Big maneuvers around the Ukrainian agenda. NATO is studying how to support them more effectively, while the United States is pressuring Zelenskyy to pursue achievable goals without dispersing forces. We look into the distance to understand where the “end” of the crisis is.
The White House has sent a clear message to Kiev, according to the Washington Post. We will support you to the maximum, you will have new weapons, but you need to look for possible achievements.
The note was delivered in direct contacts by diplomats and CIA chief William Burns. Washington will be asking for another maxi gear pack, perhaps one of the last of this magnitude, in anticipation of spring/summer deployment. The Biden administration fears the Republican brakes in Congress as well as European “fatigue”.
Because of this, he insists the resistance make the best use of cannons, tanks and himars, and leaves open his opposition to some decisions made by Zelenskyy’s generals, starting with defense to the bitter end of Bakhmut.
The newspaper’s sources add two points:
– a liberation of Crimea is currently unthinkable;
– Ukrainians should choose fronts where they can be victorious and avoid burning vehicles and soldiers in overly ambitious operations.
Warning, accompanied by the inevitable reminder that the decision rested with the sovereign state, but they let him know that despite the president’s determination, limits could emerge in the long run.
Signals from the banks of the Potomac are intertwining with those of the Atlantic partners involved in a series of meetings.
They are looking for better coordination to help Kiev, from ammunition to tanks. Promises must be realized by overcoming technical obstacles, political brakes, national security issues and needs. To get an idea: the waiting times for the production of artillery shells are between 12 and 28 months.
The Pentagon explained that if yes, it could not immediately give away the famous long-range (300 km) missiles, because it had few of them, could not do without them, and therefore would have to build them from scratch.
Also, sooner or later the allies will have to decide whether to arm Ukraine with fighter jets. At the moment there is a willingness from some countries, no concrete steps: it is considered premature and they want to avoid an escalation. The position could change if the invaders achieved major successes, a development believed possible by some observers and questioned by others.
In today’s press conference, US defense leaders reiterated that the level of Putin’s army is always low, an apparatus that has its problems. This does not prevent them from achieving tactical victories.
Vision overturned by the “party” which is convinced that the neo-tsar favors in the long run.
Several experts interviewed by Defense News were very pessimistic about the duration of the crisis. In total.
1) It can take months, if not years, for competitors to quit.
2) The two capitals are not ready to cede territories and symbols, Crimea applies to both.
3) A “Korean” situation: there is no total war, there is no peace, there remains constant tension with flashes of war.
4) New weapons are important for Kiev, but they must use them correctly and have plenty of supplies (it’s the same problem as with ammunition). Those pushing for even more powerful means argue that the West underestimated Ukrainians’ capabilities from the start.
5) US Chief of Staff Mark Milley said he was confident negotiations would begin as neither was able to push through. It’s a natural hope, probably also influenced by a pragmatic vision: the conflict cannot go on forever.