Fresh from a trip to Ukraine as part of a bipartisan congressional delegation, U.S. Rep. Jason Crow, an Aurora Democrat, warned this week that the situation “couldn’t be more dire,” as the U.S. ally runs low on military hardware after nearly two years of fighting against Russian invaders.

In an interview with Colorado Politics, Crow, a member of the House Intelligence Committee and a decorated Army combat veteran, reacted strongly to last weekend’s claims by former President Donald Trump that he would “encourage” Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” to NATO allies that weren’t meeting agreed-upon defense spending targets.

Crow, who served as a member of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly in 2022, called Trump’s remarks that he “would not protect” some NATO-members “beyond the pale” and “truly astonishing,” though he quickly added that no one should be surprised, since, Crow asserted, the former Republican president has repeatedly demonstrated disinterest in national security.

“The idea that Donald Trump would encourage one of our greatest adversaries, Russia, to attack our ally, that is host to American servicemembers and their families, putting our own people at risk, is truly astonishing,” Crow said. “But it shouldn’t be, to anybody, because Donald Trump has shown us time and time again he has no interest in America’s national security and is only looking out for himself.”

At a Feb. 10 campaign rally in Conway, South Carolina, Trump, the front-runner for the GOP nomination, said that as president he told the leader of an unidentified member of the trans-Atlantic alliance that “delinquent” countries couldn’t count on the U.S. meeting its obligation to defend NATO members from attack.

“‘You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent?’” Trump said at the rally, recounting a conversation with a foreign leader. “‘No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills.’”

Trump’s remarks sparked alarm across Europe and drew sharp rebukes from political opponents who warned that merely suggesting NATO allies won’t defend each other undermines global security.

A chorus of critics, including Crow, pointed out that the only time the post-World War II alliance’s common defense clause, known as Article 5, has been triggered was when NATO allies came to the aid of the U.S. after the Sept. 11 attack.

“To (say) to other NATO countries who went to war with us after 9/11, that funded military operations, that fought shoulder-to-shoulder with us at our time of greatest need, that this amounts to a financial transaction is really quite beyond the pale,” Crow said.

A decade ago, in response to Russia’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula, NATO allies agreed to reverse post-Cold War defense cuts and move “toward” spending 2% of their GDP on their own military budgets by 2024. Last summer, the alliance’s leaders decided on a goal of spending at least 2% of their GDP, though without setting a date to reach that level.

Throughout his presidency, Trump complained that NATO countries weren’t pulling their weight and described allies as “delinquent” on their dues, though experts noted that the 2% spending benchmarks were voluntary. Further, beyond small contributions to an administrative fund, NATO members aren’t obligated to pay the U.S. anything but instead have agreed to meet spending levels on their own military.

Crow told Colorado Politics that beyond the threats to national and international security, it is ironic that Trump, of all people, is complaining about delinquent bills.

“It’s not lost on me that a man with a reputation over his business career of not paying bills and not fulfilling his obligations and declaring bankruptcy over half a dozen times is lecturing people on paying their bills,” Crow said.

On his third trip to Ukraine — and his second since Russia’s Feb. 24, 2022, invasion — Crow was part of a four-member, bipartisan House Intelligence Committee delegation that met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Kyiv, the embattled country’s capital, on Feb. 9 to assure the U.S. ally that they’ll push a stalled military aid package in the Republican-controlled House.

The delegation intended to “send a very strong and very simple message, and that is the people of America stand with Ukraine,” Crow said at a press conference in Kyiv, standing alongside Ohio Rep. Mike Turner, the intelligence committee’s Republican chairman, and fellow committee members French Hill, an Arkansas Republican, and Abigail Spanberger, a Virginia Democrat.

“We stand with Ukraine not just because we understand that defending freedom and democracy around the world is an American value,” Crow continued. “But we stand with Ukraine because it’s also in America’s interest to do so. For less than 5% of our annual defense budget, we have helped Ukraine ensure a stable and prosperous Europe. We have helped Ukraine destroy over half of the Russian military. We have helped Ukraine defend our allies and NATO. And we have helped Ukraine ensure stable food prices and a stable supply of food around the world, as well. All of those things are in the interest of the American people.”

Back home, Crow told Colorado Politics that the visit reinforced the urgency of getting military equipment to Ukraine right away.

“It couldn’t be more dire,” Crow said. “Frankly, there are people fighting and dying now on the front lines that don’t have the resources they need, because we’re already running too late on this bill, and we should have passed it months ago. They’re running low on ammunition. They’re running low on air defense, interceptors. This is very real. This is not an abstract issue, and it’s having really tragic consequences on the battlefield already. And it’s going to get much worse in the near future. So, we need to get this done, and we need to get it done yesterday.”

The House adjourned on Feb. 15 for a nearly two-week winter recess without taking up a Senate-passed $95 billion aid bill that includes military aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. The legislation was originally part of a larger bipartisan package that included funding and policy provisions for increased border enforcement. Last week, however, House Republicans rejected the immigration measure at Trump’s urging, arguing it wasn’t tough enough, even as some GOP leaders said they tanked the legislation in a partisan move to prevent Democrats from scoring a win on a hot-button issue in an election year.

While even opponents of sending additional aid to Ukraine admit that it has majority support in the House, the prospects of passing legislation are uncertain.

“I don’t know what Speaker Johnson is doing or what his strategy is, and frankly, I don’t know that Speaker Johnson knows what he’s doing and what his strategy is,” Crow said. “So, it very well might be the case that Democrats have to stand up and lead once again and get them out of the Republicans’ mess.”

At the end of the week, a small, bipartisan group of House lawmakers said they were working on a compromise supplemental security bill that included harsher border policies, but it was unclear whether more than a couple of Republicans — or many Democrats — would get on board once it’s unveiled.

House Democrats have also said they’re considering launching a discharge petition, which would take the signatures of a majority of House members to force a floor vote on a measure — likely the funding bill that passed the Senate this week with 70 votes — without the speaker’s assent. Capitol observers, though, caution that discharge petitions might sound like a way to break legislative logjams but rarely work out in practice, since members of the majority party are reluctant to buck their leadership, when it comes down to it.

Crow said he is encouraged after speaking with GOP lawmakers.

“There’s a number of Republicans who have indicated that they very well might join a discharge petition because they know what’s at stake, and they’re committed to doing what’s necessary to defend our national security,” he said. “A discharge petition is a very important tool, that if speaker Johnson doesn’t put something on the floor that’s a good bill, and doesn’t do it soon, then we can move and we can act on our own.”

The Associated Press contributed.

Ernest Luning has covered politics for Colorado Politics and its predecessor publication, The Colorado Statesman, since 2009. He’s analyzed the exploits, foibles and history of state campaigns and politicians since 2018 in the weekly Trail Mix column.

Adam Frisch more than quintupled Lauren Boebert's fundraising haul last quarter | TRAIL MIX

Colorado's crop of congressional district switchers makes for Year of the Carpetbagger | TRAIL MIX

Historic turnover on tap as all three Colorado Republicans vacate their US House seats | TRAIL MIX