Republicans in the impeachment hearings keep making a big deal about how Trump approved the sale of Javelin missiles to Ukraine and that this shows that he was more pro-Ukrainian and anti-Russian than President Obama.
I’m really not clear on how this helps anything in the charges being discussed in this current impeachment process. In fact, it probably weakens any argument about why the additional money and support would be held up due to old corruption issues that occurred. I mean if you were fine with the original Javelin sale and money being given in the past without any concern for investigations into previous corruption, then why would it all of sudden become an issue for only the most recent aid being given?
Regardless of the nonsense of this line of thinking, I believe that Trump didn’t provide the Javelins or the initial aid due to wanting to support the Ukrainians against Russia, but rather it was done in another quid pro quo arrangement where he used the Javelins and aid to get Ukrainian investigations that were cooperating with the FBI and Mueller who were digging into Manafort’s Ukrainian corruption in support of Russian goals.
This Foreign Policy article agrees:
The most recent call may not have been the first time Javelin missiles have been caught in the political crosshairs. In April 2018, just weeks after the U.S. State Department approved a $47 million sale of Javelins to Ukraine, Kyiv halted investigations by an anti-corruption prosecutor into Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, who worked for a decade for a pro-Russian political party in Ukraine, in an apparent effort not to rock the boat in Washington.
Also, I’m not sure that many folks are also aware (as it hasn’t been widely reported) that Trump’s release of the Javelins to Ukraine came with a bunch of conditions. From another Foreign Policy article:
But while there is evidence that the Javelin sale has been a powerful gesture of support for Kyiv, the missiles’ military application has been far more limited. Under the conditions of the foreign military sale, the Trump administration stipulates that the Javelins must be stored in western Ukraine—hundreds of miles from the battlefield.
“I see these more as symbolic weapons than anything else,” said Samuel Charap, a senior political scientist at Rand Corp. Experts say the conditions of the sale render them useless in the event of a sustained low-level assault—the kind of attack Ukraine is most likely to face from Russia.
Also, the argument that the Obama only gave blankets to Ukraine is another mischaracterization. From the same article:
Trump’s claim about supplying far more critical military aid to Ukraine than Obama is hyperbolic at best in other ways. The Obama administration did draw criticism for its refusal to approve lethal assistance to Ukraine, including the Javelin missile sale Trump cited. But it did commit to Kyiv more than $600 million in security assistance and equipment, including armored Humvee vehicles, unmanned aerial vehicles, countermortar radars, night vision equipment, and medical supplies.
I’m really not sure why the Republicans think this is a good line of support for Trump in these impeachment hearings especially since they may want to let sleeping dogs lie. Does Trump really want folks digging more into these original Javelin sales when they may have been part of another quid pro quo?