What US midterm elections mean for Ukraine, Iran and elsewhere

US midterm elections are elections held during a president’s term to determine the makeup of Congress. They matter because Congress can shape legislation, government spending, oversight, and foreign policy, even when the president belongs to another party.

Voters choose representatives for the House of Representatives and senators for the Senate. The article describes these as the two chambers whose composition voters decide in the election. They influence financial aid, military assistance, and investigations. Congress also handles impeachment proceedings and approves certain presidential nominees.

The president remains in office after the midterms and can veto legislation. However, Congress can override a veto with a two-thirds majority in both chambers. A change in congressional control therefore can shift policy without immediately changing the president, especially on Ukraine, Iran, and development aid.

The US Congress consists of two chambers: the House of Representatives and the Senate. Together, they make laws, decide government spending, oversee the president and intelligence agencies, and influence foreign policy. Their composition is decided by voters in the midterm elections.

According to the article, Trump’s Republicans currently hold majorities in both chambers. That alignment makes it easier for the president to pursue his agenda. Congress still has independent powers, including approving spending, conducting investigations, handling impeachment proceedings, and approving certain presidential nominees.

Recent polls cited in the article suggested Democrats could take control of at least the House and possibly the Senate. If that happened, the balance of power would change. Democrats could push different legislation, increase oversight, and seek more support for Ukraine, although the Republican president would retain veto power.

A Democratic majority could push the United States toward stronger financial and military support for Ukraine. Democrats criticize the Trump administration for doing too little, so they could make new aid legislation a priority. This would matter because the article says US assistance to Ukraine has been reduced under Trump.

The key mechanism is Congress’s control over legislation and government spending. Lawmakers could pass bills providing money, weapons, or other assistance. Brandon Conradis said Democrats could push legislation that would provide more aid. The president could veto such a bill, but Congress can override a veto with a two-thirds majority in both chambers.

A Democratic majority would not automatically reverse US policy. Whether aid increased would depend on the congressional balance and whether some Republicans supported an override. The article presents a likely shift in direction, not a guaranteed restoration of Biden-era assistance.

The president directs US military operations, but Congress has constitutional and financial powers that limit presidential freedom. The article says Trump launched the war against Iran alongside Israel on February 28 without consulting Congress. Congress must approve a formal declaration of war, although the administration has ignored a resolution calling for the hostilities to end.

Congress’s strongest practical tool may be funding. Michael O’Hanlon said lawmakers could perhaps prevent a major escalation by refusing to finance it. Congress can also debate, investigate, pass resolutions, and use legislation to challenge the administration’s approach. These powers do not necessarily let it direct battlefield decisions.

The article suggests Congress would not have huge powers over the war. Still, election results could affect its willingness to fund the conflict. A Democratic-controlled Congress might continue opposing the war, while the president would retain significant authority over military operations.

Congress could respond to Trump’s cuts to development aid by using its control over spending and its oversight powers. The aid supports projects around the world fighting Ebola, AIDS, and hunger. Democrats could seek more money for these efforts and examine how the administration shut down USAID, the agency responsible for foreign development assistance.

The main mechanisms would be legislation, funding decisions, hearings, and investigations. Brandon Conradis said Democrats would scrutinize the closure and bring officials they considered responsible before Congress. Lawmakers could therefore create political and administrative pressure, even if they could not immediately reopen the agency.

The article says whether Congress could actually reactivate USAID against the president’s wishes is questionable. A Democratic majority would not completely reverse policy because Trump would remain president. However, the closure could face intense oversight, and aid spending could rise if Congress approved it.

The article describes a sharp change between the Biden and Trump administrations. During Biden’s presidency, the United States stood alongside Europe as a reliable partner for Ukraine after Russia invaded. Washington provided financial aid, military expertise, and large-scale weapons deliveries.

Under Trump, the relationship changed abruptly. The article describes a frosty 2025 White House visit by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and says Trump has acknowledged getting along better with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The United States suspended sanctions against Russia and reduced financial and military aid to Ukraine.

Foreign development aid also moved in the opposite direction. Soon after beginning his second term, Trump sharply cut support for projects fighting Ebola, AIDS, and hunger and shut down USAID. Democrats could seek more Ukraine aid, increase development spending, and investigate USAID’s closure, but the article says there would be no complete reversal while Trump remained president.

The US system divides power so the president does not govern alone. The article emphasizes that Congress decides legislation and spending and checks both the president and intelligence agencies. This matters because decisions about war, aid, and public money can affect the country and the wider world.

The president can veto Congress’s legislation, but Congress can override that veto with a two-thirds majority in both chambers. Congress also handles impeachment proceedings. The Senate must approve nominees for Cabinet posts, ambassadorships, and federal judges. These arrangements force cooperation or create institutional resistance.

The article does not describe courts’ day-to-day role in war or spending. It does show that the Senate helps shape the federal judiciary by approving judges. The result is a system where presidential power is substantial but not complete. Midterm elections can therefore change national policy without changing the president.