Unanimous Consent Request--S. 2918 (Executive Session)
Mr. President, my colleague from Virginia was very persuasive, I think, in pointing out the threat to national security that providing Nvidia's chips to China presents. Unfortunately, another area that has the potential to significantly…
Mr. President, my colleague from Virginia was very persuasive, I think, in pointing out the threat to national security that providing Nvidia's chips to China presents.
Unfortunately, another area that has the potential to significantly undermine our national security is that of the efforts by this administration to try and negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine.
Now, don't get me wrong. I support ending the war in Ukraine. I think it would be in America's interests, in Europe's interests, and in Ukraine's interests to do that. But to do it in a way that undermines Ukraine for the long term--that gives Vladimir Putin access to the Ukrainian army, which is the largest army in Europe now and is the most technologically advanced--and to do that in a way that would further undermine the future security of Ukraine is not in America's interest.
But, to continue his war in Ukraine, Vladimir Putin needs two things. He needs money, and he needs weapons.
Russia has hundreds of billions of dollars in assets that are frozen overseas, some of which are subject to U.S. jurisdiction. Moscow is fighting hard to regain access to that money because it would help sustain its war effort.
But, as we know, money alone is not going to be enough. Sanctions have significantly degraded Russia's defense industry, and to keep building weapons, Russia relies on outside supply chains. Much of that support now comes from Chinese entities that are providing the materials and the technologies that are keeping Russia's war machine running.
So, if President Trump is really serious about ending this war, those are the pressure points to put against Vladimir Putin.
The good news is that the tools we need to apply that pressure already exist. The United States can deny Russia access to its frozen sovereign assets, and we can disrupt the supply chains that enable Russia to keep fighting. The Foreign Relations Committee has already reported out two
bills that have had strong bipartisan support that would address each of these.
One is the REPO Implementation Act, known as REPO 2.0. I think that is particularly important because hundreds of billions of Russian sovereign assets have been frozen, including about $5 billion here in the United States, since the start of Russia's murderous invasion of Ukraine.
To help Ukraine beat back the Russian invasion and to eventually rebuild, seizing and repurposing those Russian frozen funds is the right place to start. Senators Risch and Whitehouse led the Rebuilding Economic Prosperity and Opportunity for Ukrainians Act, known as the REPO Act, which I supported, to allow the frozen assets in America to support Ukraine's recovery and reconstruction to ensure Russia's accountability and ensure a just and lasting peace.
The partnership has worked again in this session of Congress to put in place an even stronger REPO 2.0. This bill, which passed out of committee, promotes the regularly scheduled transfers of sizable amounts of these underlying assets to Ukraine to build pressure until Russia ceases its war of aggression and agrees to terms that compensate Ukraine for war damages.
Now, I think it is particularly important for the United States to act because our EU friends have been working on this issue. They have had significant objections. Last year, when the first REPO Act was introduced, they raised a number of concerns. But this year, our European allies are working very hard to get this done in Europe where most of the Russian assets are actually being held.
There is a meeting on this today in Brussels. The question of freezing and then seizing and deploying Russian sovereign assets is a global security question. It should be decided by people operating in a global security environment.
Now, as I said, the Foreign Relations Committee adopted REPO 2.0 by voice vote in October, and I am confident we will pass this legislation out of this Congress at some point in the next few months, if not today.
But supporting Ukraine against Russia in this unjust war is important to America's national security. One way to help ensure that Ukraine has the support they need is to pass the REPO 2.0 Act.
So, as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 243, S. 2918; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.
Mr. President, I appreciate my colleague from Kentucky's longstanding efforts to object to sanctions and to any way to hold accountable states that commit atrocities like Vladimir Putin, but I think he is just wrong on how we end this war.
The way we end this war is by putting pressure on Vladimir Putin so that he is willing to come to the table. He has not been willing to come to the table to have serious negotiations.
And the President's rolling out the red carpet for him in Alaska, welcoming him back into the international community, also has not brought him to the table.
So the only thing Vladimir Putin understands--and I agree with my colleague about the Russian people. I have been to Russia. The Russian people are wonderful. They are being misled by a tyrant who will do anything to continue to expand Russia's influence, not only in Europe but around the world.
My colleague, I am sure, hasn't read some of the documents that show what
Russia is doing right now to meddle in the United States to try and influence public opinion about the war in Ukraine. So I think he is absolutely wrong.
That is why I am going to continue to ask for a unanimous consent to pass the third bill that came out of the Foreign Relations Committee because I think that Russia--not Ukraine, not U.S. taxpayers--should pay for the destruction it has caused.
What the REPO 2.0 bill would do would be to make clear that aggression carries lasting financial consequences.