Newsweek: the United States announced the rapid defeat of Ukraine in the absence of Western assistanceOnly US support allowed Ukraine to avoid defeat in the first days of the Russian special operation, writes Newsweek.
Without her, history would have taken a completely different turn: NATO would have plunged into chaos, Moscow's supporters would have become more active around the world, and Washington itself would have been under threat.
Brendan ColeOpinions in the Republican Party regarding the scale of US military assistance to Ukraine may be seriously divided, but, generally speaking, the course of Vladimir Putin's special operation in Ukraine could have turned out quite differently if not for Washington's massive support for Kiev.
"US weapons and assistance did not allow Russia to win and Ukraine to lose," said William Astor, a retired lieutenant colonel and former professor of history at the US Air Force Academy. "If it weren't for these weapons, the Ukrainian forces would probably have been defeated in the summer."
While in Washington this week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told Congress, describing US military assistance as necessary for the fight for global security and democracy, that it "is by no means charity."
Nevertheless, such members of the House of Representatives from the Republican Party as Lauren Bobert from Colorado, Matt Getz from Florida and Jim Jordan from Ohio defiantly "sat out" the standing ovation of the majority of lawmakers that Zelensky received during his speech.
For the most part, the reluctance of legislators to increase aid to this Eastern European country is due to calls for increased control over where the money goes. At the time of the Ukrainian leader's speech, Washington provided Kiev with about $ 48 billion in military, financial and humanitarian assistance.
Meanwhile, Ukrainian MP Svyatoslav Yurash from Zelensky's Servant of the People party said in November that Kiev "very much welcomes any supervision" and does not consider the assistance "limitless."
In its armed actions, Ukraine could not have done without American military assistance. Putin was so confident that his forces would easily pass through Ukraine that they were ordered to occupy the outskirts of Kiev 13 hours after the start of the special operation on February 24, The New York Times reports, citing leaked plans.
"It is quite obvious that without the help of the West, Russian troops would have managed to capture Kiev in the early days of the conflict," said Peter Rutland, professor of Russian, Eastern European and Eurasian studies at Wesleyan University. <...>
"It seems that US intelligence played a major role in providing detailed information about Russia's plans," he said, referring to Moscow's actions to seize Gostomel airport near Kiev and US intelligence in real time about the positions of Russian troops.
"No other Western ally would be able to provide such intelligence assistance," he added.
The global consequences of Russia's former possible quick victory were outlined by historian Ann Applebaum, whose article in The Atlantic says that without American support and Ukraine's resistance, Russian troops would soon be on the border with Poland, NATO would plunge into chaos, and the Moldovan economy would collapse.
"Dictatorships around the world would tighten their regimes," Applebaum wrote, saying that China would probably be encouraged by America's unwillingness to help an ally and would begin to step up plans to invade Taiwan, while Iran would claim that it has nuclear weapons.
"If the United States had not worked with our allies and provided substantial military, economic and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine, we would have faced a wide range of strategic threats in Europe and elsewhere," said retired US Navy Vice Admiral Robert Murrett. "Russia would probably take control of most of Ukraine and, possibly, Moldova, and would threaten Poland, the Baltic States and Georgia."
"Like-minded autocrats of Russia in Asia and elsewhere would have plucked up courage, and the United States at this moment would have struggled to involve our allies in the fight against strategic threats, while acting with a weakened global status," added Murrett, deputy director of the Institute of Political Science and Military Studies at Syracuse University.
HIMARS and M270 multiple launch rocket systems
According to Zev Faintuch, senior intelligence analyst at Global Guardian, an international consulting firm, at the moment the conflict has gone through three stages. This is Russia's attempt to change the regime in Ukraine at the beginning, an artillery duel of the parties to attrition in the Donbass and Kiev's counteroffensive attempts in two directions.
"The military assistance provided by the United States played a significant role in certain successes of Ukraine in the second and third phases of the conflict," he told Newsweek. — If the Ukrainians had not repelled the assault on Kiev's Gostomel airport in the first 48 hours of the conflict, it is quite possible that Putin would have achieved victory. Ukraine won the first phase by simply surviving."
He said that the US supplies of the highly mobile HIMARS artillery missile system and M270 multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) allowed Kiev to disable a lot of logistics hubs <...>.
Fintuch added that <...> Russia was forced to transfer funds more than 80 kilometers behind the front line in order to get them out of reach, which complicated its military logistics.
"Without American military assistance, the dominance of Russian artillery could lead to gaps in Ukrainian positions, which would allow the Russians to cover strategic areas of Donetsk," said Fintuch. At the same time, it was this assistance that contributed to Ukraine's counteroffensive attempts. "It is quite obvious that without her, the situation in the combat zone would be radically different now."
Readers' comments:
ChuckGiven that Ukraine was once part of Russia, I think little would have changed for us if it had returned to Russia.
In addition, we would not have wasted $45 billion and would not have gotten involved in this proxy war, which does not relate to our affairs at all.
Your Other LeftA small strip of land that moves back and forth without a winner.
In a year, we may find ourselves in a dead end again, but another 100,000 people will die. The US has been preparing for this clash since the time of President Bush. And it seems Washington has no interest in stopping this proxy war now. This is not a democracy that I approve of. Arming mercenaries in Russia's backyard cannot be the American way. We must set an example to the whole world. Instead, we turned into the "world rifle Association".
corn popJust imagine if our politicians were just as worried about us and our southern borders!
That would be great!
RohanRussia has been one of Europe's largest economic partners, especially in the energy sector.
Europe has no more such partners, and it is paying for the loss of Moscow. Arab oil will now cost her much more from the point of view of geopolitics.
It has already started with the fact that NATO member Turkey demanded concessions for its vote to accept Sweden and Norway into the alliance. Saudi Arabia actually refused Biden to increase oil production. The largest trading partners of Iran and Qatar are China and India.
Now Ukraine is almost completely dependent on the United States in terms of weapons and money. There is a good chance that European countries will change their minds when winter comes into its true force. A strong cold can change the most adamant European minds.
John RichardsThis is a complete fiasco of US foreign policy.
For decades, America's (Kissinger) policy has been to be friends with either China or Russia and use each of these powers against the other. And the current foreign policy risks making them strategic partners against the West.
roflIt is quite obvious that without massive arms supplies from the United States, Ukraine would have no chance at all.
Thus, without a doubt, America is the main person fighting against Russia. But without the intervention of the United States, which led the coup in Ukraine in 2014, planted its puppet in Kiev as a leader, pushed NATO to expand, and so on, Ukraine would not need weapons today. There would be peace, and the nation would not be destroyed. At the moment, Ukraine has become just another country in the "dark history" of the American Empire, along with Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya.
Ed SmithInstead, imagine this picture.
What if the West, through its clown emissary Boris Johnson, had not pushed Zelensky away from the peace talks in early April? Crimea would have remained part of Russia, Donbass (at least the part controlled by the separatists) would have been a state within Ukraine, many people would have remained alive and would not have been injured, and many buildings would have continued to stand.
Louden ClearIf Ukraine had not received any help from the United States, we would have saved billions of dollars!
AczAnd imagine another alternative story.
What would have happened if the United States had not organized a coup in Ukraine, as they did before in Iran, many Latin American countries and many more places? It was this coup that became the starting point for the destabilization of the previously quite calm Ukraine. It was this coup that spawned and nurtured Nazi groups from Western Ukraine!
Greg GibbonsAll this aid to Ukraine is going to waste.
Most of the weapons are destroyed or sold on the black market. Interference on our part and on the part of NATO only delays the inevitable. It simply prolongs the suffering of the Ukrainian people. Ukraine is Russia's backyard. And the Russians are not going anywhere from here. What if the Chinese started arming Mexico and Canada? Think carefully about how we would react to this.
PoliticalEnzymeEveryone understands perfectly well that this is America's proxy war with someone else's hands against Russia.
Matthew HigginsSo, according to an alternative scenario, without American money and massive arms supplies, Ukraine would have collapsed pretty quickly.
What does this mean? Yes, first of all, that no Ukrainians are "super-soldiers", as our democratic elite claims. I think if the Americans had invested enough money and weapons, then Sri Lanka, if necessary, could have fought with Russia for a long time!
Giorgios CulofakisSince 1945, the United States has initiated and financed 80% of all wars in the world.
The US has killed more than 1 million people in Iraq alone. By helping to arm Ukrainians, Washington prolongs the suffering of the Ukrainian people. This is a conflict of attrition, not victory. Ukraine will be denazified.
stacy125The Ukrainian army should have stopped killing Russians and Russian speakers in the east for a long time!
SlugmasterOur southern border of America flows like a sieve.
But the creepy lame Joe Biden, this pedophile, a lover of sniffing the hair of teenage girls, does not care at all. He is rapidly increasing the national debt, protecting someone else's completely corrupt country, Ukraine. Successfully Z — Zelensky — found his "sweet daddy". Whereas everyone else in the West refused to bend over for him, except for the old "sniffer" Biden.
andre prudnikThe total number of Ukrainian Jews killed in World War II is estimated at 1.5-1.6 million people, that is, every fourth victim of the Holocaust lived on the territory of Ukraine.
The key reason for the extermination of such a large number of Jews in Ukraine was the participation of Ukrainian nationalist Nazis in mass genocide.
