The suggestion that President Donald Trump is about to end US military support for Ukraine will inevitably raise questions about the ability of Ukrainian forces to maintain their fight against Russia’s unprovoked aggression.
Setting aside the arguments over whether the US or Europe has provided the most aid to Ukraine during the past three years of conflict, there is little dispute that America has provided the lion’s share of the military equipment.
From the Patriot air defence missiles that have proved so effective in defending Ukraine from the constant waves of Russian drone and missile attacks, to the long-range Army Tactical Missile Systems that have enabled Ukrainian forces to take the fight deep into Russian-held territory, the US military’s superior firepower has proved vital in keeping the Russians at bay.
The importance of maintaining supplies of high-end military kit to sustain Ukraine’s war effort was the reason that, in the final days of the Biden administration, the White House ordered that the US deliver as much military equipment to Kyiv as possible before Trump took office.
The Biden team clearly had a premonition that relations between Washington and Kyiv would sour the moment Trump became president.
Reports, therefore, that Trump is likely to respond to his car crash of a press conference with Zelensky by cancelling Washington’s military support have inevitably raised concerns that without US backing, the Ukrainian cause is all but lost.
And it is true that, without the Patriots and other high-end equipment, Ukrainian forces will struggle to counter their Russian adversaries who, despite the catastrophic losses they have suffered on the battlefield, are still pushing their outnumbered opponents hard.
But even if Trump’s White House debacle does result in Washington ending military support for Ukraine, it is important to remember that the Ukrainian forces have already demonstrated just how tough they are during the past three years of brutal fighting.
Nothing better illustrates the Ukrainians’ determination to defend their homeland than their outstanding performance in the early days of the conflict back in February 2022 when they succeeded in preventing a formidable Russian invasion force from seizing control of the country.
While Western weaponry, such as the NLAW anti-tank weapons provided by Britain, proved highly effective in destroying columns of Russian heavy armour, it was the professionalism and resilience of the Ukrainian forces that proved decisive in halting the Russian invasion in its tracks.
Moreover, while the military support provided by the US and its allies has undoubtedly assisted the Ukrainian war effort – even enabling them to capture a chunk of Russia territory in the Kursk region – the Ukrainians have done a great job at developing their own indigenous military production, especially drones, which have been used to devastating effect against the Russians.
In addition, some of the equipment from other Western countries, such as the UK’s long-range Storm Shadow missiles, has also given the Ukrainians a distinct advantage on the battlefield, especially in Crimea where the missiles have been used to good effect to neutralise the threat posed by Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.
By contrast Moscow, despite putting its economy on a war footing, is still struggling with severe manpower shortages, to the extent that it has had to rely on the deployment of common criminals and inexperienced North Korean troops.
Trump’s continued support for the Ukrainian cause might be in doubt, but it would still be foolhardy to write off the Ukrainians’ ability to fight on against Russia, with or without America’s help.
The suggestion that President Donald Trump is about to end US military support for Ukraine will inevitably raise questions about the ability of Ukrainian forces to maintain their fight against Russia’s unprovoked aggression.
Setting aside the arguments over whether the US or Europe has provided the most aid to Ukraine during the past three years of conflict, there is little dispute that America has provided the lion’s share of the military equipment.
From the Patriot air defence missiles that have proved so effective in defending Ukraine from the constant waves of Russian drone and missile attacks, to the long-range Army Tactical Missile Systems that have enabled Ukrainian forces to take the fight deep into Russian-held territory, the US military’s superior firepower has proved vital in keeping the Russians at bay.
The importance of maintaining supplies of high-end military kit to sustain Ukraine’s war effort was the reason that, in the final days of the Biden administration, the White House ordered that the US deliver as much military equipment to Kyiv as possible before Trump took office.
The Biden team clearly had a premonition that relations between Washington and Kyiv would sour the moment Trump became president.
Reports, therefore, that Trump is likely to respond to his car crash of a press conference with Zelensky by cancelling Washington’s military support have inevitably raised concerns that without US backing, the Ukrainian cause is all but lost.
And it is true that, without the Patriots and other high-end equipment, Ukrainian forces will struggle to counter their Russian adversaries who, despite the catastrophic losses they have suffered on the battlefield, are still pushing their outnumbered opponents hard.
But even if Trump’s White House debacle does result in Washington ending military support for Ukraine, it is important to remember that the Ukrainian forces have already demonstrated just how tough they are during the past three years of brutal fighting.
Nothing better illustrates the Ukrainians’ determination to defend their homeland than their outstanding performance in the early days of the conflict back in February 2022 when they succeeded in preventing a formidable Russian invasion force from seizing control of the country.
While Western weaponry, such as the NLAW anti-tank weapons provided by Britain, proved highly effective in destroying columns of Russian heavy armour, it was the professionalism and resilience of the Ukrainian forces that proved decisive in halting the Russian invasion in its tracks.
Moreover, while the military support provided by the US and its allies has undoubtedly assisted the Ukrainian war effort – even enabling them to capture a chunk of Russia territory in the Kursk region – the Ukrainians have done a great job at developing their own indigenous military production, especially drones, which have been used to devastating effect against the Russians.
In addition, some of the equipment from other Western countries, such as the UK’s long-range Storm Shadow missiles, has also given the Ukrainians a distinct advantage on the battlefield, especially in Crimea where the missiles have been used to good effect to neutralise the threat posed by Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.
By contrast Moscow, despite putting its economy on a war footing, is still struggling with severe manpower shortages, to the extent that it has had to rely on the deployment of common criminals and inexperienced North Korean troops.
Trump’s continued support for the Ukrainian cause might be in doubt, but it would still be foolhardy to write off the Ukrainians’ ability to fight on against Russia, with or without America’s help.