The West has promised to support Ukraine for a long time, but Ukraine’s defense is still in constant trouble. The aid given by the West has been too scarce compared to Ukraine’s needs.
Why?
Europe lacks a strategy, says the colonel Pasi Hirvonen. He is the head of the Department of Military Art at the National Defense University.
– There is no common understanding of what would be the view of the outcome or goals of the war.
There are many reasons behind this. They are related to both opportunities and the will to give weapons, say the experts interviewed by .
The United States’ new arms aid package eases the situation on the front, but according to experts, it does not help Ukraine win.
US support balances the forces on the front
The US aid of about 60 billion dollars corresponds to the acute need that Ukraine has had in its defense. President Joe Biden signed the bill into law on Wednesday.
With US support, it is possible to stabilize and balance the situation at the front, says Hirvonen of the National Defense University.
In recent months, Ukraine has not received enough weapons from the West.
– Ukraine has been in a clearly weaker position compared to Russia at the front, and the power relations have changed quite radically over the course of a year, says the professor of international politics Tuomas Forsberg from the University of Tampere.
A large ballast has a huge psychological meaning. President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyi said after the decision of the US Congress that with the aid Ukraine will win the war.
Finnish experts are more cautious.
The weapons provided by the United States are not enough to win the war, says Forsberg.
Hirvonen is of the same opinion. US aid is probably not enough for Ukraine to be able to recapture the territories it lost.
– Ukraine needs long-term help, and this is where Europe needs to step up.
The West lacks an idea of how the war should end
Although both the European Union and NATO promise Ukraine membership and long-term support, Ukraine has not received enough weapons from Europe to defend itself right now.
The decisions about the arms to be handed over come from different countries on a random schedule, and the whole thing does not seem to be under anyone’s control, although the countries coordinate support under the leadership of the United States in the so-called Ramstein configuration.
Senior researcher at the Foreign Policy Institute Iro Sarkkä says that the support lacks a broad outline of what the support is aiming for, i.e. a strategic vision.
– There have been individual aid packages one after the other, but it lacks the big picture of what the support consists of. Likewise, the activism of who is piloting this forward, Särkkä states.
From a soldier’s point of view, it is difficult to plan support if you do not know what you are aiming for.
– Europe lacks a strategy for what Ukraine wants to achieve in this war, says Hirvonen of the National Defense University.
Ukraine is promised to be supported as long as it is needed, but at the same time the countries limit their support so that the war does not accelerate and expand, i.e. escalate.
Ukraine’s own goal is the 1991 borders. In Hirvonen’s opinion, Europe and the United States should have an idea of whether they want to support Ukraine so much that it can achieve its own strategic goals. However, it is not.
– The slogan of the West has been to support as long as necessary. Not as much as is necessary, says Tuomas Forsberg.
In Forsberg’s opinion, the slogan contains the idea that there would be a turning point in the war, and Russia would understand that it cannot win the war either.
The fear of the expansion of the war limits the number of helpers
Why aren’t weapons handed over as much as Ukraine needs?
One of the main reasons has been precisely the fear of escalation: we don’t want the war to expand. For example, the handing over of powerful weapons has been feared to lead to a Russian backlash. Despite Russia’s threats, however, there has been no escalation.
There are several practical problems in helping. One is warehouses with no goods.
Stocks in some countries were already low. After the Cold War, they had been allowed to cool off.
– For example, Germany was only prepared with ammunition for a few days of warfare, Tuomas Forsberg reminds.
Some countries – such as Poland – have said that they have already given away what they can give away.
Production is also a problem, as Europe still has not been able to significantly increase the amount of ammunition and weapon production. First it was estimated to take a couple of years, now the estimate is a year or two more.
Both the idea that weapons are not needed, democratic decision-making and the bureaucratic systems of many countries have caused it to take time to start industrial production.
– In the time when ammunition production in Russia has been increased to a couple of million, in Europe there is talk of an increase of a few hundred thousand ammunition, Forsberg compares.
Countries do not dare to hand over their stockpiles of weapons to Ukraine, because it is not known how quickly they will receive replacement goods.
In Hirvonen’s opinion, the stockpiles are a practical problem, but the bigger problem is that not everyone takes the war with the same seriousness.
In Särkä’s opinion, the reasons are internal political or economic in many countries. But they are also foreign policy: what is the country’s relationship with Russia, what is the dependence on energy purchased from Russia, and are countries ready to cross their so-called “red lines”, i.e. to break their previous ideas and ways of doing things about what can be given to Ukraine.
The hold-up of short-term support is a problem for the Ukrainian front. But long-term support creates confidence in Ukraine and is a message to Russia.
– Without that support, the message would go to Russia that Russia can act as it wants.
What does Ukraine get and what does it need?
The United States will not delay the delivery of the aid to Ukraine, which was finally approved on Wednesday. The preliminary assessment is that weapons and ammunition are already stored in Europe and the first ones will leave for Ukraine immediately.
According to the US Department of Defense the most urgent help includes, for example, air defense missiles, Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, various artillery shells, ammunition for Himars systems, anti-tank missiles and various vehicles.
US support has also been tight. The decision stumped Congress for months because it became a tool of domestic politics.
There are decision-makers in the Republicans who think that the United States cannot spend such sums on Ukraine for a long time. Forsberg reminds that a huge amount of money was spent on the Afghanistan crisis management operation, According to the BBC eventually over $800 billion.
– Yes, that was also questioned, and in the end it had to be stopped. But it really lasted twenty years without spending money in a distant country being a particularly big problem in the beginning.
Ukraine most urgently needs more air defense and ammunition.
Since last autumn, Russia has destroyed critically important sites in Ukraine, such as power plants. It has told about the difficulties of air defense. Russia has also had at its disposal ten times the amount of ammunition compared to Ukraine.
For anti-aircraft defense, the president of Ukraine has requested Patriot anti-aircraft systems from the West.
European countries are now looking for these systems – from each other. Germany promised to give one system. There are systems at least in Sweden, Holland, Spain and Greece, and the politicians of different countries are appealing that they could find something to give to Ukraine.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg promised last weekend that soon there will be solutions to talk about.
What thoughts does the story evoke? You can discuss the topic on 25.4. until 11 p.m