.

[sinkingfeeling]

6. We no longer have a Secretary of Defense according to TSF and his jester.

[Emrys]

7. It's interesting that the NDAA uses the terms Department of Defence and Defense Secretary etc. throughout