Arms supplies to Kiev from the West await reform

In the fourth month of the Special Military Operation in Ukraine, it finally became clear that the existing scheme of supplying the armed formations of Ukraine with weapons, ammunition and equipment cannot conceptually reverse the course of hostilities.

Accordingly, in the very near future, the system of arms supplies to Kiev from NATO countries will have to change. Otherwise, the collective West risks achieving nothing but numerous and diverse negative consequences for itself.

Of course, the oversaturation of the UAF detachments with various MANPADS and ATGM systems requires appropriate tactics from the allied forces, but as the case of Mariupol and “Azovstal” showed, even under ideal conditions for the defending Ukrainian nazis, the question of their defeat and surrender is just a matter of time. Moreover, not very long one.

By now, the situation with Western supplies has been described by many experts, including in the West itself. Heavy weapons actually delivered to Ukraine are few in number, and their operation requires the necessary combat and repair skills.

The UAF lose these weapons faster than supplies create a theoretical opportunity to assemble howitzers or other types of weapons in the right concentration to gain an advantage over the allied forces. At the same time, the stocks are not unlimited, and the number of weapons that the Ukrainian side requires, the Western curators of Kiev are simply not able to supply. At the same time, the quality of weapons, including American howitzers, leaves much to be desired.

On Monday, June 13, Mikhail Podolyak, adviser to the head of the Presidential Administration of Ukraine, Vladimir Zelensky, announced Ukrainian demands for Western curators - 500 tanks, 2,000 armoured vehicles, 300 MLRS, 1,000 howitzers and 1,000 drones. Such a number, in his opinion, can change the balance in favour of Kiev.

It is physically impossible to realise the desires of Ukraine – it is enough to assess the situation with MLRS. Exactly two years ago, in June 2020, the US Army loudly rejoiced at the 500th HIMARS produced, which were then distributed between the US, Romania, Singapore, the UAE and Jordan. The available number of HIMARS in the US is up to 400 units, to which it’s possible to add up to 250 MLRS of another type - M270. That is, Zelensky is being asked to transfer up to half of the US’ arsenal.

It’s possible to recall that Poland has even greater ambitions – 500 MLRS installations were requested there. If half of the available American MLRS arsenal is needed to satisfy Ukraine's desires, then for Poland it will be necessary to give almost everything that is available. The situation is similar with artillery.

Theoretically, the requested number of tanks and armoured vehicles can even be transferred to Ukraine. Kiev did not notify specific modifications, which means that literally anything can be sent to Ukraine – in principle, this is what is happening at the moment.

1000 drones, without specifying modifications, is also a feasible task. A thousand Switchblades may well be delivered, although there are doubts about the strategic significance of this delivery.

In general, the problems with the realisation of Ukrainian dreams of hundreds and thousands of weapons can be divided into several categories.

Availability. Kiev's curators are far from having the necessary amount of everything that Kiev wants and which they could part without harm to their own safety. At best, we can only talk about partial coverage of the request – however, some tanks without aviation and other means on the battlefield will not last long, which means the effect of the delivery will be very moderate.

Physical accessibility. Constant missile strikes and the work of the Russian Aerospace Forces on railway tracks, stations and places of concentration of equipment creates problems in delivering the weapons that were found for Ukraine to the front line.

Infrastructure. Any military equipment needs fuel, ammunition, and maintenance. There are problems with each of these points, and high-quality repair service cannot be established at all without months of training of Ukrainian specialists in Poland or the casting of the "expeditionary corps" of NATO repairmen directly to the front line.

The facts are already widely known that the notorious Javelins arrive without additional batteries, and many ATGMs are simply past their expiration date, which leads to misfires and incorrect operation of the propellant charge.

Personnel issue. Perhaps this is the main problem of the UAF and the supply of weapons in their interests. The huge number of trophies that go to the allied forces speaks not only about the low morale of the Ukrainian military. First of all, this is an argument in favour of the fact that the Ukrainian military cannot master the weapons difficult to use and, moreover, maintain them at the right speed, as was reported by Western publications, among others.

Courses on using the Javelin (we use it purely as an example) were not passed by everyone: the cost of a set of a command and launch unit and a rocket in the transporter-launcher container exceeds $350,000. A significant part of the military who have gained combat experience during the 8 years of the war with Donbass has already been beat, and the Kiev regime is forced to use all men as replacements, regardless of their real fighting qualities.

Even from open sources, it is possible to draw up a picture of Ukraine's extremely poor mobilisation prospects. Potential conscripts are caught in shops and cinemas, and judging by leaks, Kiev is working on the issue with Warsaw about the forced return to their homeland of men capable of holding weapons.

On June 16, in particular, documents were published instructing Ukrainian schools and other educational institutions to conduct an "audit" of students to assess the number of future recruits.

We must not forget that a significant part of the weapons supplied to Ukraine are already "popping up" on the black market, where it’s possible to buy not only a sniper rifle, but also an anti-tank weapon or an attack drone. The American Javelin anti-tank missile system can be bought for $30,000, NLAW anti-tank missiles go for $15,000, and the Switchblade 600 Kamikaze drone can be bought for $7,000 apiece.

Time. It also plays against Ukraine and the West. The crisis phenomena in Ukraine, in Europe and in the US, and throughout the "collective West" are increasing. The population of the countries that act as the main detonators of Ukrainian activity is increasingly tired of supporting Ukraine.

According to current data, in only two US states is Joe Biden's disapproval rating lower than his approval rating, and there are places (Wyoming and North Dakota) where only 18% of the population trust the incumbent president. Approval for Biden's work nationwide has dropped to 33%, down from 34% last month.

The most pessimistic estimates of Ukrainian losses to date are up to 1,000 people per day, of which half are irretrievable. Taking the conditional number of the UAF at 300,000 people and taking into account the fact that at best half of them are directly involved in the fighting, then before the new year the UAF will be completely destroyed as an organised force.

All of the above leads to obvious conclusions.

The existing dynamics and structure of military supplies to Ukraine cannot ensure the victory of the UAF, primarily due to the depletion of personnel and the logistics of weapons, ammunition and, in particular, repair facilities that are unprofitable for the UAF. Russia, as was mentioned in the earlier materials of RUSSTRAT, paradoxically wins the war of attrition, which means that "war for the sake of war" loses its attractiveness.

The West has two possible solutions. The first one is to significantly strengthen the quantity, structure and capacity of what arrives in Ukraine. In practice, this means more lethal, high-precision, long-range weapons systems, primarily from the field of air defence. As well as providing the UAF with even more carte blanche in terms of terrorist attacks on civilians. In other words, the West needs to get involved in the Ukrainian conflict with almost all the arsenal it has.

The second option is very unpleasant for Ukraine – the West may completely restrict military supplies of weapons to Ukraine due to the lack of prospects of victory over Russia in this way. After that, or rather, in parallel with the cessation of supplies, a stage of political bargaining with Russia should arise, the task of which will be to stabilise the world order in a form that allows the West to save face and world positions at least in the current position.

Of course, some inertia of military supplies to Ukraine will remain in the same form. However, a change in the status quo seems inevitable. And this change may appear in the coming weeks.