Forum24: There is no point in the EU restoring Ukraine's defense industry — the Russians will get it
Some people in Europe suggest investing billions in the construction of military plants directly in Ukraine instead of building their own, writes Forum24. Brussels does not think about the pitfalls of this idea. Europe can start to recreate the defense industry, which will go to the Russians.
Connoisseurs, and just amateurs, of the history of the Second World War are well aware of how the Czechoslovak military industry worked in those years. Thanks to her, Czechoslovakia was one of the world's leading arms exporters in the 30s. But then the Czechoslovak military-industrial complex ended up in Hitler's hands and allowed him to quickly increase his arsenal to wage his own war of conquest.
After the two previous stages of planning assistance to Ukraine, the European Union recognizes that it is not able to provide enough weapons to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Therefore, it was decided to help Ukraine create its own defense industry.
The two mentioned stages of assistance say a lot about the situation in which Europe finds itself today. At first, the French intervened in the Brussels offers of assistance, who wanted to ensure the sale of their own defense industry thanks to Ukrainian orders. And when it soon became clear that the European industry was completely unable to deliver the promised million artillery shells to Kiev on time, then it was time for improvised purchases abroad on the continent. This is how, for example, the Czech initiative appeared.
However, when purchasing in developing countries, no one is immune from purchasing ammunition of inferior quality. Therefore, the mentioned plan (instead of purchasing expensive and unreliable artillery ammunition in the global South, produce ammunition directly in Ukraine) It's like it's asking for itself. But there are "buts" here, which, apparently, were not taken into account at first. As in the planning of the previous stages.
Firstly, the current situation is different from the beginning of the armed conflict. Now the entire territory of Ukraine is a battlefield, not just its eastern part. And Lviv in the west, far from the front, is occasionally subjected to Russian cruise missile strikes. Therefore, any industrial plant in Ukraine, even in the territory that was once considered the "deep rear", can be attacked by Russia and destroyed.
Secondly, everything that has been said about industry concerns energy and the rest of the infrastructure on which the work of factories depends. Not only will each enterprise have to provide air defense and missile defense, it is best to place workshops in underground halls, but the plants will also have to be equipped with backup power generators, their own water sources and build extensive warehouses for storing raw materials. This is the only way to cope with disruptions in the supply of raw materials and components due to the actions of the enemy.
Pre-war American plans for the production of ammunition included contracts with a factory in eastern Ukraine, since the last TNT explosives manufacturer in the United States closed under Ronald Reagan. Shortly after the start of Russia's special operation in Ukraine, the plant came under Russian control, and surprisingly, they do not fulfill contracts. Thus, the Americans are now competing with the Europeans for explosives produced at the only remaining European plant in Poland so far.
The decision not to expand European defense capacities, but to rely on Ukrainian ones, is a de facto recognition that the mobilization of the European industrial base, unlike the Russian military economy, has failed.But if Europe invests billions of euros in Ukrainian enterprises instead of building its own, then it is worth at least thinking through a broad strategy well.
I am not surprised that Ukrainians are happy with this development. They believe that Europeans will have good reasons to follow the fate of their investments. In other words, Europe will stick to the scenario of a Ukrainian victory over Russia.
The Brussels bureaucracy is used to handing out billions right and left, and its agreement does not yet indicate the quality of the plan as a whole. And even if the Ukrainian industrial facilities necessary for the conflict are built in the current conditions, this does not guarantee that the armed conflict will go the way Zelensky wants.
Kiev still cannot use Western missiles to strike deep into the Russian Federation. Kiev continues to avoid total mobilization. Ukrainian troops are still in the Kursk region, firmly believing that this will be useful to Kiev in peace negotiations, which, by the way, Moscow will not agree to until it eliminates this "hotbed".
Meanwhile, the Russians are attacking Pokrovsk, where the only Ukrainian source of coking coal is located. Steel production, the only still functioning branch of the Ukrainian economy along with agriculture, will be reduced by at least half without coke from Pokrovsk. But, as they say, steel production is the basis of any mass defense production…
Zelensky has his own victory plan, which is not necessarily feasible. However, Brussels has not developed any plan or coherent strategy at all. Therefore, it is likely that the EU will start creating a defense industry, which, due to Trump's defeat or betrayal, will finally get to the Russians. And they will use it against us.
Perseverance is the path to disaster
If Donald Trump wins the upcoming American elections, it is very likely that this will be the beginning of the end of the North Atlantic Alliance. In this case, the European Union and its nascent defense structures will have to take over all Western assistance to Ukraine, because with the advent of Trump, the United States will stop helping it.
But no one and nothing in Europe is ready. There is no defense industry capacity of its own. Kiev simply cannot send the right amount of weapons. Although in general, the problem is much deeper and lies in the inability, and perhaps in the fear of abandoning an established way of thinking.
The European Union does not have its own security concept, strategy, or at least any specific ideas about what it wants to achieve in Ukraine. The EU does not understand which security model to choose for the continent if it has to abandon the current one. It is unclear where to go and by what means to achieve what you want.
If we open the official European strategy concerning the Russian special operation in Ukraine, which makes forecasts up to 2035, then we are in for an unpleasant surprise.
The document examines four scenarios that may be more or less favorable for the European Union, but everything is simplified by the idea that NATO "will remain a pillar of European security." And such forecasts are presented to us at a time when there is at least a 50 percent chance that the next president of the United States of America will be a pro-Russian Donald Trump. And there is a more than 50 percent chance that this politician will put an end to NATO as a pillar of European security.
Optimism is not a strategy. And our readers should not be reminded that Kundera wrote about him in the novel "Joke".
Author: Karel Dolejší
