US Military Aid to Ukraine Package Part 2
Another Commentary Coming from
An American in Ukraine
by Dr. E. C. Olson, Mission Director
Part 2: The U.S. announces the single largest military aid package yet for Ukraine – the August 8th $1 billion-dollar military aid package
But is it what the Ukrainians need? And is it helping the Ukrainians on the battlefields? We’ll answer that
Also announced by the U.S.: a $4.5 billion-dollars in budgetary support for the Ukrainian government
Will this comprehensive aid package make a
difference in Ukraine’s ultimate destiny?
We’ll examine that too
Ever since the Russian invasion began, it was abundantly clear that Russia’s military might was so superior to the Ukrainians that all parties knew that if Ukraine had any chance of avoiding a quick defeat (much less a stalemate or especially a victory on the battlefield) they would have to receive significant, in fact truly unprecedented military assistance from any and all potential allies.
Given that Ukraine was not yet a member of NATO, and Poland and other neighboring NATO nations would face similar long odds if they provided troops to fight the Russians, it became clear that any military assistance coming from Europe would not be in the form of troops (or planes or ships or submarines), but instead their help would be in terms of military aid equipment and supplies.
In making the same appeal to the United States, Ukraine received the same answer: Washington was also concerned, because as they saw it sending troops to Ukraine would be violently opposed by Russia, stoking fear of a nuclear response by Putin. So here too, any military assistance coming from the U.S. would also have to be in the form of military aid equipment and supplies.
Fast-forward to today – early August – where we see that since early-March, the U.S. has sent a total of now 18 military aid packages to Ukraine (representing more than $10 billion worth of equipment and supplies) in leading the West’s response to Ukraine’s global appeal for military assistance. Throughout this entire history of military aid, the burning question in America’s collective mind was and is, “is this aid meeting the real needs of the Ukrainian military?”, and perhaps more importantly, “is it making a difference on the battlefield, in other words, is it helping Ukraine prevail in the war?”
If one looks at either the sheer magnitude of this latest U.S. aid package or its composition, they would be hard pressed to come up with any other answer to that first question except for a resounding, categorical “yes!”
Apparently, we weren’t the only people asking Ukrainian soldiers about the specific nature of their real actual military aid needs because the latest U.S. aid package literally has something for everyone, beginning with the single most universally expressed needed weapon, the highly coveted HIMARS, which stands for “High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems”. These nimble, long-range missile systems have been credited with allowing Ukraine to effectively strike against Russia’s larger military from far behind enemy lines.
The addition of these very tactical weapons has allowed Ukraine to shift to a more comprehensive battle plan that will be far more effective than the more-primitive plans Ukraine was forced to use when they only had short-range weapons at their disposal. Already this increased ability has been tapped in scoring repeated battlefield victories in the past several weeks, with the Ukrainians now being able to destroy and disrupt Russia’s supply chain that moves ammunition, fuel, and other supplies from Russian rear guard supply depots to their front lines. By cutting-off or eliminating these supply depots, the Ukrainians are now forcing Russia to pull troops off the front lines, which in many areas also includes forcing Russian troops to de-occupy villages that were costly to conquer in the first place.
Our Mission experienced that first-hand a few weeks ago as we delivered aid to those front-line Ukrainian villages and military camps, most of which had been very recently de-occupied, including two villages in particular that we delivered aid to, where Russian soldiers left the village mere hours before we arrived.
One way of looking at this scenario is that it is a good example how Americans played significant roles in bookending this action: first, the military aid provided by the American government allowed these villages to be militarily liberated after more than month of brutal Russian occupation, then we American missionaries stepped in and provide much-needed humanitarian aid to the villagers emerging after the Russian de-occupation.
When I look at the description of the military aid that the US is sending Ukraine in this latest August 8th package, I see a lot of very familiar weapons and other equipment – familiar because when I was asking the solders on the front lines what specific types of US military aid are they in greatest need of – they rattled off the vast majority of the items on this list, most that would end up in their hands, while others were for arming their artillery support units that are 10-plus miles off the front lines.
Being the singular topic of this article, I will repeat my observation: every single item included in this latest US military aid shipment was mentioned at least one or more times during my questioning of Ukrainian front-line soldiers AND in the recommendations that Ukraine’s military leaders issued very recently – which clearly means that Washington is paying close attention to the needs of the Ukrainian military (who apparently are now speaking with one voice in expressing their most vitally-needed aid).
I also want to include in this discussion another related observation, which too is the focus of this article, which asks the billion-dollar question of, “is this now targeted aid making a difference on the battlefield”, and in the largest context, “is it helping the Ukrainians defeat the Russians in the war”?
In answering this pair of questions, I first want to qualify my response by saying that the only source of information I have on the difference-making on the battlefield and Ukraine’s overall prospects for winning the war comes from two sources (and specifically not coming from another source in particular). My two sources are led-off first by the media coverage of the war, specifically the information coming from the most un-biased of these media outlets (and decidedly not coming from either the Ukrainian or Russian governments). And my second source is collectively the soldiers that I have spoken to on the front-lines, specifically the soldiers manning the western or southern terminus of the front-lines near Mykoliav.
What makes the latter all the more important is because during our time in Ukraine (mid-to-late-July), they were the ones responsible for the greatest momentum shift in favor of the Ukrainians since the initial Russian invasion in late-February was repulsed. Here is a particularly appropriate map revealing these very recent battlefield results.
Recent (late July–early August) action along the western/southern terminus of the front lines, the site of our recent Mission aid deliveries
Battlefield results made possible in-part by the Ukrainians being armed with advance weaponry from the US in recent US military aid packages.
Here in the critically important southern theater (important because it is so close to Crimea, which the Russians illegally annexed in 2014) is where US aid is helping to produce the most victories since the war began, by forcing Russian forces to retreat from the front lines.
In summarizing our answers to the pivotable questions examined in this article, more conclusively than ever before, it now appears as if America’s military aid packages for Ukraine are exactly what the entire Ukrainian military force needs the most, and most importantly, we now have evidence that this advanced, targeted aid is turning the tide of the war in Ukraine’s favor by providing them new capacities to strike both more Russian targets and especially the Russians military supply centers that are far behind the front lines, where they are now no longer safe from Ukrainian attacks.
I should also point out that it isn’t as if this new aid package, or even the combination of the last several military aid packages instantaneously flipped the war in Ukraine’s favor – that it could also be the result of several months of skilled use of these US-supplied weapons, including those that came from the very earliest aid packages. This reasoning is substantiated in-part by looking at what equipment has been included in the more than $10 billion in military aid that the US has given Ukraine since the war started, as seen here:
Also announced yesterday, Monday August 8th, only this time by the U.S. Treasury Department, was an additional $4.5 billion in aid to the government of Ukraine to help keep the government afloat as it seeks to withstand a large-scale, nation-wide Russian military campaign that now is approaching its sixth month. The Treasury will administer the funds along with the U.S. Agency for International Development and the money will go for essential services like paying government salaries, keeping hospitals and schools operating, and distributing humanitarian supplies.
The department said there were mechanisms in place to make sure that the funding, which was approved by Congress, would be used only for its intended purposes.
“Robust safeguards put in place by the World Bank, coupled with U.S.-funded, expert third-party oversight embedded within the Ukrainian government, ensure accountability and transparency in the use of these funds,” the Treasury said in a statement.
The $4.5 billion represents the fifth disbursement from the U.S. directly to the Ukrainian government budget. The U.S. sent $1 billion through the World Bank in April and May, $1.3 billion in June, and another $1.7 billion in July.
The Treasury is also releasing $335 million to the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development to help with Ukraine’s energy and food security as part of the country’s efforts to rebuild from the war. The money will go to supporting infrastructure in transport and logistics as well as some direct financing for the agricultural sector and exporters. It will also go to cities and towns that are dealing with issues related to internally displaced persons and other vulnerable populations.
Why should America give this much money and aid to Ukraine
To remind ourselves of the logic of spending this significant amount of money in support of Ukraine’s effort to repel Russian expansionism – in other words, to arm ourselves (we supporters of providing aid to Ukraine) for the backlash we might hear over America donating such a large sum of American dollars at a time when our own nation is battling inflation and dealing with our own crises.
In doing this I don’t want to overstate the opposition to providing more aid for Ukraine, as a very recent poll indicated that 73% of Americans support providing aid to Ukraine – in geopolitical polls, that represents nearly a landslide of support for Ukraine.
Or as stated in the obverse, only 27%, or approximately 1 in 4 America opposes sending more aid to Ukraine. But as we have witnessed in recent times as other political vocal minorities have received a disproportional amount of recognition in the media, we need to be forewarned about that happening here.
In providing this information I’m also drawing the distinction here between my previously stated personal reasons why I support Ukraine and why I am going to Ukraine, with what I am discussing here, which are the geopolitical reasons why the American government should continue to support Ukraine.
Admittedly, some of these reasons overlap, being both personal and geopolitical reasons why America should support Ukraine, such as where Russia is seen as the bully of Eastern Europe, subjugating a nation being bullied: Ukraine. Or where Russia is characterized as being Evil, while in this stark dichotomy, Ukraine represents Good.
But for the most part these distinctions are easy to see – for example in the geopolitical sense, the most accurate observation is that Ukraine is merely a proxy for “the West” in general, and Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and other vulnerable NATO nations in particular. In this reasoning, we see Ukraine as nothing more than the first nation targeted for occupation and ultimately conversion back to a dictatorial communist nation by Russia – and having been chosen mostly for logistical reasons (i.e., beginning with Ukraine bordering Russia, which makes transport of military troops and equipment that much easier than say if Russia were to invade Hungary or Poland).
This analogy always produces the common talking point of “the West is supporting Ukraine, which hopefully results in Russia’s defeat and puting an end to Russia expansionism, so that the West and NATO nations don’t have to next defend Poland, Slovakia or Hungary or any other Eastern European NATO nation”. Distilling that down to an even more common refrain sees this as “fight Russia now in Ukraine or fight them later in Poland”, or even more basal, “pay me now or pay me later”.
Another primary reason to support Ukraine in its war against Russia is that Russia’s invasion represents an affront to the principles of modern international law, which prohibits the forcible alteration or conquest of territories. These principles — first agreed on by Winston Churchill and FDR in the 1941 Atlantic Charter, and then codified in the UN Charter — are crucial to global stability and human rights. If Russia or any nation is allowed to violate them freely, then other, potentially aggressive nations will perceive no limit to their own ambitions. Expansionist countries that come to mind (and their most likely target) include China (Taiwan), North Korea (South Korea) and possibly Iran (Israel).
This translates into a more common refrain of “if we let one aggressive communist dictatorship take over a free and open democracy against their will without any globally enforced penalty or retribution, then all other aggressive communist dictatorships will see that as a green light to their expansionist agenda”.
There are many other reasons why supporting Ukraine is important – these are just a few – but this also doesn’t even begin to touch on the reasons to support Ukraine that have nothing to do with geopolitical affairs but instead something much more…well, human, and that is opposing Russia for the openly criminal acts that it is conducting, individually more than 40,000 individual acts of criminal violence thus far since the war began. Cumulatively this equates to genocide being committed against the Ukrainian people, so in that sense we need to continue to support Ukraine so that Russia is held fully accountable for all of the War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity that it is committing in engaging in full-on genocide on the Ukrainian people.
Thusly, for many Americans, they view Russia as they did “The Mob” during its hey-day in the 1920’s-30’s, when it openly committed one atrocity after another on public streets with impunity and without retribution. That “war against crime” required a similar dramatic response, where the FBI provided what could be seen as military aid to local law enforcement agencies to defeat their common enemy.
I’ll end this discussion here because devoting any more attention to “the twenty-seven-percenters” who oppose further aid to Ukraine would make me guilty of the one thing I forewarned in saying earlier that too often in America political vocal minorities have received a disproportional amount of recognition in the media, this giving the allusion that they represent more Americans than they really do.
In closing, I will return to the headlines of this article and re-state the conclusions alluded to there. First, this week the United States released a $1 billion military and humanitarian aid package to Ukraine, the largest to-date, which begs several important questions, leading with, “is this aid specifically what the Ukrainians need the most? Based on what I learned from Ukrainian front-line soldiers and top military leaders, the answer is an unequivocal “YES!”
Facts supporting this conclusion are many, headed by the fact that the package included the most-needed weaponry – HIMARS, NASAMs and other long-range artillery weapons and ammunition, along with thousands of short-range weapons and ammunition like the AT4 (the Blue Dogs covet their one AT4 and its re-usable brother, the “Carl Gustav 84mm shoulder fire rocket launcher”), and also vitally needed were the 50 armored medical vehicles provided by the aid package from America.
Second comes the vital question of, “is this aid, specifically the military aid, making a difference on the battlefield?”, in other words, “is this military equipment helping the Ukrainians to actually defeat the Russians in battle” – and there too, as evidenced by what the soldiers and top military brass are telling us, and by the war’s individual battlefield status reports, the pervasive answer is another emphatic “YES!”.
Factually supporting this conclusion begins with the emphatic declarations of such by the Ukraine soldiers on the front lines, who told me rather convincingly that over the past month, the military equipment included in the most recent aid packages were absolutely instrumental in them pushing Russian forces off their front line positions and into retreat mode, which allowed Ukrainian forces to liberate dozens of small villages which were under Russian occupation for more than a month.
What allowed for this fungible positioning along the front lines was the fact that Ukraine relied almost entirely on the new long-range weapons included in these aid packages to destroy supply depots and rear-guard bases that all support the Russian soldiers on the front lines. By destroying these depots and supply lines from a distance (while incurring few or no Ukrainian losses in the process), the Ukrainians were able to force Russian forces to retreat once they ran out of ammunition, fuel and food.
Equally as important, due to the tragic loss of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers due to not getting them to Field Hospitals before they bled-out or otherwise succumbed to their injuries or before getting adequate medical treatment, the new aid package includes 50 armored wounded warrior transport vehicles. On a much smaller scale but reflecting this same vital need, our adopted Field Hospital informed us that they were losing too many soldiers because they couldn’t get needed medical treatment in time to save them, but in their specific location they needed small boats to transport the wounded because the Russians had destroyed all of the bridges and roads spanning the many rivers that dissect this portion of the front lines. As you read in our other current report, we were able to buy and deliver three such rescue boats to our Field Hospital two days ago.
Third, and returning again to the headlines, accompanying this week’s military aid package was $4.5 billion in support of the Ukrainian government and their efforts to manage the country and provide for its fifteen million internally displaced citizens with the war now entering its sixth month. Again that poses the question of “is this what the Ukrainians need and is it making a difference in their lives?” Seeing as the money will go for essential services like paying government salaries, keeping hospitals and schools operating, and distributing humanitarian supplies – then this becomes the clearest example yet of American funding directly benefitting the Ukrainian people.
For those of you who have been regular readers of my previous articles, you will see – as I now feel – that finally it seems as if the American military aid is much more targeted in meeting Ukraine’s actual military needs, as opposed to my earlier criticism where it seemed to me that in previous military aid packages, the US was merely emptying our military equipment and supply depots of old and outdated weapons and ammunition. And as I also previously stated, we are finally seeing America overcome its paranoia over sending long-range weapons to Ukraine out of a misplaced fear that Ukraine’s will preemptively invite WWIII by using these American long range weapons to attack Moscow and other marquis Russian targets.
Finally, I will point to the status of the overall war over the last thirty days to reinforce my claim that by finally getting the aid right, America is now fully enabling Ukraine to do what it does best, which is to valiantly protect its motherland and force the Russians to persistently retreat despite their far superior manpower. And as a result of America’s stepped-up military aid, gone now is Russia’s dominance in firepower and equipment; with the new long and short range weaponry included in this latest aid package, Ukrainians now posses an arsenal nearly equivalent to Russia’s, there again enabling the Ukrainians to show the world – especially Russian citizens back home – that with equal firepower, the advantage swings to the Ukrainians simply because they are better fighters than the Russians.
So for all those reasons and more, for the first time since the war began, I can honestly say that I now see a clear (but difficult nonetheless) path to total victory for the Ukrainians, and a total victory that now includes reclaiming Crimea, which the Russians illegally took back in 2014.
For me, this latest military aid package has made this the tipping point in the war – all it took was for America to open-up its entire warehouse of military equipment and supplies and to shed its fears of this aid increasing the likelihood of a global war. With those now clearly in the rear-view mirror, despite the fact that Russia still has a 10-to-1 advantage in total number of solders, by now arming the Ukrainians with military equipment equal to the Russians, I see the outcome of the war resting squarely on one factor: the will of the Ukrainian people, especially their military.
And from what I have personally witnessed firsthand, there the Ukrainians excel, in fact I believe that not just are the Ukrainian people the most proud, resilient and determined people as I have ever seen, but their soldiers are amongst the world’s most skilled and the most courageous of warriors anywhere – so if one has to put the fate of Ukraine in the hands of those amazing people, I can think of no better place for that fate to be determined.
Slava Ukraini!