Unveiling the Truth: How US Hesitancy Prolongs the Conflict in Ukraine

Keir Giles, who works with the Russia and Eurasia Programme at Chatham House, an international affairs think tank in the UK, author of "Russias War on Everybody: And What it Means for You," notes that as the war between Russia and Ukraine approaches another winter, the discussions surrounding the US's provision of military aid to Ukraine are once again following a familiar and predictable cycle.

Keir Giles

Washington initially refused to supply HIMARS rocket artillery, Patriot air defence systems, Abrams tanks, cluster munitions, and F-16 fighter jets to Kyiv. However, after months of lobbying by Ukrainian officials and with support from public opinion across the West, there were hints of a change of view. Finally, it was confirmed that Ukraine would receive the weapons.

The latest equipment on the table is the Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS), which is a long-range solution critical to Ukraine's efforts to expel Russian invaders. Despite being recognized as crucial, it is still in the testing stage. Each cycle of this process sparks heightened emotions among Ukraine's supporters. Granting Ukraine's full requests in 2023 cannot guarantee the expulsion of Russian invaders, but delaying and hesitating has resulted in loss of lives and allowed Russia to fortify their defensive lines.

But while campaigns for Ukraine to acquire their desired high-profile weapon systems have been crucial in ensuring public support, they have also diverted attention from the consistent supply of less glamorous and everyday materials that have been vital throughout the war - including munitions, clothing, vehicles, and medical supplies.

Soldiers from the 3rd Battalion, 321st Field Artillery Regiment of the 18th Field Artillery Brigade based in Fort Bragg, North Carolina, are seen conducting live fire testing at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico in December 2021. The purpose of the testing is to evaluate early versions of the Army Tactical Missile System. The image was provided by the US Army.

Biden set to make imminent decision regarding the deployment of long-range missiles to Ukraine. The practice of singularly emphasizing a particular capability runs the risk of exaggerating it as a "miracle weapon" capable of single-handedly winning a war, rather than viewing it as an integrated component of a gradually developing and evolving arsenal.

The US paradoxically stands as the largest supplier of military support to Ukraine, yet it faces intense criticism for not fulfilling Ukraine's needs due to its substantial capabilities. Public scrutiny primarily revolves around the perception that the US prioritizes avoiding Russian escalation. US officials acknowledge the practical challenges such as logistics, training, support, infrastructure, and delivery that cause delays in providing new capabilities to Ukraine. However, the foremost delay consistently arises from the political hurdles preceding this process.

Once the political barriers are removed, coalition partners demonstrate a strong commitment to expedite even the most ambitious projects, such as acquiring F-16 fighter jets for Ukraine. Notably, the UK has consistently spearheaded efforts to meet Ukraine's requests, disregarding US concerns regarding the potential capabilities of Ukrainian forces.

However, it appears that US policy continues to be influenced by the concept of Russian red lines. Certain Western policymakers stubbornly believe that the US lacks leverage, autonomy, or initiative, and is constrained to engaging in this standoff solely on Russia's terms. Consequently, persistent suggestions imply that the US is hesitant to support Ukraine effectively, potentially due to a tacit or explicit agreement to avoid defeating Russia.

Disagreements within the US system regarding Ukraine have not only led to policy contradictions but also a covert effort to sow doubt about Ukraine's conduct of the war and its chances of success. Consequently, the US finds itself leading an unwilling coalition of Ukraine's supporters, with Germany frequently using the US as a justification for its own hesitance to provide arms, including Leopard tanks, and preventing others from doing so.

{{img_placeholder_2}}

In Riga, Latvia, Ukrainian flags wave alongside the Russian Embassy, forming a striking backdrop for a banner displaying the skull of Russian President Vladimir Putin. This powerful image was captured on December 8, 2022, and is a symbolic representation of the tensions between Russia and Ukraine. (Photo by Gints Ivuskans / AFP) (Photo by GINTS IVUSKANS/AFP via Getty Images)

Gints Ivuskans/AFP/Getty Images

Opinion: Russias neighbors have a message for Putin

However, as the war enters its third year, there is a compelling argument that exercising restraint has proven to be counterproductive. Not only does the focus on avoiding escalation provide reassurance to Russia, allowing them to relentlessly batter Ukraine's economy and ruthlessly kill its civilians using drones and missiles without facing consequences, but any delay in resolving the conflict, such as cautious decisions regarding the support provided to Ukraine, plays into Russia's strengths and exposes the weaknesses of the Western nations.

As the conflict continues to stretch into 2024 and possibly beyond, Western supporters will face increasing difficulties in meeting Ukraine's needs. Even before a potential change in presidency, the generous support provided by the United States is threatened by political trends within Ukraine. Therefore, as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky visits the US this week to seek international support once more, he recognizes that he is not only addressing hesitant members of the UN. He understands that there is a possibility that support from Washington itself may eventually dwindle.

Without considering the voters' tolerance for the economic cost, the failure to fully revive European defense industries makes it increasingly difficult to find the necessary munitions and weapons worldwide for Ukraine to survive.

In the case of the UK, there is a limited eagerness to provide support due to 30 years of defense cuts, which have left the country with inadequate resources. The shortage in munitions stocks was already recognized prior to 2022, leading to an urgent purchase of replacements from Sweden to supply howitzers to Ukraine. Furthermore, indications suggest that the UK's donation of 14 Challenger 2 tanks accounted for a significant portion of the remaining tanks in the British Army that were still functional.

However, the war in Ukraine is not going to end simply by removing Russian soldiers from occupied eastern Ukraine and Crimea. Russia still possesses artillery, missiles, and drones that can carry out destructive attacks, while they continue to rebuild their land forces for future offensives. Strengthening Ukraine is crucial for Europe's long-term security and the ultimate resolution of this conflict. This war holds immense importance for Russia, as it taps into their core ideas of national identity, and President Vladimir Putin is willing to subject his country to significant economic and human losses to maintain their position.

Get our free weekly newsletter

• Sign up for CNN Opinions newsletter.• Join us on Twitter and Facebook

Most Western leaders have failed to effectively communicate to their constituents the critical need for significant reinvestment in defense and its supporting industries. With the United States turning its attention towards China, the defense of Europe will increasingly depend on frontline states that comprehend the gravity of this threat and are committed to addressing it seriously.

After years of disregarding the possibility of military threats, the rest of Europe must now urgently acknowledge that investing in defense is not a discretionary indulgence.

Instead, it is the price that must be paid for sharing a continent with Russia.