OPEN LETTER: To the Republican senators blocking the Ukraine Support Act — you are choosing Putin

OPEN LETTER: To the Republican senators blocking the Ukraine Support Act — you are choosing Putin

Introduction: A letter I must write

June 5, 2026: the House voted, the Senate blocks

On June 5, 2026, the United States House of Representatives passed the Ukraine Support Act by 226 votes to 195. This bill authorizes more than one billion dollars in aid to Ukraine and up to $8 billion in direct loans, while imposing severe sanctions and export controls on Russia. Republicans voted alongside Democrats — a rare act of political courage in the current climate.

And now, the bill is in the Senate. Where Republicans are refusing to bring it to a vote. Where the majority leader keeps the bill in a drawer. Where some senators wait for instructions that will never come from the Oval Office — because Trump himself would likely veto the bill if it passed.

Why this letter, why now

I am writing because I am tired of watching history unfold from the stands. I am writing as a columnist who has observed American politics for years, who has watched the West hesitate, stall, and barter its solidarity at the price of shameful compromises. The Ukraine Support Act is not perfect. But it exists. And your inaction in the Senate, ladies and gentlemen senators, has a name: passive complicity with Russian aggression.

I am not asking you to betray your party. I am asking you to honor your constitutional oath. There is a difference between the two, and that difference has a first name: Volodymyr Zelensky, who is fighting with Ukrainian soldiers while you count your votes for the next primary.

What the Ukraine Support Act actually contains

One billion in aid and eight billion in loans — not a blank check

The Ukraine Support Act is not a blank check for Zelensky. It is structured, conditional, and designed to maximize impact while protecting American interests. More than one billion dollars in direct aid — military equipment, humanitarian support, strengthening of Ukrainian institutional capabilities. Up to $8 billion in direct loans — repayable, with conditions, not a gift.

The sanctions on Russia included in the bill are among the most targeted ever proposed in Congress: reinforced export controls on dual-use technologies, restrictions on Russian financial institutions, prohibitions for American citizens on facilitating certain transactions. It is a coherent legislative arsenal you hold in your hands. And you are letting it collect dust.

The symbolic rebuke of Trump — and why it matters

Several Republicans voted with Democrats to pass this bill in the House. That is a strong political signal in a context of extreme partisan discipline. These representatives — often from military districts or with Ukrainian communities — chose their conscience and their constituents over the line of their president. That vote is an act of courage.

In the Senate, the same logic could apply. Your chamber includes men and women who served in the armed forces, who understand military doctrine, who know what a Ukrainian retreat would mean for European and American long-term security. That knowledge imposes a responsibility on you. You cannot ignore what you know.

What is happening in Ukraine while you deliberate

Ukrainian soldiers waiting for ammunition

While the bill sits in the drawers of the US Senate, Ukrainian soldiers are running short of ammunition on the front line. Not in an abstract sense, not in a theoretical projection — in the concrete reality of the trenches. Ukrainian officers have publicly testified about these shortages. War journalists present on the ground have documented the operational implications of these gaps. This is not Ukrainian propaganda — it is documented reality.

I make no claim to have been in the field. I have not seen those trenches with my own eyes. I rely on reports from accredited journalists, on public statements from Ukrainian and allied officers, on the assessments of defense institutes that you yourselves read in your classified briefings. The military truth on the ground is not a secret — it is accessible. And it says that Ukraine needs more support, not less.

What a Ukrainian retreat would mean for your security

Some of you may believe that the war in Ukraine is distant, that its consequences are limited to Eastern Europe, that the United States can afford to watch from the sidelines. I invite you to reread your own statements on American national security over the past twenty years. You have all defended, at one point or another, the importance of alliances, the value of deterrence, the cost of a fragile West.

A Ukrainian retreat in the face of Russia sends a signal to every actor watching: Beijing on Taiwan, Pyongyang on South Korea, Tehran on its regional ambitions. The world is interconnected, and signals of Western weakness travel fast. If America abandons Ukraine, it does not save money — it pays a far higher strategic price down the line.

The presidential veto as a convenient alibi

Trump would oppose the bill — so what?

Donald Trump would likely veto the Ukraine Support Act if it reached his desk. Some senators use this probability as justification for their inaction: what is the point of voting if the president vetoes? This logic is a convenient alibi that conceals a simpler reality: you do not want to vote.

But the role of Congress is not to anticipate presidential vetoes and comply with them in advance. It is to legislate. To vote. To make heard the elected voice of the American people, even when that voice opposes the occupant of the Oval Office. A Senate vote for the Ukraine Support Act, followed by a presidential veto, would at least be a clear political act. A refusal to bring the bill to a vote is nothing other than institutionalized cowardice.

The signal sent to Kyiv, Moscow, and the world

The world is watching how the US Senate treats the Ukraine Support Act. Kyiv watches, hopes, and takes note. Moscow watches, calculates, and silently gloats. European capitals — Paris, Berlin, Warsaw, Vilnius — watch and assess just how far American solidarity will actually go.

You may think your votes in the Senate are purely American domestic politics. Think again. They are read, analyzed, and interpreted in chancelleries around the world. Every week of blocking the Ukraine Support Act in the Senate is a week during which Putin can reasonably conclude that America is pulling back from its Ukrainian commitment. And that conclusion has real military consequences on the ground.

The Republicans who had the courage to vote yes in the House

Representatives who chose history over primaries

In the House of Representatives, several Republicans voted for the Ukraine Support Act despite the political risks. These representatives deserve recognition: they demonstrated that it is possible to be Republican and to support Ukraine, to be loyal to American values of freedom and democracy without betraying one's party. That vote sent an important signal to the world: the Republican Party is not monolithically Trumpist on the Ukrainian question.

These representatives know they risk difficult primaries. Some will probably not be reelected because of this vote. They voted anyway. This form of political courage deserves more than our admiration — it deserves to be imitated by their colleagues in the Senate.

The Reagan precedent and support for freedom movements

Under Ronald Reagan, the Republican Party defined itself in part by its firm support for peoples resisting Soviet expansion. The Reagan Doctrine accepted the cost of supporting freedom forces against communist regimes. Zelensky's Ukraine in 2026 is no different from the resistance movements Reagan supported in the 1980s — except that it fights against the same Russian imperial power under a different name.

Where is the Reagan Republican Party? It is in those few courageous representatives who voted yes in the House. It is waiting, in the Senate, for you to show the same courage. Reagan's legacy is not claimed in speeches — it is demonstrated through votes.

What you lose by blocking this bill

The credibility of the United States as a guarantor power

The role of the United States as a guarantor power for liberal democracies rests on an implicit promise: that America will be there when its partners need it. This promise was made through decades of treaties, alliances, and bilateral commitments. Ukraine is not a member of NATO, true. But in 1994 it signed the Budapest Memorandum, through which the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia guaranteed its territorial integrity in exchange for giving up its nuclear weapons.

Blocking the Ukraine Support Act in the Senate is telling the world that American security guarantees are not worth the paper they are written on. That is a lesson South Korea, Taiwan, Poland, and every American ally will take note of. The credibility of American deterrence is not measured in declarations — it is measured in actions.

American public opinion and support for Ukraine

Despite the pro-Russian disinformation circulating in certain media circuits, American support for Ukraine remains significant in polls. Majorities of Americans, including moderate Republicans, support helping Ukraine resist Russian aggression. This is not solely a Democratic or progressive position — it is a sentiment shared by Americans across all regions and backgrounds.

By blocking the Ukraine Support Act, you are not following your constituents — you are following a line dictated by the Trumpist executive. This is not representation: it is submission. And your constituents, when they fully understand the implications of your inaction, may have a different opinion from yours about how they are being represented.

What Zelensky deserves from you

A man fighting for values that are yours too

Volodymyr Zelensky leads his country under daily bombardments. He stays in Kyiv. He keeps governing, negotiating, pleading with every capital in the free world. He is not asking your soldiers to die for his country — he is asking for weapons, ammunition, air defense systems. He is asking for what your allies have always asked when they were in danger and America was strong.

Zelensky is fighting for democracy, for the rule of law, for national sovereignty — all values that you claim to defend in your speeches. Consistency between speeches and votes is the bare minimum your voters should be able to demand of you. The Ukraine Support Act gives you the opportunity for that consistency. You are refusing it. That is your choice. And that choice says something about you.

The legacy you will leave

In twenty years, when historians write about this period, they will note that the US Senate had the opportunity to strengthen support for Ukraine at a decisive moment — and chose not to. They will note the names of the senators who blocked the vote. And they will ask the question that history always asks of those who failed to act: What did you do when you could have acted?

I do not know which side of that question you want to be on. But I know the window for choosing will not stay open indefinitely. Wars have their own timelines, and the moments when support can change the course of events are rare and brief. This moment is now. The Ukraine Support Act is on your desk. The decision is yours.

Conclusion: One last chance to choose the right side

The side of history or the side of fear

History will judge the actors of this period by a simple criterion: did they have the courage to act when action was possible and necessary? The House of Representatives answered yes on June 5, 2026. The Senate has not yet answered. That answer only you can give. No one else. Not Trump, not your floor leader, not your campaign donors.

You. Individually. Vote by vote. That is what representative democracy is. That is the oath you swore. Bring the Ukraine Support Act to a vote. Vote. Let the president veto it if he wants. And own your vote before your constituents and before history.

What I am asking of you

I am asking only one thing: bring this bill to a vote. Not necessarily to vote for it — bring it to a vote. Let American democracy function. Let every senator express their position transparently, before their voters and before the world. The procedural blocking of a bill passed by the House is not politics — it is institutional sabotage.

Ukraine needs this aid. The West needs this signal. America needs to prove that it is still, in times of trial, the reliable guarantor of the democratic values it helped build. You have the power to provide that proof. Use it. Or own the fact that you did not.

A final appeal to European allies

Europe must show the West does not wait for Washington

If the US Senate continues blocking the Ukraine Support Act, Europe cannot remain passive. European governments — particularly France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Poland — must redouble their own commitments to Ukraine. Not as a substitute for American aid, but as a signal that Western solidarity does not depend on a single vote in the US Senate.

Ukraine must never feel alone. Nor must it feel that its future depends on the whim of a single legislative chamber in a single country. The West is larger than the United States, and this truth must translate into concrete actions, not just declarations of principle at G7 summits.

Zelensky deserves more than our fine words

Zelensky hears speeches at every visit to a foreign capital. He hears promises, statements of support, affirmations of solidarity. What he needs to hear now are votes, concrete financial commitments, equipment deliveries. Fine words do not defend the Ukrainian sky against Russian missiles. Patriot batteries do. Give him the Patriots. Vote the aid. Act.

The war in Ukraine is not only the Ukrainian people's fight — it is the fight of all of the West for the values that define its civilization: freedom, sovereignty, rule of law, rejection of the law of the strongest. Every vote that strengthens Ukraine is a vote for these values. Every blockade is a vote against them. The dividing line is clear. Choose your side.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist

Columnist's transparency note

My declared biases

This open letter is deliberately partisan on the question of support for Ukraine. I am pro-Ukraine, I consider Zelensky a courageous head of state defending universal values, and I am anti-Putin in the most direct sense of the term. These positions are my deep journalistic and ethical convictions, not a calculated posture. The reader must know them in order to evaluate my analysis.

I am a French columnist, an outside observer of the American political system. I have no direct American electoral expertise, and my appeals to Republican senators are not grounded in an intimate knowledge of their local political constraints. I speak from a position of an engaged international observer, not an American political strategist.

What I know and what I do not know

The figures in the Ukraine Support Act — $1 billion in direct aid, $8 billion in loans, 226 votes to 195 — are official public data that can be verified. The likelihood of a presidential veto by Trump is a journalistic estimate based on his public statements, not a certainty. I do not know whether the Senate will ultimately vote on this bill, nor on what timeline. I acknowledge this fundamental uncertainty while maintaining the full force of my moral argument.

Sources

Primary sources

PBS NewsHour: House Passes Bill to Provide More Ukraine Aid and Impose New Sanctions on Russia — June 5, 2026

Breaking Defense: House Passes Ukraine Aid Bill with New Sanctions for Russia — June 2026

Atlantic Council: The Ukraine Support Act Sends a Strong Signal Even If It Won't Send Weapons — June 2026

Secondary sources

The Epoch Times: House Passes Bill Authorizing New Ukraine Aid, Russia Sanctions — 2026

Daily Sabah: House Approves Ukraine Aid, Russia Sanctions in Rebuke to Trump — June 2026

The Straits Times: US House Backs Russia Sanctions, Ukraine Aid in Latest Blow to Trump — 2026