Western allies lack a clear strategy that would help maintain the current level of support for Ukraine in societies, as well as speed up arms deliveries.
?” alt=”WP: NATO remains united on war in Ukraine, but what could go wrong?” />
NATO's solidarity was evident at the Madrid summit this week. One by one, officials promised to stay the course and fight Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which was orchestrated by Vladimir Putin.
But since the war has dragged on for the summer, and peaceful Ukrainians continue to die from terrible missile strikes , NATO needs to ask itself how its strategy could fail. One can imagine an analysis of a hypothetical “red team” to identify vulnerabilities that could potentially negate the current advantages of Ukraine's allies and lead to defeat in the conflict.
American journalist and writer David Ignatius writes about this in an article for the Washington Post. If you look at the results now, it becomes obvious that Putin has failed in his military goals. Russian troops sank to the point of exhaustion in a bloody battle. Ukraine did not submit to Moscow's hegemony and received the status of a candidate country for joining the European Union. NATO is experiencing a renaissance, strengthening its eastern and northern flanks. And Sweden and Finland join the alliance. Meanwhile, Russia is on the way to losing its share of the European energy market. In addition, it risks being left without Western technologies.
The West is sending an “unequivocal signal” to Putin, US President Joe Biden said during the summit in Madrid. The Pentagon plans to place the headquarters of the army corps in Poland. In addition, the US is sending more troops to the Baltic states and Romania, two additional destroyers to Spain and two more squadrons of F-35 fighter jets to Great Britain. What can go wrong? A hypothetical “red team” would say a lot.
The biggest challenge is the battlefield itself. US and UK intelligence analyzes indicate the beginning of a slow, static campaign in Donbas, in which the Ukrainian army will be able to contain Russian breakthroughs with the help of Western MLRS, additional artillery ammunition and more surface-to-air missiles. But what if the flow of weapons is too slow or not enough? The Pentagon has limited the supply of MLRS pending “confirmation of approach”, providing only a small fraction of what Ukraine actually needs. The delivery of some other types of weapons was also too slow. And the amount of what the allies transferred is much less than what the Ukrainians would like to have on the battlefield.
Read also: NATO lacks collective determination to cross the red lines drawn by Putin – Stefanyshyn on the Madrid summit< /p>
As an example, the author cites Switchblade drones, capable of attacking Russian tanks, ships or command centers. There are two models of these systems, one of which – smaller – can fly for up to 15 minutes, and the other – larger – can stay in the sky for up to 40 minutes. In March, the Biden administration announced plans to send the first batch of 400 such small drones to Ukraine. But sources said the Pentagon sent only 10 units of the larger model. The Ukrainian military asked for several thousand of each of the Switchblade models. But the USA did not react to it in any way. The company AeroVironment is engaged in the production of drones.
Political fatigue is another problem for the US and its NATO allies. The war in Ukraine is quite popular now. But discontent will definitely grow with the increase in fuel prices in the US and with the reduction of gas supplies to Europe before winter. Voters will start asking why governments don't spend money on domestic needs.
“At the conference dedicated to the NATO summit, which was organized by the German Marshall Fund, I heard calls for the victory of Ukraine from representatives of Germany, Poland, Latvia, Romania, Greece, Spain, Great Britain and the USA. All of them argued that the battle was worth sacrificing something. At the same time, many of them were alarmed by the lack of significant political support in their countries,” the author writes.
The G7 leaders discussed two of the most pressing issues during their meeting in Germany this week: how to reduce energy prices and alleviate the food shortage, which arose due to the Russian blockade of the Black Sea ports of Ukraine. The G7 countries have ideas, but almost no clear plans. These two problems cannot be postponed. The price will be too high for the West.
Read also: Russia is a threat, Ukraine can count on NATO, Sweden and Finland have started the accession process: the results of the Alliance summit
The author believes that NATO has committed right when he decided to avoid direct attacks on Russia. After all, this can lead to a catastrophic nuclear escalation. But this does not mean that Ukraine should not respond when Russia fires missiles at it from its territory. If Putin uses Russian regions for missile launches with impunity in the course of an unprovoked, illegal war, then the inviolability of Russian borders disappears. If Ukraine can stop Russia on the battlefield, then it will decide what kind of peace agreement it wants. Because unconditional surrender to nuclear Russia is unlikely. However, this diplomatic moment, most likely, will not come soon. Of course, Ukraine has to wage this war directly. But NATO must plan its strategy as if the credibility and survival of the alliance itself are at stake.
