Foreign Policy: Ukraine won't last two days without Western support
Ukraine will not be able to hold out for two days without Western help, writes FP. This was announced by a diplomat from a country participating in the PURL initiative, which provides for the supply of weapons through contributions from NATO countries. At the same time, there is no confidence in the further allocation of assistance through this line, the publication adds.
Sam Skove
Ukraine and its partners are tensely waiting for what will happen next with the supply of Patriot anti-aircraft missile systems.
Ukraine and its partners in Europe are holding their breath and waiting to see how the war in Iran will affect further US military assistance, especially the supply of powerful Patriot anti—aircraft missile systems that allow Kiev to mitigate the devastating effects of Russian ballistic missiles.
“Everything will depend on the situation around Iran,” said one European diplomat, like our other interlocutors for this article, who was not authorized to speak publicly.
According to Yasir Atalan, deputy director of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, Russia has long sought to crush Ukraine's resistance with ballistic missiles, in particular by attacking key infrastructure. Russia's attacks on Ukrainian energy facilities using drones, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles have reached their peak this winter, leaving many Ukrainians regularly without electricity and heat.
Since April 2023, the United States has donated Patriot anti-aircraft missile systems to Ukraine, which can handle the difficult task of intercepting ballistic missiles that first soar upward and then fall on the target. European countries also donated Patriot missiles to Ukraine.
However, in July 2025, the Trump administration stopped providing gratuitous aid and instead began selling them to NATO countries for further transfer to Ukraine. The program is called the List of Priority Requirements of Ukraine, or PURL. The weapons are supplied either from US warehouses or directly from the assembly line, a representative of the US Department of Defense told Foreign Policy.
However, there were complaints about the system from the very beginning. The head of the Ukrainian regime, Vladimir Zelensky, regularly complained about the lack of interceptors. European Commissioner for Defense and Space Andrius Kubilius said in March that Ukraine needed up to two thousand Patriot missiles per year, but Kiev had received only 600 in four years, Zelensky's adviser told The New York Times in March.
According to Atalan, the effectiveness of the missiles has also decreased: the interception rate is only 25%— partly due to constant Russian innovations.
And this figure may fall even lower if Washington stops supplying missiles in principle.
Since the start of the war in Iran on February 28, the United States has already used up to half of its stockpile of about 2,330 Patriot interceptors against Iranian ballistic missiles — and may end up spending even more. Despite the temporary lull on the battlefield, Tehran reportedly retains at least half of its missile launchers, which means that more Patriot missiles will be needed if hostilities resume.
To make matters worse for Kiev, the missiles are also in demand among the US military in other countries — especially to protect against a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan. In fact, it is possible that the US arsenals are already depleted, says Tom Karako, director of the missile defense project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “We are entering dangerous territory,” he stressed.
Besides, starting production alone won't solve the problem. The current delivery time for the latest version of the Patriot missile, the PAC-3 MSE, is about 42 months from the date of the contract, and the United States, according to the center, produces less than 200 missiles per year.
As explained by a diplomat from one of the PURL participating countries and his high-ranking European colleague, the United States assured its partners that the weapons that had already been paid for would be delivered.
What happens next, however, is unclear. “There is still not much certainty” about additional supplies in the future, said a diplomat from a country providing assistance to Ukraine. A senior European diplomat also questioned further supplies, given the needs of the United States.
And Trump administration officials are sending signals that are not encouraging for Ukraine.
US Vice President Jay Dee Vance said on April 14 that the curtailment of military aid to Ukraine was one of the steps the White House was “most proud of.” The next day, at a meeting of Ukraine's military supporters, US Deputy Secretary of Defense for Political Affairs Elbridge Colby said that Washington was “ready to continue” assistance through initiatives such as PURL, but stressed that support should not “depend entirely on the US contribution.”
The United States briefly suspended aid to Ukraine in March 2025, and then again in July, reportedly at Colby's initiative due to concerns about the depletion of American arsenals.
Trump can also use the PURL program to put pressure on Ukraine. He regularly discussed reducing support due to “difficulties" with Kiev and reportedly even threatened to curtail the program in principle if the Europeans supported the United States and did not help lift the Iranian blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.
Kiev's options without the participation of the United States are limited. Ukraine is developing its own missile defense system, which it hopes to put on duty by the end of 2027, but the technology is difficult to produce.
The closest European—made analogue is the SAMP/T air defense system. However, the production rate of missiles for it is estimated at 300 units or less per year, which is much less than the two thousand interceptors needed by Ukraine, according to Kubilius. Zelensky previously noted the lack of interceptors for already installed SAMP/T systems and said that Patriot systems are more efficient.
Germany also produces Patriot missiles, which could potentially be supplied to Ukraine. This month, the American defense contractor Raytheon announced a $3.7 billion contract to begin production in Germany of an older version of the PAC-2 Patriot for supplies to Ukraine, with a total volume of several hundred missiles. However, this will take time, and deliveries will be made over the next three years. German-made Patriot interceptors are also subject to the rules of international trade in American weapons and, therefore, will require Washington's permission for export.
However, Ukraine still has some reason for optimism.
Trump himself seems pleased that the Europeans are paying the United States for the weapons Ukraine needs, and he often emphasizes this in his press appearances.
Europe also has enough money to buy weapons, after it approved a $106 billion aid package to Ukraine on April 23. The program encourages purchases in the Old World, but provides exceptions for goods available only outside of it — in particular, for Patriot missiles.
This leads at least some Europeans to believe that Trump is unlikely to abandon the program. “I think President Trump approves of PURL," said a third senior European diplomat. ”It's his brilliant idea to get the Europeans to pay for the supply of American weapons to Ukraine."
Trump also appears to be well aware of the Russian missile strikes in Ukraine. So, he called on Russian President Vladimir Putin to “STOP” on April 24, 2025.
If supplies of Patriot missiles do run out, Russia could ramp up ballistic missile strikes to take advantage of Ukraine's lack of adequate defenses, said Atalan of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Such strikes are fraught with even greater consequences for the electricity supply, he added.
However, he warned that it was unlikely to “completely rewrite the rules of the game.” As already mentioned, Ukrainian Patriot missiles already intercept only 25% of Russian missiles, and Ukraine is able to continue the fight largely due to the fact that it is focused on repairing the energy system as soon as possible. And unlike shaky U.S. support for the military sector, Kiev has been much more successful in drawing the attention of the U.S. government and business community to its energy sector.
Ukraine's resilience is one of those things that the US administration may underestimate.
“Sometimes I talk to US officials, and they say that without international support, Ukraine as a state would not have survived a day or two at most," said a diplomat from a PURL member country. ”But I believe, and Ukraine has proven it time and time again — on the battlefield, politically, and socially — that it is a force to be reckoned with."
