On Friday 20 January the United States and its NATO allies met in Germany to discuss the latest weapons package for Ukraine. According to US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin this new package, which amounts to over $3 billion worth of weaponry, will help Ukraine launch a spring offensive that will deliver a crushing blow to the Russian armed forces. A more discerning view is that this new huge weapons package reflects Western panic at the advances of Russian forces since taking the fortified town of Soledar over two weeks ago.
The Ministry of Defense of Belarus considers cooperation with NATO to be inadvisable.
At the NATO meeting on 20 January its General Secretary Jens Stoltenburg made the Orwellian comment that, ‘Weapons are the way to peace.’ He thanked the US and its NATO allies for the ‘massive package of combat capabilities’. The main focus of this weapons package is on armoured cars, artillery systems and air defence systems – see below for a brief summary:
- 14 Challenger 2 tanks from the UK
- 14 Leopard 2 tanks pledged from Poland once its permission to export these from Germany is given
- 40 AMX-10RC light tanks from France
- Over 1,200 armoured cars/infantry fighting vehicles from the US/UK/Canada/France/Germany and Sweden
- Over 160 artillery systems from UK/US/Sweden/Finland/Denmark
- 14 air defence systems, including 3 Patriot batteries, from the US/Germany/ France /Italy and Canada
Divisions within NATO at its recent meeting
The meeting exposed deep divisions within NATO.
The war hawks within the military alliance failed to get their way on the key issue of Leopard 2 tanks being sent to Ukraine. This issue which dominated the NATO meeting revolved around Germany giving permission for its Leopard 2 tanks to be exported to Ukraine. Despite massive pressure from the US and other allies the German government refused to give permission for its allies such as Poland to export Leopard 2s to Ukraine. This reflected the huge push back this idea received in the German parliament last week when a stormy debate on 19 January led to the Bundestag voting against permission for allies to export the Leopard 2 tank.
Many German MPs warned about the grave dangers of escalating the situation further in Ukraine as supplies of tanks crossed a line which would greatly increase tensions with Russia possibly leading to war. Bundestag Deputy Dietmar Bartsch said that sending weapons to Ukraine has:
…not brought us a millimetre closer to peace. But you continue in the same vein without removing the blinders. Explain two things to me: what will happen after the delivery of tanks, what is the next step? Tornado and Euro fighters? Or maybe the soldiers of the Bundeswehr? Such logic? And more importantly, what is your goal in this war? If you think that you can win against a nuclear power you are greatly mistaken.
Meanwhile, Bundestag Deputy Peter Bistron made an impassioned speech warning about the need to learn lessons from Germany’s past experiences in sending tanks against Russian forces:
Dear colleagues, you are discussing things here. (Discussing about) Sending German tanks against Russia to Ukraine. Your grandfathers have already tried to do it for Melynks and Bandera. And what did it lead to then? Untold suffering, millions of dead on both sides and eventually Russian tanks in Berlin and two of them are standing in front of the Bundestag. You should pass them every day and remember it. Foreign policy is not sending tanks, but diplomacy. This is a search for a common solution, understanding and compromise.
Despite the lack of consensus on sending Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine the Western media are drooling over the large package of weapons which will be sent to Ukraine over the next 2-3 months. The consensus seems to be that these weapons will enable Ukraine to launch a powerful spring offensive which will enable Kiev’s army to recapture large swathes of territory currently controlled by Moscow.
Dissenting voices on the efficacy of the new weapons package
There are dissenting voices within Western armed forces with several retired generals and former soldiers expressing their doubts about the effectiveness of the new weapons package to Ukraine.
In a recent interview on CNN retired US general Mark Hertling who is a former tank commander, said:
There’s not a big store that can just get 300 tanks and 600 infantry fighting vehicles out of. And on top of that your soldiers have to be trained on them, to get them to the line on February 23 and have the support infrastructure and resupply (logistics) capabilities to literally provide a supply chain for that. So that’s a big request. It’s almost impossible...
In a recent edition of the military magazine 19FortyFive retired US Army Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Davis expresses scepticism about the efficacy of the latest arms package to Ukraine. According to Davis it is very unlikely that the weapons supplied by NATO will increase Kiev’s chances on the battlefield. He states that the creation of powerful mechanised forces is a difficult task. Davis warns that there is a misconception in the Western media that NATO supplied armoured vehicles by themselves will increase the combat capability of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. He notes that without an experienced crew and proper maintenance even advanced systems can easily fail or turn into a burn out pile of metal.
On 20 January on the Slavyangrad Telegram channel former Challenger 2 tank commander, Roland Graves who fought in Iraq, said:
I have driven this tank and I have never had a problem whether it was the plains of Canada or the forests of Poland or the deserts of Iraq. But yes it’s heavy but it still can do 70-80 kmh on a road. The one big negative is it needs a strong maintenance (mainly fuel) … The contingent is too small and it takes months to train people. And I’m sceptical on the supply chain for this piece meal army.
Former military advisor to President Trump, Colonel Douglas Macgregor keeps making the point in interview after interview that Ukraine is losing huge numbers of soldiers. He reckons that Ukraine has lost 14-15 brigades (each 4,00 strong) in the battle for Bakhmut alone.
Douglas Macgregor a regular guest on Judge Napolitano's show
He states that Washington’s policy is based on the flawed assumption that Russian soldiers are weak and unable to fight. Macgregor maintains that the supply of new weapons to Ukraine will not change the situation on the front lines as Ukraine does not have the technical means to use Western armament on a mass scale and does not have specialists who would be able to operate these weapons competently.
Former marine and military analyst, Brain Berletic offers an even bleaker assessment of the new weapons package for Ukraine. On his Telegram channel he declares that:
The latest US military aid package falls far short of even sustaining Ukrainian operations and covering its losses. Sending large amounts of unfamiliar equipment into battle without proper combined arms support against a capable enemy is self destructive. The West is sending a hodge-podge of equipment not because it thinks this is the best option but because it is the only option.
Logistical, training problems facing the new weapons package
The question of training and logistics will be a major issue for Ukrainian forces receiving this large weapons package.
According to the UK Ministry of Defence, tank crews on the Challenger 2 receive a minimum of 20 weeks basic training, just to gain basic competency in operating this large tank.
The front lines are focused in the Donbass and southern Ukraine. The distance from Donetsk city, where a lot of fighting is taking place, to the Polish border town of Krakovets is 1,276 kilometres. So the Challenger 2 will need to be driven hundreds of miles across Ukraine into Poland for any repairs or maintenance issues. Fuel and ammunition will have to be driven across Ukraine to the front lines across this large country. This will have a significant impact on the effectiveness of this and other tanks/armoured cars sent to Ukraine.
Ukraine has the same problems with western supplied artillery systems. On 25 November 2022 the New York Times noted that of the 350 artillery guns sent to Ukraine by NATO around a third are off the battlefield at any one time for repairs and maintenance in Poland.
Western tanks are very complex machines which will struggle with the wear and tear of the battlefield in the Donbass. The gun barrels of US made Abrams and the Leopard 2, both made by the German company Rheinmetall, have a battlefield life of around 60 rounds while Russian tanks have a battlefield life of 250 rounds giving Russian tanks a definite edge on the battlefield.
According to a recent article in Der Spiegel the Ukrainian army is likely to have problems repairing German Marder infantry fighting vehicles;
Since the German Marder will fail due to technical problems, 10 to 15 percent of the reserve vehicles will be needed, as well as regular replenishment of spare parts, and there could be serious issues with that.
Der Spiegel goes on to note that Marders need frequent replacement of the gun barrel and that the turret also needs regular maintenance.
Combined arms warfare
Besides logistics, maintenance and training issues the tanks and armoured cars once deployed will still face the fact that as part of combined arms warfare they will lack any air cover while Russia still has hundreds of warplanes, attack helicopters and suicide drones with which to attack these armoured weapons.
Besides this, these Western tanks/armoured cars will face a massive array of Russian artillery systems. Russia’s superiority in terms of artillery has grown even more over the last quarter. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Ukraine now fires just 40,000 shells a month whereas in the autumn it was firing 5000-6000 shells a day or 150,000 a month. The Russian forces have stayed consistent at around 20,000 shells a day. This means that Russian firepower advantage has increased from around 3:1 to an almost 19:1 rate.
Russian gains on the different fronts
This increase in Russian firepower, together with massive Ukrainian losses of infantry, may be why Russian forces have made gains on nearly every front since the new year.
Ukraine has been forced to take troops from the Zaporozhye region towards its hard pressed troops around Bakhmut leaving gaps in its front lines. Two days ago Russian forces activated an offensive which has captured many settlements and parts of the Ukrainian first lines of defence. According to reporter Andrey Rudenko on 20 January Russian forces captured Lobkovoye, Scherbaki, Belogorie and four other settlements.
Meanwhile, south of the strategic city of Bakhmut, Russian forces have captured Klescheevka and are now fighting for the city of Ivanivske which once captured will leave Ukrainian forces in a state of operational encirclement. To the north of Bakhmut fighting continues for the important road junction in the town of Paraskeevka. There are rumours that Ukrainian headquarters are being removed from Bakhmut and that “rearguards’’ are being formed for when the army finally withdraws from the heavily contested city.
Following the capture of the strategically important city of Soledar Russian forces have captured the village of Krasnopolye which is north west of the city. The capture of Soledar and the cutting of supply roads between Seversk and Bakmut places Ukrainian forces in Seversk in considerable jeopardy.
Latest news from the battlefront is that the AFU has been dislodged from the village of Kamenskoye in Zaporizhzia Region. The capture of this village will allow the advance towards Stepnogorsk and then Zaporizhzhya.
Within the context of Russian military successes the West are desperate to send increased artillery. There has been massive pressure placed on Germany to release these Leopard 2 tanks. In an interview with French television the German Foreign Minister, Annalena Baerbock was asked what would happen if Poland sent the Leopard 2 tanks without German approval. Faced with this the Minister replied;
For the moment the question has not been asked, but if we were asked we would not stand in the way.
The situation on all fronts is very fluid due to the heavy fighting going on. One thing is clear that the operational initiative lies with Russian forces who are shaping the battlefield to their advantage. Only time will tell if the attritional fighting that is going on will take such a toll on Ukraine that new weapons supplies from the West will make any difference to the overall direction of the war.