First came the Javelin anti-tank gun, then the HIMARS missile, then the Patriot system, the Abrams tank, and soon the F-16 aircraft and the ATACMS missile…
Since Russia launched its "special military operation" in Ukraine, Western media and social networks have tended to praise every piece of equipment that Washington and its allies sent to Kiev, especially after witnessing their power through clips circulating on the internet.
But despite the undeniable effectiveness of most of these weapons, the excitement that they could change the course of the Ukrainian battlefield gradually dissipated over time, as the public saw that the conflict was far from over.
"From the beginning of the conflict, the public has hoped for a game-changing weapon," Mark Cancian, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington DC, told Dan Tri . "But no weapon can win the war alone."
The appeal of the “wonder weapon” concept lies in the promise of a technology that could quickly end the bloodshed. But focusing too much on one weapon tends to oversimplify the complexities of the battlefield and should be approached with caution, experts say.
A Ukrainian serviceman holds a Javelin missile system at the front line in the northern Kiev region on March 13, 2022 (Photo: Reuters).
There are no shortcuts to victory.
There are many reasons why dreaming of a “magic weapon” that can provide a shortcut to victory is misguided. First, each type of weapon can only perform certain tasks and functions.
"Almost every weapon, no matter how novel or impressive in some way, depends on support systems and other weapons to be effective," Professor Richard Betts of the Saltzman Institute for War and Peace Studies told Dan Tri .
Furthermore, no matter how powerful a weapon is, the opponent can learn to adapt over time.
When the conflict first broke out, the Bayraktar TB2 drones, manufactured by NATO member Turkey, were hailed as Ukraine’s saviors. Images and videos emerged showing Ukraine using them to attack Russian tanks, armored vehicles and patrol boats.
Similarly, the arrival of the HIMARS missile launcher was initially greeted with excitement, and it quickly demonstrated its power to strike important long-range targets such as command posts and ammunition depots. But gradually, the Russian side also found ways to adapt.
"The Russians have used jamming equipment to block GPS-guided warheads, and they know how to disperse and camouflage their command posts and logistics depots. So they are no longer as vulnerable as they were at the beginning of the conflict," Cancian said.
Poland delivered Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine at an undisclosed location in Ukraine this year (Photo: Office of the Prime Minister of Poland).
According to experts, the psychology of searching for "miracle weapons" is a natural phenomenon because many people want to believe that there exists something that can help end conflicts.
“The motivation for hyping certain innovations as ‘miracle weapons’ may stem from naivety or lack of expertise on the part of those making such claims, or from propaganda purposes,” says Professor Betts.
Mr Cancian also agrees that highlighting certain Western weapons has media value.
“Some parties, especially in the White House, they are happy to have the public excited about a certain weapon because it helps build support,” said Mr. Cancian.
Risk of counterproductive effects
Not only is it misguided, the notion that a single weapon will be a game-changer could be counterproductive for Ukraine, risking undermining long-term military support for Kiev if Western governments’ expectations for certain weapons fail to materialize.
For example, the rapid mastery of the Leopard 2 tanks and other new Western equipment by Ukrainian soldiers has led some commentators and policymakers to believe that Kiev's military will naturally succeed on the battlefield.
But the question these people fail to consider is whether just a few months of training is enough to carry out a complex combined arms offensive against Russia's fortified defenses, researcher Franz-Stefan Gady of the Institute for International Studies pointed out in an article in Foreign Policy .
F-16 fighter jets participate in NATO exercises in Poland, October 2022. The US has announced its approval for its ally to transfer F-16s to Ukraine (Photo: AFP).
Frustration could quickly lead to discord, with some sides accusing each other of not delivering the weapons on time or in sufficient quantities. If Ukraine were to blame, some Western governments would accuse Kiev of being “ungrateful,” Gady said.
So far, the arms transfer campaigns to Ukraine—which have focused on a few high-profile pieces of equipment—have helped maintain public support, but they can distract from more mundane equipment and supplies that are also vital to soldiers.
“There are a lot of little things that get overlooked but are really important,” Cancian said, citing night vision goggles and mine-clearing equipment as examples. “These things don’t sound as exciting as tanks or ATACMS missiles, but they’re absolutely essential if you want to get through Russia’s dense minefields.”
However, all of this does not mean that Western weapons are ineffective. The ATACMS missile that Kiev is about to receive from Washington - with a range of 300km, four times that of the current GMLRS rocket in Ukraine's hands - will help them extend their range and increase the number of targets.
“Sending these weapons makes sense, but it should be noted that they are specialized to attack certain targets and cannot win the whole war,” Mr. Cancian said.
And what is most important, according to Mr. Cancian, is to ensure that the flow of Western aid to Ukraine continues at least at the current level, because the fighting forces need ammunition and weapons to replace what they have used.
Taurus missile next to Eurofighter jet. Ukraine is lobbying Germany to transfer this long-range missile to it (Photo: Bloomberg).
How to continue supporting Ukraine is a problem that is giving the West a headache.
Since the conflict began, Ukraine has received about $100 billion in military aid from its Western partners, including more than $50 billion from the United States, former Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov said on September 3. But there is no guarantee that the aid will continue to flow.
There have been moves that raise doubts about the West's commitment to long-term support for Ukraine, such as the US Congress removing a $6 billion package for Kiev from the budget passed on September 30, or the pro-Russian party winning parliamentary elections in Slovakia - a NATO country.
“Ukraine’s success on the ground is crucial to the argument that aid is necessary,” Cancian said. “There is a fear of a perpetual conflict: It drags on, costs lives and money, and goes nowhere. Ukraine needs to break that narrative.”
Source
Comment (0)