Potentially thousands of veterans are affected, but many questions remain about the policy that the Pentagon and Department of Veterans Affairs must work through.

Bad discharges cost service members years of benefits for home loans, educational benefits and medical care, and it’s not clear whether the government will try to find a way to compensate for those costs or how it might set benefits from this point forward.

Here’s a look at how the policy has changed, how veterans can apply for the pardons and what questions still need to be answered:

Who is affected?

In December 2013, Congress removed a provision from the Uniform Code of Military Justice that had criminalized sodomy between two consenting adults. The provision, under Article 125, had been in place since 1951 and resulted in the convictions and discharges of an estimated 2,000 service members, said Rachel Branaman, a spokeswoman for the Modern Military Association of America, an advocacy organization of LGBTQ+ service members, military spouses, veterans, their families and allies.

The total numbers affected — including service members who may have been targeted due to sexual orientation but discharged for other issues — could be much higher, she said. While the act was no longer criminalized in the UCMJ after 2013, service members who had been prosecuted under Article 125 before then and discharged were still facing the repercussions of having those military convictions on their records.

How do service members apply for a pardon?

Service members who were discharged due to an Article 125 violation prior to 2013 can apply for the pardon. The Pentagon launched a webpage on Wednesday with links to apply and instructions on how to pursue each case.

Not everyone will qualify under Biden’s proclamation. Exceptions include if the consensual act occurred during an adulterous relationship with the spouse of another service member or where a power imbalance put into question whether the act was consensual, such as between a recruiter and a potential recruit.

The Pentagon’s portal has the guidelines for who qualifies and an application for a pardon, which affected veterans will need to submit to the military branch they served in.

Will there be benefits?

While Biden’s proclamation technically pardoned all people covered by its terms, former service members still have to have their records verified by the military branch they served in to get proof from the Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney that they were pardoned.

That’s important because it will allow the affected veteran’s record to be corrected in paperwork used to apply for loans, credit, employment or positions of trust.

The pardon doesn’t mean the conviction will be removed from the person’s record — both the conviction and pardon will show. A further step to have the record expunged would need to be pursued in the courts.

The affected veteran also will then need to apply separately to their military branch to correct military records, including an upgrade or correction of a discharge.

Branaman said that while this was a positive step, it puts the burden on the veterans to work to remove a conviction that they should not have faced, adding that the administration needs to find a way to streamline the process.

The convictions have had potentially life-altering repercussions, as those former service members did not have access to Veterans Affairs benefits. including a pathway to home loans, which could have cost them the ability to create generational wealth or attend school, Branaman said.

On a call with reporters Tuesday, two Biden senior administration officials could not answer whether the pardons could result in back pay or restitution for those affected.

“We don’t know what will be retroactive,” Branaman said.

The aircraft, subject of a hearing Wednesday, has faced safety, maintenance and reliability issues for decades, with 62 service members and civilians killed in 12 Osprey accidents since 1992. The most recent was a crash off the coast of Japan in November that killed eight U.S. service members and led the military to ground the entire fleet. The aircraft, which can fly long distances fast like an airplane but land like a helicopter, began returning to service in March with flight restrictions.

Among the information that the House Oversight Committee’s Subcommittee on National Security, the Border and Foreign Affairs has requested but has yet to receive is the wear and replacement rates on Osprey proprotor gearboxes, a component that was a factor in the 2023 crash off Japan.

Committee members also have asked for internal crash reports that the military conducts with surviving air and ground crews and witnesses. The reports, known as safety investigation board reports, aren’t available to the public and cannot be used to punish a crew — they are in place to identify and quickly share any safety issues among the fleet.

To date, the staffers said they had received about 3,500 pages of documents, but information was redacted, leaving them unable to conduct oversight. The committee staffers spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

The staffers said the documents they have reviewed left them concerned about whether Pentagon leadership has maintained a close watch on the Osprey program. Some of the problems with the aircraft date back a decade or more but still haven’t been fixed.

After mechanical and material failures led to an Osprey crash in California in 2022 that killed five Marines, the military said it had instituted changes to prevent the issue from happening again.

“However, the recent fatal crash and ongoing investigations suggest that more transparency and rigorous testing is needed to verify these claims,” U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothman, a Wisconsin Republican who chairs the committee, said in a statement to the AP ahead of the hearing Wednesday.

Testifying before lawmakers will be Vice Admiral Carl Chebi, head of the U.S. Naval Air Systems Command, which is responsible for the Osprey program across the military.

The committee is concerned about how the Pentagon will be able to sustain the Osprey program long term. Parts are wearing out faster than anticipated, but recent operations and maintenance budget requests by the Pentagon for the aircraft have been cut, Grothman said.

The Marine Corps is planning on using the Osprey through 2050, while Air Force Special Operations Command has already begun to talk publicly about finding another type of aircraft to conduct missions.

Osprey producers Bell Flight, the Boeing Co. and Rolls-Royce, which supplies the engines, are facing a new lawsuit from families of the five Marines killed in the 2022 California crash. The lawsuit alleges that the companies did not address known parts failures or safety issues that were a factor in the crash.

Boeing and Bell have declined to comment, citing the ongoing litigation.

The most recent crash last year in Japan was the fourth in two years which killed a total of 20 service members. The Air Force quickly identified that a material problem with the aircraft was to blame for last year’s crash, and within a week, the entire Osprey fleet — hundreds of aircraft across the Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force — were grounded.

The staffers said the Pentagon has not provided details on what the restrictions are as the aircraft returns to operations.

The V-22 Osprey is loved by pilots because of its speed and ability to land on target like a helicopter. Besides the deadly crashes, there have been additional accidents in which the aircraft were destroyed and service members were injured, but all survived.

Moving fast is critical, CIA Director Bill Burns said Thursday, warning that without additional aid from the U.S., Ukraine could lose the war to Russia by the end of this year.

Pentagon press secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said, “We would like very much to be able to rush the security assistance in the volumes we think they need to be able to be successful.”

If about $61 billion in funding for the war-torn country gets the green light, “we have a very robust logistics network that enables us to move material very quickly,” Ryder told reporters Thursday. “We can move within days.”

The Pentagon has had supplies ready to go f—or months but hasn’t moved them because it is out of money. It has already spent all of the funding Congress had previously provided to support Ukraine, sending more than $44 billion worth of weapons, maintenance, training and spare parts since Russia’s February 2022 invasion.

By December, the Pentagon was $10 billion in the hole, because it is going to cost more now to replace the systems it sent to the battlefield in Ukraine.

As a result, the Pentagon’s frequent aid packages for Ukraine dried up because there’s been no guarantee Congress would pass the additional funding needed to replenish the weapons the U.S. has been sending to Ukraine. The legislation would include more than $20 billion to restock the Pentagon’s shelves and ensure that the military services have what they need to fight and protect America.

The lag in weapons deliveries has forced Ukrainian troops to spend months rationing their dwindling supply of munitions.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is pushing the Ukraine funding bill toward a weekend vote despite threats from within his party that doing so could cost him his job. If Congress passes the bill, President Joe Biden, a Democrat, has said he will sign it “immediately,” which then triggers the Pentagon to begin pulling stockpiled weapons to deliver to Ukraine.

A look at how the U.S. can quickly move weapons to Ukraine:

Presidential drawdown authority

When an aid package for Ukraine is announced, the weapons are either provided through presidential drawdown authority, which allows the military to immediately pull from its stockpiles, or through security assistance, which funds longer-term contracts with the defense industry to obtain the systems.

The presidential drawdown authority, or PDA, as it’s known, has allowed the military to send billions of dollars worth of ammunition, air defense missile launchers, tanks, vehicles and other equipment to Ukraine.

“In the past, we’ve seen weapons transferred via presidential drawdown authority arrive within a matter of days,” said Brad Bowman, director at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies center on military and political power.

Those stocks are pulled from bases or storage facilities in the U.S. or from European sites where the U.S. has already surged weapons to cut down on the amount of time it will take to deliver them once the funding is approved.

Dwindling US stockpiles

As the war in Ukraine has dragged on, the U.S. began to send increasingly larger, more lethal and more expensive systems to the warfront. They included entire air defense systems, armored vehicles, sophisticated missiles — even Abrams tanks.

Those systems cost more to replace, so the military — in particular, the Army — went deeper into debt. Compounding that, the military in some cases opted to replace older systems sent to Ukraine with pricier, higher-tech ones at home.

As a result, Army leaders recently told Congress that without passage of the foreign aid bill, they will begin to run out of money and have to move funds from other accounts.

Army Secretary Christine Wormuth and Gen. Randy George, chief of staff of the Army, said the branch wouldn’t have enough money to bring home troops serving in Europe or to train units in the U.S.

US weapons storage

The military has massive weapons storage facilities in the U.S. for millions of rounds of munitions of all sizes that would be ready to use in case of war.

For example, the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant in Oklahoma sprawls across 45,000 acres (70 square miles) connected by rail and has a mission to surge as many as 435 shipping containers — each able to carry 15 tons (30,000 pounds) worth of munitions — if ordered by the president.

The facility is also a major storage site for one of the most used munitions on Ukraine’s battlefield, 155 mm howitzer rounds.

The demand by Ukraine for that particular shell has put pressure on U.S. stockpiles and pushed the military to see where else it could get them. As a result, tens of thousands of 155 mm rounds have been shipped back from South Korea to McAlester to be retrofitted for Ukraine.

Weapons storage in Europe

According to a U.S. military official, the U.S. would be able to send certain munitions “almost immediately” to Ukraine because storehouses exist in Europe.

Among the weapons that could go very quickly are the 155 mm rounds and other artillery, along with some air defense munitions. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss preparations not yet made public.

A host of sites across Germany, Poland and other European allies also are helping Ukraine maintain and train on systems sent to the front. For example, Germany set up a maintenance hub for Kyiv’s Leopard 2 tank fleet in Poland, near the Ukrainian border.

The nearby maintenance hubs hasten the turnaround time to get needed repairs done on the Western systems.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin instituted the policy after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022 to ensure that troops who were assigned to states where abortions or other types of health care such as IVF treatment were no longer provided could still access those services.

The policy sparked outrage in some circles and led Alabama Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville to hold up hundreds of military promotions for months in a failed attempt to get the Pentagon to rescind it. Tuberville ultimately withdrew all of his holds in December.

The travel policy was used by service members or their dependents 12 times during that seven-month period at a cost of roughly $40,000, Pentagon deputy press secretary Sabrina Singh said Tuesday. The money covered lodging, meals and transportation for out-of-state travel to receive care.

The Pentagon said it did not have data on the first five months of 2023 because the services did not establish a way to track those uses when the policy was first implemented.

The policy does not cover the cost of abortions, and it’s not clear how many of the 12 trips were for abortions or other type of reproductive health care, such as IVF treatment. Singh said the Pentagon would not have a specific breakdown of what services were sought by the service members or their dependents due to medical privacy issues.

Under federal law, Defense Department medical facilities can perform abortions only when the life of the pregnant person is at risk or in cases of rape or incest, and those instances have been extremely rare. According to the department, there were 91 abortions performed in military medical facilities between 2016 and 2021.

For months, many of the military officers directly affected by Tuberville’s holds declined to speak out, for fear any comments would be seen as political. But as the pressures on their lives and the lives of the officers serving under them increased, they began to speak about how the uncertainty surrounding their next move was hurting not only them but their children and spouses.

They talked about how some of their most talented junior officers were going to get out of the military because of the instability they saw around them, and about how having to perform multiple roles because of so many vacancies was putting enormous additional stress on an already overworked military community.

The issue came to a head when U.S. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Eric Smith suffered a heart attack in October, just two days after he’d talked about the stress of the holds at a military conference. Smith fully returned to his duties only in the last few weeks.

For the second time in nine months, Defense Department accountants have sharpened their pencils, pored over their books and found a way to send more military aid to Ukraine.

That $300 million figure may sound huge to ordinary citizens who struggle to pay the mortgage. But it’s not for the Pentagon. Given the vast size of the military budget, even minor savings like shaving a few dollars off every bullet in a new contract can translate into millions of dollars.

That’s how White House and Pentagon leaders explained how they could send a new package of weapons and equipment to Ukraine this month even though the bill to fund military aid is stalled in Congress. It was the first aid package since late December, and the lack of U.S. weapons deliveries has caused Ukrainian troops on the front lines to ration or run out of ammunition.

A senior defense official said the department used savings it recouped in an Army contract that came in cheaper than planned. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss details of the process.

The discovery of the $300 million has raised some eyebrows. The Defense Department is begging Congress for money it needs to replace weapons it already sent to Ukraine. Earlier this month, the Pentagon revealed how bad the gap was — $10 billion. That means that the military services that sent stockpiled equipment to Ukraine won’t get replacements unless Congress approves the funding bill, which House Republicans have stalled.

It’s unclear whether the Pentagon could have put that $300 million toward reducing the $10 billion replenishment deficit instead. There are congressional controls on how different funding lines can be used, and the Pentagon did not immediately respond to questions on the savings. But with Ukrainian troops running out of ammunition in their fight against Russia — and no sign that the funding impasse in Congress will end soon — the Biden administration opted to use the savings to help its struggling ally.

Adding to the complicated financial record keeping, the Pentagon announced last year it had found an accounting error that freed up an extra $6.2 billion in weapons for Ukraine. The military services used replacement costs to determine the value of the equipment sent to Ukraine. But rules require them to use net book value, which is lower.

The surplus was in spending authority — not actual money — so it meant the Pentagon had congressional approval to send an additional $6.2 billion worth of equipment to Ukraine.

A look at the complicated accounting:

THE $10 BILLION HOLE …

The $10 billion replenishment gap stems from estimates that Pentagon budgeteers made in the early months of the war. Back then, there were few details on what weapons Ukraine would need over time and what the U.S. would ultimately send. In those early months, mostly simple systems, like small arms ammunition and anti-tank rounds, were rushed in.

For those simpler systems, the Pentagon’s replenishment costs were estimated to be close to a 1-to-1 ratio.

But as the months went by, the U.S. began to send entire air defense systems, armored vehicles, sophisticated missiles — even Abrams tanks. The replacement cost ratio grew, depending on the system, sometimes to as much as 4-to-1, because the military in some cases is replacing older weapons with newer, higher-tech, pricier ones.

For example, the Army sent Humvees to Ukraine but is buying new and far more expensive Joint Light Tactical Vehicles to replace them. The Army also is buying the upcoming Precision Strike Missile, or PrSM, to replace the long-range Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMS, which is a high-demand item for Ukraine and costs less than the PrSM.

As a result, the early estimates for how much it would cost to replenish U.S. stockpiles fell short. By how much, however, is difficult to calculate. The Pentagon has not provided any details to explain how it came up with the $10 billion figure, such as the total value of the equipment already sent and how much of that the department needs to replenish.

… AND THE $300 MILLION SAVINGS

As the U.S. began negotiating contracts to replace weapons sent to Ukraine, officials at times were able to save money by getting things at lower prices than initially expected.

For example, the military was able to buy 25mm ammunition for $93 per round, rather than the initial estimate of $130 per round. So, when it bought 120,000 rounds, the savings on that contract alone totaled $4.4 million.

Such savings actually happen all the time, as do contract overages. Over the past two years, the military services returned more than $1.57 billion to the replenishment fund, as of September 2023, due to price savings or other contract issues.

Of the funds returned, about $1.5 billion was used to replace other stocks sent to Ukraine, while the remaining $70 million came too late in the fiscal year and expired before it could be reprogrammed.

The senior defense official said the bulk of the $300 million came from an Army contract to buy Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicles. The final cost was $290 million less than initially estimated.

Essentially, the recovered $300 million allowed the Pentagon to offset the costs of sending more munitions to Ukraine without going deeper into the red.

THE $6.2 BILLION SURPRISE

Late last June, as the end of the fiscal year was nearing and congressional funding for Ukraine was beginning to dwindle, Pentagon officials announced they’d found an accounting error.

The account in question involved the Pentagon’s Presidential Drawdown Authority, or PDA. That program gives the department the authority to pull weapons from its own stockpiles and send them to Ukraine. It does not provide funding — that comes in other appropriations bills.

As the military services pulled weapons off the shelves, they used replacement costs to calculate the value of the equipment sent, rather than book value as required. The book value of a weapon is the original cost minus depreciation, which was a lot less than weapon replacement costs, and once the costs were corrected, there was about $6.2 billion in spending authority left over.

WHAT’S LEFT?

The Pentagon dipped into that unexpectedly discovered $6.2 billion a few times to send additional weapons to Ukraine, and there is currently about $3.91 billion left.

In theory, that could be used for sending arms from U.S. stockpiles to Ukraine. But because there is no money left to buy replacement weapons, and no guarantee that Congress will act soon, the Pentagon is reluctant to use that authority.

Sending weapons without the funding would only deepen the $10 billion replenishment hole, further reducing stockpiles and potentially putting U.S. troops at risk.

In the past week, top Pentagon officials have publicly urged Congress to approve a $95 billion supplemental funding package that is still stalled on Capitol Hill. About $60 billion of that would fund U.S. efforts to support Ukraine, with $20 billion of it going toward replenishing stockpiles now and in the future. The officials argue that such funding actually is a boon to Congress, since it would be used to increase production at manufacturing plants all around the U.S.

Last week, Gen. CQ Brown, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, pressed the point during a rare trip with lawmakers. He took Republican House and Senate members from Arkansas and Oklahoma, some of whom have opposed the spending bill, with him to visit companies in those states making weapons needed by Ukraine to show that the bill, if passed, would ultimately benefit the local economies and workforces that make up the U.S. defense industrial base.

Brown visited Lockheed Martin’s Camden, Arkansas, weapon facility and the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant in McAlester, Oklahoma, with the lawmakers who represent those factory workforces to address concerns over billions of dollars being sent overseas when there are so many needs at home. Some of those lawmakers have either already voted against the aid or have indicated they will oppose it.

The general traveled with Arkansas Republican Sen. John Boozman, Oklahoma Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin and Arkansas Republican Rep. Brad Westerman and is scheduled to meet with Oklahoma Republican Rep. Josh Brecheen while at McAlester. Boozman, Mullin and Westerman expressed optimism that the Ukraine supplemental bill will find a way to passage in Congress and highlighted the impact it would have on their local workforces.

Brown said he’ll use the trip to point out how the funding is needed to replenish U.S. military stockpiles that have been sent forward to Ukraine during its fight against Russia’s invasion and how that increased production supports local economies. It’s a point the Pentagon has increasingly pushed in recent months as current Ukraine funding ran out — and Ukraine’s front lines began to ration munitions against a much more robustly supplied Russian army.

“As I have done with other members, and I’ll do with these members, I’ll talk to them about the importance of the supplemental and not only how it helps Ukraine but also how it helps all of us. What I mean by that is much of the money, about 80% of the money out of the supplemental, will go back into our defense industrial base,” Brown said in a call with reporters ahead of the trip.

Lockheed Martin’s Camden plant produces both the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, or HIMARS, which is a coveted long-range firing system Ukraine has effectively used against Russian front lines, and the Army Tactical Missile Systems, or ATACMS, long-range missiles that are quick and that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said have proved effective against Russian forces. The McAlester plant produces Navy and Air Force bombs — but is also a major storage site for critically needed 155mm munitions. In support of Ukraine the McAlester plant has also accelerated repair of Stinger and Hawk missiles and has refurbished South Korea-provided 155mm rounds with new markings and fuses.

“I think there’s real value in coming to see this firsthand and have time with them on the airplane to talk about why this is important and why going to these two locations is important,” Brown said.

Arkansas Republican Sen. Tom Cotton, a high-ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford, who negotiated the failed border bill that has now become a sticking point for the Ukraine aid bill in the House, had been scheduled to travel with Brown but will no longer be on the trip.

The lawmakers have taken different approaches on their support for Ukraine as the war has dragged on.

In May 2022, the Arkansas senators split on the $40 billion Ukraine aid package, with Cotton joining Lankford in favor of the aid and Boozman opposed.

Mullin, who was a member of the House at the time before being elected to the Senate, also voted in favor of the 2022 aid package, as did Westerman.

But more recently, as the Senate last month approved the $95 billion aid package for Ukraine, Israel and the Indo-Pacific allies, Cotton, Lankford and Mullin voted against it, while Boozman was in favor.

That bill is now stalled in the House, opposed by hard-line Republicans, including Brecheen, who joined Congress in 2023. He said on social media the “disastrous legislation must be stopped.”

Austin, 70, is still in the hospital being treated for complications from prostate cancer surgery. His failure to disclose his hospitalization has been sharply criticized by members of both political parties and has led to some calls for his resignation.

In a memorandum to Austin and other top officials, Inspector General Robert P. Storch said his review would “examine the roles, processes, procedures, responsibilities, and actions” related to his hospitalization.

He said he would assess whether Pentagon policies and procedures “are sufficient to ensure timely and appropriate notifications and the effective transition of authorities as may be warranted due to health-based or other unavailability of senior leadership.”

The incident led the White House and Pentagon immediately to formalize policies for which officials will be notified anytime a Cabinet member transfers authority to one of their deputies because they will be indisposed for any reason. This includes not just because of medical treatment but, in an example the Pentagon used this week, when the secretary is traveling and does not have immediate access to secure communications.

Austin was admitted to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on Dec. 22 and underwent surgery to treat the cancer, which was detected earlier in the month during a routine screening. He developed an infection a week later and was hospitalized Jan. 1 and admitted to intensive care.

President Joe Biden and senior administration officials were not told about Austin’s hospitalization until Jan. 4, and Austin kept the cancer diagnosis secret until Tuesday.

Both the White House and Pentagon previously announced they are conducting their own reviews.

Austin’s secrecy also prompted criticism from Congress members on both sides of the political aisle. Republican Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said he has opened a formal inquiry into the matter.

Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Thursday that the inspector general review is “good news.” Republicans on the panel had expressed concerns that an internal review would be conducted by people involved in the episode, Wicker said.

He said Republicans still want to know more about Austin’s absence from doctors or Defense Department officials.

That the defense secretary had to be taken to the hospital by ambulance “is an occurrence of such magnitude and importance and seriousness that certainly key members of the department, including his own deputy, should be notified,” Wicker said.

It is still unclear how Austin’s cancer treatment will affect his travel or other public engagements going forward. Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks has been taking on some of his day-to-day duties as he recovers.

Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this story.

His time in Washington, which will include meetings on Tuesday at the White House and with Congress, is part of a last-minute push by the Biden administration to convince lawmakers to pass a supplemental funding bill, as officials warn that the money for Ukraine is running out.

President Joe Biden has asked Congress for $61.4 billion for wartime funding for Ukraine as part of a $110 billion package that also includes money for Israel and other national security priorities. But the request is caught up in a debate over U.S. immigration policy and border security. The U.S. has already provided Ukraine $111 billion for its fight against Russia’s 2022 invasion.

“If there’s anyone inspired by unresolved issues on Capitol Hill, it’s just (Russian President Vladimir) Putin and his secret clique,” Zelenskyy told an audience of military leaders and students at the National Defense University. “Ukrainians haven’t given up and won’t give up. We know what to do. And you can count on Ukraine. And we hope just as much to be able to count on you.”

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who introduced the Ukrainian president, said America’s commitment to Ukraine is unshakeable and supporting the war is critical to ensuring the security of the U.S. and its allies.

“America’s commitments must be honored. America’s security must be defended. And America’s word must be kept,” Austin said.

He said Zelenskyy is “living proof that a single person’s leadership can help rally an embattled democracy and inspire the free world and change the course of history.”

With Congress in its final work week before leaving for the holidays, questions remain as to whether Republicans will be able to come to an agreement on any rounds of future funding for Ukraine or Israel without White House concessions on additional border security as illegal crossings surge. But any border package also runs the risk of alienating some Democrats.

According to the Defense Department, there is about $4.8 billion remaining in presidential drawdown authority, which pulls weapons from existing U.S. stockpiles and sends them quickly to the war front, and about $1.1 billion left in funding to replenish the U.S. military stockpiles.

John Kirby, the White House National Security Council spokesman, told reporters Monday that Zelenskyy’s visit comes at a critical time.

“This is exactly the right time to be having President Zelenskyy in town to have these discussions, because of what’s going on in Ukraine, the increased activity we’re seeing by the Russian armed forces as winter approaches, but also what’s going on on Capitol Hill,” said Kirby.

He said Biden will make clear to Zelenskyy when they meet that the White House is standing firm on the supplemental budget request. White House spokesman Andrew Bates said top Office of Management and Budget, National Security Council and White House legislative affairs officials have continued to press the case for the funding.

Associated Press reporters Aamer Madhani and Sagar Meghani contributed to this report.

Austin, who traveled to Kyiv by train from Poland, met with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Defense Minister Rustem Umerov and Chief of Staff Gen. Valerii Zaluzhnyi.

While there Austin announced the Pentagon would be sending an additional $100 million in weapons to Ukraine from U.S. existing stockpiles, including artillery and munitions for air defense systems. The package also includes another High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, or HIMARS.

Austin said Ukraine’s effort to defeat Russian forces “matters to the rest of the world” and that U.S. support would continue “for the long haul.”

Zelenskyy said Austin’s visit was “a very important signal” for Ukraine. “We count on your support,” Zelenskyy said, thanking Congress as well as the American people for their backing.

This is Austin’s second trip to Kyiv since Russia’s 2022 invasion, but he’s making it under far different circumstances, as the world’s attention is drawn to the Middle East and signs of fatigue set in with the almost 21-month Russia-Ukraine war.

Austin’s first visit occurred in April 2022, just two months after the start of the war. At the time, Ukraine was riding a wave of global rage at Moscow’s invasion, and Austin launched an international effort that now sees 50 countries meet monthly to coordinate on what weapons, training and other support could be pushed to Kyiv.

But the conflict in Gaza could pull attention and resources from the Ukraine fight. The U.S. has worked feverishly since the Oct. 7 attacks by Hamas on Israel, and the weeks of devastating bombardment on Gaza by Israel that has followed, to prevent the conflict from turning into a regional war. Even as Austin stood in St. Michael’s Square in Kyiv, the first question asked at a press briefing at the end of the short visit was about Israel’s use of U.S.-provided weapons in that conflict, instead of about Ukraine.

Both conflicts have already seen significant U.S. military support. To back Israel and keep that conflict from spreading, the U.S. has already committed two carrier strike groups, scores of fighter jets and thousands of U.S. personnel to the Middle East, and has had to shift its force posture and conduct airstrikes against Iranian-backed militant groups that are now hitting U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria on a regular basis.

For Ukraine, the U.S. has already provided more than $44 billion — and allies have sent an additional $35 billion — in weapons packages that range from millions of bullets to air defense systems, advanced European and U.S. battle tanks and, finally, pledges for F-16 fighter jets.

But Ukraine still needs more, and after almost 20 months of shipping arms to Ukraine, cracks are beginning to show. Some European countries such as Poland have scaled back support, noting their need to maintain adequate fighting ability to defend themselves.

Ukrainian officials have strongly pushed back on suggestions they are in a stalemate with Russia after a long-awaited counteroffensive over the summer did not radically change the battle lines on the ground. In a visit to Washington last week, Andriy Yermak, head of the president’s office, provided no details but confirmed that Ukrainian forces had finally pushed through to the east bank of the Dnieper River, which has essentially served as the immovable front line between Ukrainian and Russian forces for months.

However, as winter sets in it will become more difficult for either side to make large gains due to ground conditions. That could further work against Ukraine if U.S. lawmakers perceive there’s time to wait before more funds are needed. Ukraine and the U.S. expect that this winter Russia will go after Ukraine’s infrastructure again, like the power grid, making air defenses critical.

Fred Kagan, a senior resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, said it would be a mistake to think there is time to wait.

“If we stop providing aid to Ukraine, it’s not that the stalemate continues. The aid is actually essential to preventing the Russians from beginning to maneuver again in ways that can allow them to defeat Ukraine,” Kagan said. “So the cost of cutting off aid is that Russia wins and Ukraine loses and NATO loses.”

Further complicating the support is that the Pentagon has only a dwindling amount of money left in this year’s budget to keep sending weapons to Ukraine, and Congress is months late on getting a new budget passed and has not taken up a supplemental spending package that would include Ukraine aid.

Since the war began in February 2022, the U.S. has provided more than $44.2 billion in weapons to Ukraine, but the funding is nearly gone. The Pentagon can send about $5 billion more in weapons and equipment from its own stocks. But it only has about $1 billion in funding to replace those stocks. As a result, recent announcements of weapons support have been of much smaller dollar amounts, such as the $100 million package announced in Kyiv by Austin, than in months past.

“You have seen smaller packages, because we need to parse these out,” Pentagon deputy press secretary Sabrina Singh said Thursday. “Because we don’t know when Congress is going to pass our supplemental package.”

Officials have been urging Congress to provide additional money, but a growing number of Senate Republicans have opposed additional Ukraine aid without securing support for other unrelated provisions, such as stricter immigration laws and additional funding for border control. A stopgap spending bill passed last week to avoid a government shutdown during the holidays did not include any money for Ukraine.

Copp reported from Washington.

Included in the sanctions are the militia’s foreign affairs chief, a member of its governing council, its military commander and a media spokesman. The sanctions block access to U.S. property and bank accounts and prevent the targeted people and companies from doing business with Americans.

A spate of drone attacks hit U.S. bases in Iraq as recently as Friday, as regional tensions have flared up following the bloody war between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

Two U.S. defense officials confirmed three additional attacks on U.S. military facilities in Iraq and Syria on Friday, bringing the total number of attacks on U.S. and coalition military facilities in Iraq and Syria to at least 60. The three bases attacked as of Friday included: a one-way drone targeted Al Harir air base in Erbil, with no casualties reported, but an infrastructure damage assessment was still ongoing; an attack by multiple one-way drones at Al Asad air base in Iraq that resulted in no injuries or infrastructure damage; and another multiple one-way drone attack at Tall Baydar, Syria, that resulted in minor injuries to one service member who was able to return to duty, one of the defense officials said.

Iranian-backed militias in Iraq have threatened to attack U.S. facilities there because of American support for Israel.

Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control says Kataeb Hezbollah is supported by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force. And the State Department has previously designated it as a terrorist organization.

Brian E. Nelson, Treasury’s under-secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence said Friday that the U.S. is “fully committed to security and stability in the Middle East and are steadfast in our efforts to disrupt these destabilizing activities.”

At least 11,470 Palestinians — two-thirds of them women and minors — have been killed since the war in Gaza began, according to Palestinian health authorities, who do not differentiate between civilian and militant deaths. About 2,700 people are reported missing.

Some 1,200 people have been killed in Israel, mostly during the initial attack, and around 240 were taken captive by militants.