The Republicans are fed up with Biden's proxy war, some say it should be financed by Europe, others are more lenient, then they would sell the already conquered Ukrainian territories to the Russians for $1.5 trillion.

Sens. Reps. JD Vance of Ohio, Mike Lee of Utah, and Rand Paul of Kentucky joined sixteen other congressmen in writing to the Biden administration last week.

“Over the past year, the United States has been the main funder of Ukraine's defense efforts. The war has now entered its second year, but there is no end in sight, and there is no clear strategy to end it," the letter states.

"A proxy war with Russia is not in the strategic interest of the United States and risks an escalation that could spiral out of control."

Of course, the USA has already sought escalation with its unrestricted support for the Ukrainian war effort and Zelensky.

“To date, the United States has provided more than $113 billion in military, economic and humanitarian aid, making it Ukraine's number one supporter. The contribution of our NATO allies pales in comparison," the letter notes. "In addition to the billions of dollars, there is also a big difference in terms of content and motivation.

While the US increases its debt by transporting tanks, anti-aircraft systems and long-range missiles to a battlefield an ocean away, it sends only uniforms and protective equipment to deal with the conflict on its own borders.”

"With each new aid package and each new weapon provided to Ukraine, the risk of direct conflict with Russia increases," the Republican signatories of the letter claim.

However, the current regime does not seem to be bothered or daunted by the situation. Last week, the Pentagon announced another aid package that includes HIMARS artillery shells, anti-tank missiles and other unnamed "precision aerial munitions" valued at $325 million.

But "open-ended American aid to Ukraine is fundamentally incompatible with our strategic interests," the Republicans write.

"The US can support the Ukrainian people in other ways, but the unlimited supply of arms that causes an endless war is not like that. Our national interests and the interests of the Ukrainian people are best served by encouraging the negotiations that are urgently needed to resolve this conflict.

We urge you to stand up for negotiated peace, ending this terrible conflict.”

Representative Eli Crane, one of the signatories of the letter The American Conservative that

"our foreign policy establishment is ready to buy a $100 billion ticket on the train that will take our country to world war." The Arizona Republican went on to say that "the American government absolutely cannot afford to finance another perpetual war at the expense of the American people."

After the letter was sent, Mike Lee's office issued a press release that included Dan Caldwell, vice president of the Center for Renewing America .

"The Biden administration's indefinite support for Ukraine has increased the risk of direct conflict with nuclear-armed Russia and diverted attention from more urgent national security priorities," Caldwell claimed.

"Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine is an immoral but real European security challenge. The burden of supporting Ukraine should primarily be borne by the rich European welfare states, for whom the stakes of the conflict are higher and who have been living for free under the protection of the American security umbrella for decades, he added.

As a parenthesis, it is worth noting here that the elections are approaching in the United States, so the Republicans have an important card in their hands to protest against the war, or more precisely, to act against the skyrocketing costs of the war. It is also true that Europe has become comfortable and has outsourced its own self-defense, so the Americans can rightly feel that they are left on their own in terms of financing.

But let's not forget that starting the Russo-Ukrainian war was not in Europe's interest, nor was the destruction of European-Russian economic cooperation, and that Europe is slowly getting involved in the war, while some American interest groups are profiting from the blood sacrifice. Bracket closed.

Although the letter did not provide much detail on what peace between Russia and Ukraine would look like, there are voices, such as William Lind, an American conservative writer , who suggest that the Russians practically buy the already conquered Ukrainian territories:

“Russia will get Crimea, Donbas and the land corridor connecting the two, but they will have to pay Ukraine for them, say $1.5 trillion, which would be used to rebuild the cities of Ukraine. Until the money is paid, Russia would not receive ownership of the territories, nor the full lifting of sanctions. Russia would cede the occupied eastern counties to Ukraine, so Ukraine would have two seas, the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea, through which it could export its grain.”

According to Lind, this is not comprehensive, but it is a reasonable and workable first step, and we can agree with him that it is indeed not comprehensive.

But as for reasonableness: it is highly debatable that anyone would want to pay for something, or want to return what they have already taken, what is already theirs.

Of course, every negotiation starts with an opening offer, and there is no doubt that the United States should also seek a negotiated solution, whether Ukraine wants it or not. If the Ukrainian leadership does not want to sit at the negotiating table, then billions of dollars from American taxpayers must be withheld from it.

Either way, the Republican signatories are realists who don't believe the letter will change the Biden administration's war policy. Still, there is a growing number of people calling for restraint in the name of the "America First" slogan or the emerging confrontation with China, or both.

Featured image: Shutterstock