Sunday, 28 April 2024
Will the rush of US weapons to Ukraine make a difference?
(My piece in the Spectator this weekend)
It’s a race against time for the Kyiv government to make best use of the new batch of American weapons now being assembled for delivery to Ukraine. With the much-delayed American funding available at last, Ukraine will have to build up its defences to withstand a new Russian offensive in the summer and to make enough headway to prove to the US, and in particular a sceptical Donald Trump if he wins the November election, that all this taxpayers’ money is being well spent. Whether the money and weapons will buy victory for Kyiv has to remain in doubt. The Russian invasion force has been making limited but steady territorial gains. But, more crucially, while US Congress wavered for months over approving the multi-billion-dollar aid package for Kyiv, Moscow has been hammering the country’s power infrastructure, turning the lights off for millions of Ukrainians. More than anything else, Ukraine needs air defence systems to counter the barrage of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and armed drones that have succeeded in recent months in getting past existing defences and causing massive destruction. Additional batteries of US Patriot missile launchers should be at the top of the Pentagon’s list. These anti-air missiles have the capability to protect Ukraine’s cities and towns from Russian strikes. But there is no sign of extra Patriot systems being included in the first $1 billion delivery order. The reason is simple. There just aren’t enough available to hand over to Kyiv, so Ukraine will have to make do, at least for the moment, with the single Patriot battery it currently has deployed. This could be a serious weakness at a time when Russian forces are expected to ramp up their air and missile strikes across Ukraine. However, the list of weapons en route to Ukraine include hundreds of thousands of rounds of 155mm and 105mm artillery shells which are the bedrock of battlefield systems in a war where relentless firepower keeps the enemy at bay. At present the Russians have a 10-1 advantage in stocks of artillery rounds. Ukraine lost territory and surrendered strategic towns and villages because of dwindling munition supplies. The first tranche also includes more than 2,000 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, additional munitions for the super-effective High Mobility Rocket Systems (HIMARS), and 200 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles. However, even if, as promised by President Biden, the first batch of new weapons and munitions arrive “within hours”, will they be in time to make a significant difference on the battlefield or has the recent Russian momentum gone too far to be reversed? There is no doubt that the approval of the $61 billion in aid for Kyiv will lift spirits among the Ukrainian soldiers, giving them a better chance at last to fight back against advancing Russian troops and perhaps recapture small areas of eastern Ukraine where they were forced to retreat.
However, a sizeable proportion of this huge investment in Ukraine’s survival will be spent on replenishing US stocks of munitions and weapons which had been prioritised for Ukraine’s use. The first US F-16 fighter jets being supplied from Europe are also not expected to be operational until July. Yet there is optimism that the new deliveries of weapons will improve Ukraine’s fortunes. ”The US aid and the new UK military package [worth £500 million and includes air-launched precision-guided Paveway IV bombs] will definitely make a difference on the battlefield by enabling the Ukrainians to protect their critical infrastructure , equalling up the artillery battle of attrition and enabling Ukrainian deep strikes to target Russian logistics in Crimea and elsewhere behind the lines, “said Eric Edelman, a former top defence policy official at the Pentagon. “That being said, it will help the Ukrainians stabilise the front lines and can perhaps prevent the Russians from making large mechanised breakthroughs. But Ukraine is likely to be on the strategic defensive for most of 2024,” he said. “In an ideal world they would use that time to get after their military manpower shortfalls and develop their indigenous defence production so that they might go on the offensive in 2025,” he said. Edelman added a warning. “If Trump is elected [in November], all bets are off. He would be likely to try and pressure the Ukrainians to negotiate, although the only thing [President] Putin seems willing to negotiate is a Ukrainian capitulation,” he said. Other analysts are less hopeful that Ukraine will now be in a position to make a lasting stand against Russia. “It’s difficult to see how this latest aid package is going to shift the balance significantly in Ukraine’s favour,” said Andrew Krepinevich, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and former Pentagon official. “Nato does not appear to want to risk providing Ukraine with the support it will need to defeat the Russian invasion and risk Putin escalating the conflict but it fears a Ukrainian defeat. And so the war goes on,” he said. After all the sighs of relief in Washington over the successful passing of the Ukraine aid bill, US officials say the objectives have not changed. But there is less talk of victory for Kyiv. The main focus is to help the Ukrainian military make sufficient gains for the Kyiv government to be in a strong position to achieve a good outcome in a negotiated settlement with Moscow. But Russia will always have the advantage in terms of manpower, munitions and weapons production. The one thing which might make a substantial difference in Putin’s mind is if Ukraine multiplies by a huge amount its attacks on Russia itself and on Russian-annexed Crimea. The revelation that the Pentagon last month secretly sent the longer-range version of the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) to Ukraine appears to demonstrate that Biden has been persuaded to drop his reluctance about sending weapons that could escalate the war. The 190-mile-range ATACMS has already been launched twice to strike deep behind Russian lines. The previously deployed ATACMS has a range of only about 100 miles and fires cluster munitions, not precision-guided missiles. This weapon, more than anything else in the pipeline, might spoil Putin’s day.
No comments:
Post a Comment