One of the most important elements of the recently passed additional aid package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan is a little-noticed provision that requires the Biden administration to submit a strategy to Congress regarding U.S. support for Ukraine. Notably, for the first time since Russia’s full-scale invasion began, the Biden administration will be tasked with presenting an assessment “of the resources needed…to help accelerate Ukrainian victory against Russian invasion forces.” .
Although a strong minority of lawmakers oppose any aid to Ukraine, this requirement in the legislation reflects a bipartisan concern among many members of Congress that the administration’s hypersensitivity to “escalation” has restricted the provision of more effective weapons systems requested by Ukraine and limited their use. of some US weapons supplied, thereby contributing to Ukraine’s battlefield disadvantage and the current bloody stalemate. The new law makes it clear that Congress wants a plan that allows Ukraine to win, not just survive. The administration should accept it.
Section 504 of the supplemental mandates requires “a classified independent assessment from the Commander, United States European Command, describing all specific defense items and services not yet provided to Ukraine that would result in significant gains on the battlefield” within 45 days. After hearing from U.S. commanders in congressional briefings – and those from Germany and Poland during a dozen trips to Ukraine – I am convinced that if the Biden administration allows military judgment to prevail, its response will pave the way for breaking the impasse in which Ukraine finds itself. service.
With the correct approach, the administration has the opportunity to give Ukraine an advantage on the battlefield and stop this unprovoked, illegal and brutal Russian attack, thereby forcing it to Vladimir Poutine at the negotiating table from a position of weakness. Investing in Ukraine’s battlefield capabilities will help create leverage that the United States and Ukraine will need in these potential peace talks.
Among the opponents of aid to Ukraine are those who cling to unrealistic and practical arguments that somehow if America pulls out, Vladimir Putin will come to the table negotiations and that Ukraine can remain a free and independent democracy. There is simply no evidence in the history of aggression by dictators or in the words or actions of Vladimir Putin to support this argument. The best theory of Russia’s victory in this war depends on the exhaustion of American support for Ukraine. Withdrawing our aid will only help realize Putin’s dreams of conquest and empire.
The only realistic way to end the conflict is to provide Ukraine with the weapons it needs to win on the battlefield and to inflict enough pain on Russia that a favorable settlement is possible. The approval of one or two much-needed weapons in small numbers, after long delays, did not have the battlefield impact that Ukraine needed. Instead, the Biden administration must redouble coordination with our European allies to provide a set of capabilities that can be used together to achieve maximum results.
Putin will only come to the table in good faith when he knows he cannot wait for us. I agree that European allies can do more to support Ukraine’s war effort, although they have actually contributed more than many Americans realize. With the passage of the new supplemental funding bill, total U.S. commitments now stand at approximately $173 billion. As a bloc, total European Union aid to Ukraine currently stands at around $155 billion. Nevertheless, American leadership is essential to sustain this progress and make European military assistance, in particular, more effective and more sustainable.
At this point, I believe that the United States’ commitment to move quickly to provide Ukraine with the weapons it needs and the training to use them effectively is just as important as the amount of aid provided. The same scenario has played out time and time again: Ukraine asks for a particular weapon, the Biden administration first says no, then ends up providing it after months — even years — of bipartisan pressure in Congress. Inevitably, this weapon is quickly making a significant difference: the Stinger missiles at the start of the conflict, the HIMARS two years ago and the longer range ATACMS missiles more recently. Think of all the lives that could have been saved if we had delivered these weapon systems sooner.
The Russian Air Force is currently bombing civilian targets on a daily basis and Ukraine needs F-16 fighter jets as soon as possible to ward off these attacks. But this requires more than just providing American aircraft: it means accelerating and expanding the training already underway, as well as licensing to allies around the world who are willing and able to provide such aircraft to Ukraine but need our authorisation. Based on recent reports, it appears that operational F-16s will slowly arrive in Ukraine later this year, meaning they may not have a significant impact until at least 2025. Unfortunately, this is emblematic of the administration’s slowness in providing aid to Ukraine. Had the administration acted sooner, F-16s would already be protecting Ukraine’s skies from deadly Russian attacks on civilians and infrastructure.
On the ground, Ukraine needs tanks to break through Russian lines and retake territory. Some American M1A1 Abrams tanks were supplied, as well as British Challengers and larger numbers of German Leopards. They have proven their effectiveness, but they are not sufficient. After more than a year of stalemate, the United States provided only about 31 tanks – a symbolic gesture apparently intended to pressure the Germans into supplying Leopards. We have hundreds more that could be shipped to Ukraine from our allies or our own stockpiles.
One of the main sticking points concerns long-range missiles capable of hitting critical logistical and command nodes behind Russian lines. Ukraine requested two years for these missiles, and reports indicate that the United States has provided a small number. More ATACMS and other long-range missiles are desperately needed. In fact, Congress included an explicit requirement in the supplement that the Administration provide more of these missiles. But the administration is currently imposing onerous conditions on their use for fear of escalation. British Foreign Secretary David Cameron’s recent announcement that the UK would allow Ukraine to use UK-supplied long-range Storm Shadow missiles against Russian territory is a welcome development, and the United States United should follow. Russia has been attacking Ukraine from Russian territory since day one. The administration must allow Ukraine to defend itself.
Next, Ukraine’s air defense must be strengthened immediately. Ukraine needs long-range air defense systems, like the Patriots, to defend against Russian and North Korean ballistic missiles and Iranian drones that rain down on Ukrainian cities. America’s enemies have doubled down on their support for Russia’s terrorist bombing campaign, which is why America and its allies must come together to stop it. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg recently noted that NATO countries have available capabilities to provide more air defense missiles; all it takes is the political will to make it happen. This is also true for short-range air defense systems intended to defend against both ubiquitous Russian drones as well as Russian attack aircraft near the front lines, which have taken advantage of the shortage of missile defenses Ukrainian air force to significantly increase their deadly attacks.
In particular, Ukraine desperately needs more sophisticated electronic warfare (EW) systems to counter Russian “first-person view” or “kamikaze” drones. This new generation of relatively inexpensive but deadly drones has been used devastatingly by both sides in this war, destroying vehicles and equipment far more expensive than the drones themselves. Strengthening Ukraine’s electronic warfare capabilities would allow it to disable and disorient more Russian FPV drones, thereby better protecting Ukrainian forces and preserving their combat power for future offensive operations.
The administration should also increase the number of cluster munitions sent to Ukraine, particularly the 155mm Dual-Purpose Enhanced Conventional Munition (DPICM). First delivered in July 2023 after months of Ukrainian requests and congressional pressure, DPICMs have been a game changer on the ground, often stopping Russian infantry assaults in their tracks. Originally built during the Cold War to counter the Soviet Union’s numerical superiority in artillery, the United States stocks about 3 million of these cluster munitions and could easily send more. These items would be invaluable in bolstering Ukraine’s low stockpiles of artillery ammunition and in mitigating future Russian assaults.
A successful effort requires much more than equipment and ammunition: we cannot overlook the importance of training Ukrainian soldiers. State-of-the-art equipment means little in the hands of poorly trained recruits, uncoordinated units, or poorly commanded armies. Ukraine recently passed a mobilization law aimed at enlisting thousands of new soldiers to replenish its ranks and train new units for future offensive operations. Training these new draftees to realistically prepare them for combat and teach them to conduct complex offensive operations requires that the United States and its allies redouble their efforts.
Finally, it is important to help Ukraine’s defense industry recover so that it can eventually support itself. The Ukrainians have demonstrated remarkable innovation in adapting U.S.-supplied equipment to conditions and developing their own new capabilities, particularly in areas like drone warfare. Significant opportunities exist for U.S. companies to invest in Ukraine, and relevant agencies like the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) should be more aggressive in helping them do so.
As part of the recently passed supplemental bill, Congress has made clear, in a bipartisan manner, that it wants to hear from the Biden administration on how to change battlefield dynamics in Ukraine’s favor. All we need now is for the administration to follow through on this congressional intent to “accelerate Ukraine’s victory against Putin’s war of aggression” by providing Ukraine with the weapons it has needed to win.
Find out more about La Dépêche
The Dispatch is a new digital media company providing engaged citizens with fact-based reporting and commentary informed by conservative principles. Free registration.
yahoo
