via Associated PressGermany to send Cheetah armor to Ukraine to help fight Russia.
UKRAINE – French Caesar guns, Dutch self-propelled howitzers, German Guépard armored vehicles… After a long refusal, in recent days several countries have agreed to supply heavy weapons to Ukraine to help it fight against the Russian to help army that invaded their territory 62 days ago.
During a meeting organized by the United States on Tuesday, April 26, some forty countries also agreed to coordinate their efforts to provide military support to Kyiv. What do these new announcements mean for the rest of the conflict? Marie Dumoulin, director of the Wider Europe program at the European Council on International Relations, replies to Huffpost.
The United States, France, Germany and other countries allied with Ukraine have announced the delivery of heavy weapons to Kyiv. What does this change?
The real difference lies in the origin of the supplied material. So far, Ukraine has received mainly Soviet-type weapons, which the Ukrainians themselves had in their arsenals and with which they knew how to use. The countries of the former Warsaw Pact (military alliance between the countries of the East and the USSR during the Cold War, editor’s note) could, like Poland, supply Kyiv.
The Ukrainian army can defend itself, but it must have enough materiel, supplies are not inexhaustible. Ukrainians also have other military needs at this stage of the conflict. For this reason, Westerners intervene, with weapons that must be trained to use.
We are therefore switching from old Soviet equipment to Western production equipment, but the military will not distinguish between offensive and defensive weapons. Regardless of skill, these weapons are used in warfare, whether defensive or offensive.
Does this mark a strategic turning point for the West in the war in Ukraine?
I don’t think we can speak of a turning point. It is a continuation of the strategy of supporting Ukraine, taking into account a new fact: the fact that the war will be long-term.
At first everyone expected a rapid advance of the Russian army thanks to their perceived superiority on the ground. Precisely for this reason, the West did not immediately deliver weapons, fearing that they might fall into Russian hands. But against all odds, the Ukrainians persevered and held out for two months.
Doesn’t further Western intervention threaten to escalate the conflict?
The escalation comes from Moscow’s point of view. But the Russians already see themselves at war with NATO. The logic for them is to say that Ukrainians have no autonomy and are puppets of Westerners. These deliveries are the confirmation of this vision. It becomes dangerous when Russia realizes that it cannot gain the upper hand with conventional weapons. It could move to the use of other types of weapons, such as chemical ones.
In any case, it is difficult for the West to maintain a non-escalating approach when opposing Russia bases its discourse on the fact that the escalation has already taken place.
As you just said, the Russians already see themselves at war with the West. A few days earlier, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the West was waging a proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. Are we really at war?
Legally, supplying arms to a country in conflict does not make you a country at war. Westerners have no intention of entering the conflict, although Russians are not aware of this. Vladimir Putin says and repeats that Russia has no choice but to intervene if it doesn’t want to be attacked first. In its propaganda, Moscow claims to be fighting a defensive war.
But if NATO were directly involved, we wouldn’t have this conflict at all. Moscow would be in much bigger trouble and the escalation would be nuclear. I may be optimistic, but for me Lavrov is rhetorical. He goes on to say that Russia is at war with the West, but that doesn’t mean it will attack because the nature of the conflict would change and be much more destructive.
See also on the HuffPost: Ukraine: French army refuels NATO planes in full flight over Poland