If we consider victory as the final result of this Russian-Ukrainian war, then it is worth considering two victorious components: the actual securing of victory on the battlefield and the displacement of the enemy beyond our territories, possibly the destruction of the military potential of Russia, so that the current or the next dictator is not ready to start new ones attempts to seize Ukraine; and also, secondly, the quick, effective restoration of Ukraine and its infrastructure, which will create conditions for intensive development and provide opportunities for sufficient financing of defense needs in the future.
Probably that in addition to construction and restoration works, transformations in the system of Ukrainian government, destruction, or a drastic reduction in the level of corruption are no less important. These extreme changes are necessary for us and they are a condition for providing us with recovery assistance. The world community, and America in particular, already has a bitter experience of not bringing things to an end – after the lightning-fast military operation in Iraq (“Desert Storm”), the United States did not introduce systemic reforms in that country in order to change the attitude of the population towards democratic principles, and soon those gains of the American military faded into oblivion, and Iraq resumed its aggressive intentions.
As of today, of course, the first component is paramount and the second will become so only if the first part is fulfilled. In addition to the question – when? – involuntarily the question arises – are we able to do it? An analysis of publications and evaluations by experts from different countries does not give firm confidence in this. And here’s why.
Not only that, the amount of military aid does not compare with the amount of expenditures from the Russian budget for the war – the ratio is about 1 to 2, which is not in our favor. But in addition, there is a noticeable inclination towards the start of already restored works, where part of the funds from the general aid fund are directed. It is not too soon that we are furnishing the apartment, because the house has not yet been completed.
The decrease in the amount of assistance became the most significant at the end of last year and only a couple of months ago when some part of it was unblocked. The financial side of the matter is more than significant. And victory at the front is ensured by soldiers, if there are enough funds for their work. The suspension of the decision to provide aid to Ukraine occurred almost simultaneously in America (due to the re-election confrontation between Republicans and Democrats) and in Europe – due to the anti-Ukrainian position of the governments of Hungary and Slovakia. As of now, there are positive developments and we are no longer trapped by a budget hole of 29 billion US dollars. USD
According to the data of a more authoritative scientific institution – the Kiel Institute for the world economy (Kiel Institute for the world economy), a total of 40 countries of the world provided us with assistance. The largest suppliers of military aid were and remain: the USA, Germany, Great Britain, the EU and Norway. The EU, the USA, Great Britain, Japan and Norway are leading by the volume of finances. For many countries (11 European countries in total), the amount of aid provided is more than 1% of their GDP, which is a very significant indicator.
Some countries, such as monarchies from the Persian Gulf region (Qatar, Saudi Arabia), Argentina from South America, provide only humanitarian aid. European Switzerland also does not participate in military aid, but in terms of the amount of humanitarian aid provided (2.2 billion euros) it ranks 3rd among the countries of the world.
The problem is that. that despite the large number of countries that help Ukraine, the volume of arms deliveries is clearly not enough. And this is against the background of a growing number of supporters of a quick end to the war, especially in the United States, although they are no longer so strongly in favor of giving us weapons – Americans for our surrender? Hardly, they just want it to sort itself out somehow and not disturb their life. In Europe, the decline in the number of supporters of aid to Ukraine decreased somewhat at the end of last year, but not by much. Although there are 8 countries where the majority of the population is against aid to Ukraine. This list includes Bulgaria, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. But these data were relevant at the end of the 23rd year, when we survived the crisis with help in general. Now the situation is changing and the initiative of the Czech president (regarding the coalition for the production and supply of weapons to Ukraine) is already beginning to bear fruit.
The attitude of the governments of donor countries towards the Ukrainian problem is influenced by the attitude of the local population towards Ukrainian refugees. In some small European countries, our newly arrived citizens are already 2-3.5% of the total population. However, only in Slovakia do they see this fact as a threat to their country, while in Norway people hold the opinion that Ukrainians make a qualitative contribution to the development of the working culture of their country.
Already in a month, elections to the European Parliament may be added to the factors influencing the process of aid provision – the decisions of this legislative body are decisive in determining the amount and nature of aid. the danger here lies in the possible victory of candidates from right-wing parties, they are opponents of aid to Ukraine and are in favor of ending the war through negotiations between Ukraine and Russia. But an even greater danger lies in the possible victory of the Republican candidate Donald Trump in the US elections. Among supporters of this party, almost two-thirds are against aid to Ukraine. And the root of the problem is that Europe is not able to cover the possible shortage of the American share of aid. Still, there is some chance to persuade Trump not to do such foolish things – many Republican congressmen are from states where the majority of defense enterprises are located, a significant part of the income of which depends on supplies to Ukraine. And this aspect strengthens the hope that a significant reduction in the amount of aid from the US will not occur in the event of the victory of the Republican candidate.
And again to Europe. The Freedom Party, which categorically opposes Ukraine and does not support sanctions against Russia, may win the parliamentary elections in Austria. There are still political forces in various countries of the center and south of Europe that have the potential to strengthen their positions based on the results of the elections during the 24th and early 25th years. Thus, at some German patriotic events, Russian tricolors can be flown alongside German flags.
The situation is somewhat better in Italy – there will be elections only in 2027. But long-term practice shows that Italian governments usually work for 2-3 years, so the resignation of Georgia Malloni is also likely, especially if you take into account the low support among the population for aid to Ukraine.
Therefore, in the dry balance we have not only insufficient financial support of Ukraine with weapons, but also serious dangerous prospects in the event of the development of anti-Ukrainian sentiments among political elites in many countries.
I would like to add at least a little something lighter to the listed paintings with mostly black colors. And it takes place. Soon we will begin to receive the main weapons in terms of quantity and priority. We are talking about ammunition of various calibers (a total of 180,000 units – this is according to the Czech initiative), the delivery is scheduled for June. Artillery systems, air defense systems HIMARS, Patriot, IRIS-T, SAMP/T, as well as missiles for them will be additionally provided, we will also receive armored vehicles, long-range means, in particular ATACMS. We already have positive results from these extreme measures and will have more.
Regarding the supply of F-16 fighter jets, the conversation has been going on for quite some time, at first their topic was the problem of supplies in general, now some critics are trying to downplay the capabilities of this technique. But in the expert environment, they are convinced that the F-16s are head and shoulders above any Soviet-developed aircraft. The effectiveness of the use of these aircraft will be affected by the class and number of missiles that will be delivered in the kit. So the planes themselves will not fundamentally change the situation at the front, but they will significantly improve the chances of our Armed Forces to take counteroffensive actions.
At the same time, not everything is so rosy with our enemy – according to intelligence, they will run out of tanks in a maximum of one and a half years, and they are mostly old Soviet models. Armored vehicles of various types (self-propelled guns, armored personnel carriers and armored personnel carriers) will be exhausted even earlier. It is difficult to predict exactly how much all the equipment will be enough for them, because its quantity depends not only on the skill of our defenders, who regularly destroy it, but also the equipment removed from storage does not all go to the front line, some is subject to repair, some goes to spare parts, and part is simply written off as scrap metal. Regarding the availability of ammunition, the situation could look better, but the quality of these products from the DPRK does not meet the requirements – shells and missiles often explode prematurely, do not follow the flight path, etc.
The path to the beginning of the rhythmic acquisition of the required list and quantity of weapons was long and often thorny: in Europe and America, they hesitated for a long time, waited, and if something was given, it was not enough with restrictions. Last winter we overcame a crisis with defense resources and managed to hold out with little territorial loss. If there is no drastic increase in aid, which in financial terms means an increase in the money supply to 150 billion U.S. dollars. dollars (this is the price of our victory), that is, to the level of the Russians’ expenses, then there will be no victory yet. And this means that the war will continue, our partners will continue to bear the costs, and the discontent of the population in the partner countries will grow.
If the West agrees with our defeat, which looks completely absurd, because the “cool heads” there understand that in this case the war-aggression on the part of Russia will not end, it will only stop for a short time and then it will be continued on the territories of European countries /Alliance with no less audacity. Then the cost of expenses for European countries will increase many times, and the scale of material and humanitarian losses is difficult to even predict. Doing everything for Ukraine’s victory over Russia in terms of the necessary allocation of funds for needs is a pragmatic way with great savings for partner countries.
The difference between how much money is needed to defeat Russia in Ukraine and to defeat it when the hostilities are moved further into Europe is simply amazing. Is Europe ready to experience another aggression similar to Hitler’s during World War II? The parallels here are more than appropriate, and the brutality of the Russians towards Europeans can eclipse the level of brutality of the Hitlerites. The upcoming events in Europe and America will show at what price they are willing to ensure peace and tranquility.
