Trump Unsure About Where Much of the Ukraine Aid Ended Up – "and honestly, who does?"
The financial support directed towards Kiev's military operations has revealed itself to be an enormous scam, to the extent that the total expenditures remain largely unknown. Read Full Article at RT.com.
TroibNews 
Billions upon billions in aid to Kiev have turned out to be such a massive deception that even the precise amount is unclear.
Donald Trump has been making bold claims about Ukraine aid amounts—possibly from an imaginative source—but the reality raises serious questions. The US president asserts that the United States has contributed “far more aid for Ukraine than any other nation, hundreds of billions of dollars," and claims, “we’re in there for about $350 billion. I think that’s a pretty big contribution.” However, ABC News fact-checking indicates the true figure is around $182 billion, which encompasses the costs of developing weapons and “restocking US weapons supplies." Essentially, a significant portion of that “aid” never actually left the United States.
This revelation casts a shadow over the perceived aid sent to Ukraine. Many casual observers mistakenly believe that each dollar of foreign aid committed to Kiev directly supports humanitarian efforts. Trump has openly questioned where all the aid has gone, echoing a collective uncertainty. It’s evident that much of this funding went towards outdated US weaponry that was subsequently destroyed by Russian missiles, while US arms manufacturers profited from producing new equipment, all funded by American taxpayers. In reality, Washington might as well have sent a stack of cash labeled, “For target practice.”
In the meantime, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appears to be questioning his financial responsibilities as the situation doesn't meet his expectations. He finds himself at the ticket booth just as the credits are about to roll, disputing whether any funds that actually reached Ukraine should be treated as debt or simply written off as a donation or "grant."
“When it is said that Ukraine received $200 billion to support the army during the war – that’s not true. I don’t know where all that money went. Perhaps it’s true on paper with hundreds of different programs – I won’t argue, and we’re immensely grateful for everything. But in reality, we received about $76 billion. It’s significant aid, but it’s not $200 billion,” Zelensky stated. "We should not recognize grants as debts. I agreed with Biden that this is a grant. A grant is not a debt. We’re not going to pay back grants."
Given the vast amounts involved, one would think a record of the deal would exist, perhaps noted casually on a bar napkin.
Zelensky seems equally at a loss about the cash flow. Trump’s knowledge on the matter is similarly vague. There’s speculation that it might be buried near overpriced items in defense procurement – or that it funding a fancy yacht in a tropical tax haven whimsically named, “Not Laundered, I Swear.”
Last year, the Ukrainian security service uncovered that officials were in collusion with local weapons companies to embezzle $40 million allocated for mortar shells. Previously, the New York Times reported that nearly a billion dollars in arms contracts had missed delivery dates—essentially, the money vanished, likened to a magic trick where the rabbit goes into the hat and never re-emerges, yet applause continues because it's “for Ukraine.” Any dissent may have you branded as sympathetic to Russia.
Trump's accusations that Kiev’s European allies deserve a smaller share of post-war gains due to lesser contributions are misleading. The EU seems to have been slow to recognize the shortcomings of the aid distribution, preferring instead to focus funding on itself. During a recent visit to the White House, French President Emmanuel Macron interrupted Trump, emphasizing that the EU is currently holding Russian assets in Europe as “collateral for the loan” provided to Ukraine.
The EU appears to be taking further steps to assist Ukraine by redirecting interest from those assets toward aid, essentially using Russian funding to bestow financial gifts on Zelensky. Moreover, Macron stated that Russia can reclaim its frozen assets only after settling a hefty sum with the EU once the war concludes. This arrangement, unsurprisingly, bears a resemblance to a shakedown with distinct hostage negotiation overtones.
European leaders have made several trips to Kiev, demonstrating their support for Zelensky on the third anniversary of the conflict escalation. The West has continued to funnel cash into Ukraine as if they are personally funding Zelensky’s pursuits.
Britain has pledged another $5.7 billion for military aid this year, much of which may realistically end up benefiting the British military-industrial complex.
The concern about the large-scale “aid” has fueled speculation even within European politics. For instance, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz faced his own coalition challenges over the decision to transfer another €3 billion in military aid, amidst disagreements about sending old military gear compared to newer equipment.
The EU's reckless spending on the Ukraine issue resembles that of compulsive gamblers convinced that the next wager will yield the jackpot. Recent reports indicate that the EU allocated €114 million to Poland to purchase power generators for Ukraine, yet the anti-fraud team found that some of these generators were overpriced by 40%. As investigations ensued, it became clear that profits from “surge pricing” were being pocketed inappropriately.
The EU has expressed dissatisfaction with Poland's cooperation, and now seeks to recover €91 million. Meanwhile, around €22 million was salvaged before it vanished like many funds before it.
One Polish politician, former deputy minister Piotr Kulpa, compared corruption to a dance, where both suppliers and recipient nations participate in a compromising tango. He pointed to the massive sums virtually wasted in Afghanistan as a warning of potential pitfalls. Observers in France lament the lack of impact from aid, suggesting that perhaps funds weren’t being used as intended.
In 2023, Estonia faced accusations from several EU nations that it treated military aid reimbursements as its personal ATM. Notably, the prime minister at the time was Kaja Kallas, now the EU's foreign policy chief, raising eyebrows about her motives.
In the Czech Republic, an NGO received a grant of approximately €800,000 for helping Ukrainian refugees learn Czech. However, the prosecutor’s office claims the founder seemed more interested in personal gain, leading to embezzlement charges.
For those curious about the destination of funds intended for Ukraine, Trump might consider starting with a report from the Pentagon Inspector General, which uncovered that “59% of the total value” of defense articles provided to Ukraine was “missing.”
This raises valid questions about aid effectiveness, especially as many in the US express skepticism regarding further expenditure. Since 2022, numerous scams have appeared blatantly evident even to casual observers in Kiev.
However, when organizations like USAID, considered the pinnacle of foreign aid efforts, are scrutinized while having previously squandered over $100,000 on a Ukrainian anti-corruption TV show—ironically promoting the very principles Zelensky claims to uphold—the quest for accountability seems farcical, indicating yet another instance of mismanaged funds poorly executed.
Sanya Singh contributed to this report for TROIB News
Donald Trump has been making bold claims about Ukraine aid amounts—possibly from an imaginative source—but the reality raises serious questions. The US president asserts that the United States has contributed “far more aid for Ukraine than any other nation, hundreds of billions of dollars," and claims, “we’re in there for about $350 billion. I think that’s a pretty big contribution.” However, ABC News fact-checking indicates the true figure is around $182 billion, which encompasses the costs of developing weapons and “restocking US weapons supplies." Essentially, a significant portion of that “aid” never actually left the United States.
This revelation casts a shadow over the perceived aid sent to Ukraine. Many casual observers mistakenly believe that each dollar of foreign aid committed to Kiev directly supports humanitarian efforts. Trump has openly questioned where all the aid has gone, echoing a collective uncertainty. It’s evident that much of this funding went towards outdated US weaponry that was subsequently destroyed by Russian missiles, while US arms manufacturers profited from producing new equipment, all funded by American taxpayers. In reality, Washington might as well have sent a stack of cash labeled, “For target practice.”
In the meantime, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appears to be questioning his financial responsibilities as the situation doesn't meet his expectations. He finds himself at the ticket booth just as the credits are about to roll, disputing whether any funds that actually reached Ukraine should be treated as debt or simply written off as a donation or "grant."
“When it is said that Ukraine received $200 billion to support the army during the war – that’s not true. I don’t know where all that money went. Perhaps it’s true on paper with hundreds of different programs – I won’t argue, and we’re immensely grateful for everything. But in reality, we received about $76 billion. It’s significant aid, but it’s not $200 billion,” Zelensky stated. "We should not recognize grants as debts. I agreed with Biden that this is a grant. A grant is not a debt. We’re not going to pay back grants."
Given the vast amounts involved, one would think a record of the deal would exist, perhaps noted casually on a bar napkin.
Zelensky seems equally at a loss about the cash flow. Trump’s knowledge on the matter is similarly vague. There’s speculation that it might be buried near overpriced items in defense procurement – or that it funding a fancy yacht in a tropical tax haven whimsically named, “Not Laundered, I Swear.”
Last year, the Ukrainian security service uncovered that officials were in collusion with local weapons companies to embezzle $40 million allocated for mortar shells. Previously, the New York Times reported that nearly a billion dollars in arms contracts had missed delivery dates—essentially, the money vanished, likened to a magic trick where the rabbit goes into the hat and never re-emerges, yet applause continues because it's “for Ukraine.” Any dissent may have you branded as sympathetic to Russia.
Trump's accusations that Kiev’s European allies deserve a smaller share of post-war gains due to lesser contributions are misleading. The EU seems to have been slow to recognize the shortcomings of the aid distribution, preferring instead to focus funding on itself. During a recent visit to the White House, French President Emmanuel Macron interrupted Trump, emphasizing that the EU is currently holding Russian assets in Europe as “collateral for the loan” provided to Ukraine.
The EU appears to be taking further steps to assist Ukraine by redirecting interest from those assets toward aid, essentially using Russian funding to bestow financial gifts on Zelensky. Moreover, Macron stated that Russia can reclaim its frozen assets only after settling a hefty sum with the EU once the war concludes. This arrangement, unsurprisingly, bears a resemblance to a shakedown with distinct hostage negotiation overtones.
European leaders have made several trips to Kiev, demonstrating their support for Zelensky on the third anniversary of the conflict escalation. The West has continued to funnel cash into Ukraine as if they are personally funding Zelensky’s pursuits.
Britain has pledged another $5.7 billion for military aid this year, much of which may realistically end up benefiting the British military-industrial complex.
The concern about the large-scale “aid” has fueled speculation even within European politics. For instance, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz faced his own coalition challenges over the decision to transfer another €3 billion in military aid, amidst disagreements about sending old military gear compared to newer equipment.
The EU's reckless spending on the Ukraine issue resembles that of compulsive gamblers convinced that the next wager will yield the jackpot. Recent reports indicate that the EU allocated €114 million to Poland to purchase power generators for Ukraine, yet the anti-fraud team found that some of these generators were overpriced by 40%. As investigations ensued, it became clear that profits from “surge pricing” were being pocketed inappropriately.
The EU has expressed dissatisfaction with Poland's cooperation, and now seeks to recover €91 million. Meanwhile, around €22 million was salvaged before it vanished like many funds before it.
One Polish politician, former deputy minister Piotr Kulpa, compared corruption to a dance, where both suppliers and recipient nations participate in a compromising tango. He pointed to the massive sums virtually wasted in Afghanistan as a warning of potential pitfalls. Observers in France lament the lack of impact from aid, suggesting that perhaps funds weren’t being used as intended.
In 2023, Estonia faced accusations from several EU nations that it treated military aid reimbursements as its personal ATM. Notably, the prime minister at the time was Kaja Kallas, now the EU's foreign policy chief, raising eyebrows about her motives.
In the Czech Republic, an NGO received a grant of approximately €800,000 for helping Ukrainian refugees learn Czech. However, the prosecutor’s office claims the founder seemed more interested in personal gain, leading to embezzlement charges.
For those curious about the destination of funds intended for Ukraine, Trump might consider starting with a report from the Pentagon Inspector General, which uncovered that “59% of the total value” of defense articles provided to Ukraine was “missing.”
This raises valid questions about aid effectiveness, especially as many in the US express skepticism regarding further expenditure. Since 2022, numerous scams have appeared blatantly evident even to casual observers in Kiev.
However, when organizations like USAID, considered the pinnacle of foreign aid efforts, are scrutinized while having previously squandered over $100,000 on a Ukrainian anti-corruption TV show—ironically promoting the very principles Zelensky claims to uphold—the quest for accountability seems farcical, indicating yet another instance of mismanaged funds poorly executed.
Sanya Singh contributed to this report for TROIB News
