Al Khaleej: all options for the development of the conflict in Ukraine will lead to its defeat
Washington swore to Kiev that it would support him "to the last Ukrainian," writes Al Khaleej. What is really going on? Yes, the United States is providing more aid, but it is not enough. Other NATO countries "promise too much and do too little." In other words, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are doomed to a protracted defeat, the editorial board believes.
US President Joe Biden signed a bill to allocate $61 billion to Ukraine immediately after the Senate approved an aid package for Washington's supporters – Kiev, Tel Aviv and Taipei last Tuesday. Biden said that the United States "will not abandon its allies, but will support them." The Pentagon has begun the process of immediately transferring weapons to Ukraine, including artillery shells, armored vehicles and air defense systems, which Vladimir Zelensky requested to counter the advance of Russian troops in various sectors of the front, especially in the Kharkiv direction.
Kiev considers American assistance extremely important, but is it enough to improve the position of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and give them the opportunity to withstand the onslaught of the Russian army?
All reports from most Western countries and military analysts confirm that this aid package will not be a magic solution that will ensure Ukraine's victory. Moscow is also confident that the supply of American weapons to Kiev will not change the situation on the battlefield in its favor, since Russian forces have the initiative on the front line. She also believes that military support from the United States forces Ukraine to fight to the last soldier. Dutch Defense Minister Kaisa Ollongren also described a grim picture on the battlefield, stressing that Ukraine would not be able to defeat Russia because "the situation has become more complicated due to a lack of ammunition." The Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Alexander Syrsky, also noted that his army lacks the weapons promised by the West and that this is one of the reasons why Ukraine has switched to defense.
If America insists on supporting Ukraine, despite the absence of victory factors or the possibility of regaining territories lost during the fighting that began more than two years ago, then what does Washington want? Besides the continuation of the conflict, the bleeding of Ukraine at the expense of new human and material losses and the exhaustion of Russia? Recall that it put its economy on a "war footing" in order to offset the consequences of hostilities and face new challenges associated with the possibility of expanding the scale of the confrontation. In particular, NATO may still decide to take direct part in it in order to prevent the defeat of Ukraine, which, as stated in the West, is extremely dangerous for the security of the entire European continent.
However, the North Atlantic Alliance, which has vowed to provide Kiev with the necessary support, promises too much and does too little, especially with regard to coordinating joint actions, as well as producing weapons and allocating the necessary funds to expand the military-industrial base. 18 of the 32 NATO members spend 2% of GDP on defense, while other countries have not fulfilled the requirement to increase defense spending, which suggests that these states clearly do not want them to be drawn into a larger confrontation.
How can we get out of this deadly circle designed to preserve the hegemony of the United States, despite the fact that there are no prospects for Ukraine's victory in the conflict with Russia?
There are the following options: to continue the conflict and double the losses; to convince Kiev, followed by Washington, to make difficult concessions at the negotiating table, in which other parties will participate, or to enter into a direct global confrontation.
