The US on Wednesday pledged an additional $800 million in arms for Ukraine as the Russian invasion enters its third month and Russian forces threaten to take the southern city of Mariupol and bombard the capital Kyiv with rocket attacks.
The Ukrainian military has made impressive use of weapons provided by NATO members before the invasion and in recent weeks, including man-portable rocket launchers and artillery. Despite Russia’s superior armament, Ukrainian forces were able to take advantage of Russian forces’ poor planning and tactical blunders in many instances to maintain control of most large populated areas. However, the Ukrainian government is demanding additional weapons, particularly fighter jets, to continue repelling Russian forces, which NATO as a whole has so far refused to do. Poland had offered fighter jets to the Ukrainian government last month, but the plan was scrapped after the US intervened to stop it.
The new US pledge is said to include some aircraft, Reuters reported Thursday, but not the fighter jets that Ukraine has asked for to fend off the Russian air force; Instead, 11 Russian-made Mi-17 helicopters originally destined for US forces in Afghanistan before last summer’s chaotic departure have been handed over to Ukraine. While not as maneuverable as fighter jets like the MiG-29 or F-16, some variants of the Mi-17 can be equipped with anti-tank missiles and other weapons to attack Russian ground and air forces. The US has already deployed Five Mi-17 helicopters to Ukraine earlier this year.
Powerful weapon systems such as howitzers — essentially man-portable field guns capable of firing projectiles at long trajectories, including precision-guided munitions — are also being brought to Ukraine, along with armored personnel carriers and other vehicles, hundreds of man-portable switchblade drone ammunition, millions of rounds of ammunition, and a multitude other defense systems and protective equipment are also planned for Ukraine. The Pentagon confirmed to Vox on Sunday that arms shipments were already underway, though a spokesman gave no details or answered questions about the helicopters especially including the specific model that the US would send to Ukraine.
New weapons offer new benefits and challenges
“They get a great deal of what they need,” Rita Konaev, associate director of analysis at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology, told Vox on Sunday, despite Ukraine’s continued pleas for fighter jets to support Russia’s to counteract the Luftwaffe. “This is unprecedented. We haven’t seen that much yet [weaponry] of this caliber, so fast.”
In particular, the howitzers and armored vehicles were on a wish list of weapons that the Ukrainian armed forces urgently need to repel the Russian forces as battle concentrates in the south-east in the Donbass region. This equipment represents a significant boost in capability as Ukraine seeks to hold off Russian forces, John Spencer, urban warfare expert at Madison Policy Forum, told Reuters. “You need these bigger, more powerful weapons … to match what Russia is bringing to try and take eastern Ukraine,” he said.
Russia is expected to step up fighting in the Donbass to the east in the coming days and weeks, making speedy delivery of the new weapons and equipment crucial. A Russian victory is imminent in Mariupol, where Russian forces have been bombing and cutting off access to basic foodstuffs and humanitarian aid for weeks, and they may use the same brutal tactics to seize other Ukrainian cities and towns. With that in mind, spokesman John Kirby told reporters Wednesday that the Pentagon would ship the new weapons package as soon as possible.
“You’ve seen how in the past we can go as little as four to five days from the time the president authorizes the withdrawal to the actual landing of the first shipments in the region,” Kirby said. “And then a few more days… once they’re there to be processed and actually in the hands of front-line Ukrainian forces,” Kirby told reporters, noting that while there would be some procedural bureaucracy regarding the new package, “We’re not going to wait, we’re also going to start getting these items off the ground. So we start literally right now.”
Since some of the weapon systems – namely howitzers and switchblades – are new to Ukrainian troops, there will be a learning curve in the midst of a very active conflict. However, Kirby told reporters Thursday that he doesn’t think training Ukrainian troops on the new weapons will give much of a boost; In fact, according to the New York Times, some Ukrainian troops have already been trained to use the switchblades.
“While some of these systems, the radar, the howitzers, require some familiarization and some basic training, it’s not exorbitant,” he said. “It will not take long. There is no need for a large pool of trainees. We’ll work it out. We will try to give a small number of Ukrainians an opportunity to get acquainted with these systems. But we don’t think it will be a chore or a lot of time or resources.”
But the Biden administration’s new commitment, both to weapons and timely delivery and training, has prompted a rebuke from Russia, the Washington Post’s Karen DeYoung reported Thursday.
“We call on the United States and its allies to stop the irresponsible militarization of Ukraine, which has unpredictable consequences for regional and international security,” warned a formal diplomatic note from the Russian embassy to the US State Department.
The Post reported that the note could mean that Russia intends to attack arms shipments headed for Ukraine; So far, the Russian armed forces have not done so, despite considering gun convoys to be legitimate military targets. It’s also not out of the question that they could attack arms depots outside Ukraine’s borders, according to George Beebe, the former CIA director of Russia analysis. “Many of us in the West assume that we could truly supply Ukrainians without borders and face no significant risk of retaliation from Russia,” he told the Post. “I think the Russians want to send a message here that that’s not true.”
Can the new weapons make a difference?
A more positive twist on the note comes from a senior US official who told the Post that Russia’s warning is an indication that US and NATO arms sales to Ukraine are working as intended.
“What the Russians are telling us privately is exactly what we have been telling the world publicly – that the massive aid we are providing to our Ukrainian partners is proving extraordinarily effective,” the official said. While US and NATO weapons have certainly played a significant role in Ukraine’s defenses – and these new weapons are likely to prove effective in this new phase of the conflict – there are complicating factors to consider when assessing the effectiveness of the new cache must be taken into account weapons on the way to Ukraine.
First, while the howitzers and radar equipment in particular will help the Ukrainian armed forces achieve close parity with Russian forces in terms of armament, it’s quite specific to the theater, Konaev said. As fighting has moved out of urban centers and into more “open terrain, open space” contexts, she said, “hardware could play a more significant role.” Ukraine’s armed forces are losing the defensive advantage they had in urban contexts, and therefore it could offer an advantage in more effectively detecting and attacking Russian weapon systems.
But again, that benefit is contextual, and while Ukrainian troops will receive some sort of training in using the new weapons, it’s unclear what kind of maintenance support they’ll receive. “We’re talking about quantity and type,” Konaev said. “We don’t talk enough about the survivability of gear.” Things like repairs, spare parts, and critical software upgrades are critical to ensuring gear has a long life and can be used sustainably in a war with no end date.
Less exciting than drone munitions, mines and ammunition – but perhaps just as critical – is the protective gear the US is sending. Despite high losses, Russia can theoretically continue to increase its troops in Ukraine should it decide to do so. “We don’t know what the Bank of Ukraine looks like; they don’t have the ability to replenish their forces,” Konaev told Vox. Keeping Ukrainian troops alive and fighting will be a crucial part of continued assistance.
But bigger questions – what the desired and realistic outcomes of this conflict are, and what a long-term strategic partnership to support Ukraine in this war should look like – remain unanswered. Apart from a triumph of democracy over authoritarianism, specific, measurable strategic goals of US support have not been clearly articulated. In other words, Konaev said, we don’t know if the goal for Ukraine is “to win? When? As? And at what price?”
Sending arms is vital for Ukraine to defend against an unjust and devastating Russian invasion; that is undeniable. But it serves only an immediate need and is narrow in scope; Defense support fails to address the vast humanitarian havoc Russia is wreaking on population centers as part of its military strategy. The US and its allies have pledged humanitarian and economic assistance, which must be part of their long-term support for Ukraine. In the short and long term, weapons are not the only critical need; Food, shelter, medicine and medical care are arguably just as important to the Ukrainian people and will continue to be so long after the fighting has ended.