There’s no chance you’ve missed the fact that, over the past few days and weeks,
Ukraine’s western Allies have been ramping up their support.
The U.S. announced an unprecedented supply plan, which includes Bradley armored vehicles.
France vows to send AMX 10 RCs — not exactly tanks, but close enough.
Finally, Poland decided to send more than a dozen Leopard tanks, thus making an important symbolic gesture.
For the first time ever, Ukraine will have European tanks in its arsenal. So far, these are all promises and symbolic gestures,
but the changing trend is obvious.
Ukraine's allies, whopreviously provided only limited support, have suddenly become much more active.
It is very important and is worth talking about.
To begin with, let’s first recall the history of Western aid to Ukraine during the current war.
HOW THE STANCE CHANGED
Even though the stance of Western allies regarding arms supplies to Ukraine ahead of the war and during
the first weeks was never spelled out, it was rather clear: no heavy military equipment would be provided.
Javelins and grenade launchers were considered acceptable, as well as small arms, bulletproof vests, and helmets.
However, no artillery, rocket launchers, or APCst would be supplied — nothing that can’t be carried by hand.
The rationale behind the decision was clear.
Optimistic predictions suggested that Ukraine's resistance would only last a few days,
while worst-case scenarios estimated it as a matter of hours.
Reputable Western experts believed that Ukraine's defenses and government withstanding
the attack until mid-March was a long shot.
The allies were only willing to support guerrilla warfare and provide weapons that could only be used
by small groups of soldiers scattered throughout the country.
The reason for this was that the allies dreaded a repeat of the Afghanistan conflict,
with weapons falling into the hands of the Russian army.
As soon as it became clear by mid-March that Putin's blitzkrieg strategy had crumbled, an important step followed.
The delivery of old Soviet-era equipment from storage facilities in former Soviet bloc countries began.
The supplies were limited, they went slowly, the equipment was outdated and faulty, but the general statement was this:
we do supply equipment to Ukraine.
Ukrainians will stand their ground and will be able to use it.
The next stage began in April, with Australia supplying six M777 howitzers for the frontlines.
What exactly are six howitzers in the grand scheme of things with a frontline stretching for 1,500 kilometers?
Not a lot. But those were no longer old Soviet beaters and light armored vehicles, but state-of-the-art Western weaponry.
True, from a purely military standpoint, those six howitzers from Australia meant little and had almost no impact on the war.
But they prompted further arms deliveries, including 150 M777 howitzers, various types of heavy self-propelled vehicles,
and the crazy expensive Excalibur artillery shells — not something that was sitting in warehouses in the rural Czech Republic
waiting to be scrapped, but really advanced weapon systems, costing millions and tens of millions of dollars each.
Then came the turning point in terms of strategy, psychology, and politics.
The HIMARS systems and GMLRS rockets proved to be a game-changer.
They are not just any odd long-range precision weapons that decimated Russia's offensive plans at the flick of a switch,
taking down Russian warehouses one by one.
Each six-pack of these rockets comes at a staggering $600,000+.
It is the testament to a changed concept of the West's military aid to Ukraine.
This was also the case with both anti-aircraft systems and Western armored vehicles.
At every step, Ukraine's allies were faced with the same conundrum.
Initially, there was reluctance, like, "No, no, no, under no circumstances do we want to escalate,
we don't want to poke Putin, and you don't need it anyway, since you can't use or maintain it."
But as things unfolded, doubts and indecision gave way to the realization that Ukraine would stand –
it just needed that extra help.
And then someone took action and supplied more weapons to Ukraine.
And Putin still didn’t nuke the heck out of Western capitals using all this newfangled physics and unpredictable weapon trajectories.
The delivery of one tank platoon — fifteen tanks — is certainly not the numbers you’re looking for to turn the tables on your enemy.
And without proper maintenance infrastructure, they’re nothing more than a bunch of fancy toys.
However, as in all previous cases, what's important here is that a crucial decision was made:
now we are providing Ukraine with heavily armored, expensive, and complex Western technology, equipped with powerful guns.
Sure, it will be a long time before Western tanks are deployed on the Ukrainian front,
and it will be a long time before the Bradleys are used in any significant numbers.
But there will be an immediate effect as well.
First, there will be a psychological effect.
For Ukrainian soldiers in trenches, it is crucial to know that the world is poised to help, and not just with chants of solidarity.
It shows that Western countries are gradually scrapping the stuttering rhetoric of appeasing Putin and helping him save face.
It also signifies that Ukraine's allies have a grip on reality and are generally aware of what is happening on the ground.
It also has the opposite effect on Russian troops and Russian leadership.
There has been much talk about how Ukraine will soon become too much to handle and will be abandoned to Putin's mercy.
Of course, such talk is pure self-reassurance based on a deus ex machina that would lead to a miraculous turnaround.
They’ve pinned high hopes on winter in Europe, elections in the U.S., whatever, just anything that would allow them
to bide time and hope that victory will fall into their hands.
A show of support such as this, however, obviously dashes such hopes.
Second, the provision of this advanced Western technology empowers the Ukrainian army
to make better use of their current materiel.
Knowing that they will have access to a significant amount of new weapons in the near future,
they feel more confident in utilizing their current resources without fear of running out.
This is how future supplies have an immediate effect on the war.
Third, the delivery of heavy Western equipment warrants the creation of maintenance infrastructure,
either within Ukraine or in neighboring NATO member countries, with the latter being a safer option.
This includes the training of crews and technicians. With a well-established infrastructure in place,
it becomes easier to step up future deliveries and support.
We will delve into the reasons for the increased activity of the allies shortly.
However, before we do, let me tell you about a non-commercial announcement from Ilia Varlamov.
He has launched a project to assist those who have emigrated in supporting one another. Kindly pay attention.
A NON-COMMERCIAL ANNOUNCEMENT
REASONS TO STEP UP MILITARY AID
Now it is time to talk about the reasons that convinced Ukraine’s allies to suddenly ramp up their support.
The first reason is that two obvious truths have become apparent: this war will be a long one, and Ukraine can come out on top.
Which means that planning for the future has become possible.
It now makes sense to create advanced maintenance infrastructure, train specialized personnel,
and invest in the overhaul of the Ukrainian army to adapt to new types of weaponry.
Because, on the one hand, the time constraints are not as tight and there is no point anymore to only supply
the weapons for immediate use on the battlefield.
On the other hand, any politician wants to partake in a major win. Just imagine it.
A deranged dictator attacked a European country, but we were able to rebuild its army from scratch,
under heavy bombardment and missile fire, thus winning the war.
Putin’s role has changed from that of a global villain to a mere cartoonish buffoon whose Hitleresque mustache keeps falling off.
He's not having much success, and the entire thing is somehow very inconvenient.
All the rhetoric of victory has long been replaced by whining and fingerpointing efforts to explain away the latest failure.
The second reason is that the Western allies have invested heavily in Ukraine, and while it may seem that the more is spent,
the less is left, in reality, the more you spend, the more invested you become in the outcome.
In addition to the equipment that is now being shipped to Ukraine, the U.S. and Europe are increasing
their capacity to create more weapons and ammunition.
The Western world, following a hiatus after the end of the Cold War, is now rearming itself.
Because suddenly it turned out that it was not prepared for a large-scale war.
The course for militarization has been set and there is no turning back from it.
The third reason is that Russia is showing signs of weakening.
After starting the war as a blitzkrieg, after firing tens of thousands of shells and hundreds of missiles daily,
after squandering expensive ammunition disregarding the cost, Russia has already lost more equipment
in the first months of the war than the entire arsenals of a couple of large European countries combined,
and is now facing a shortage of resources.
According to CNN sources, Russia has cut down on the intensity of its artillery shelling on certain fronts, by as much as 75 percent.
The shortage of resources — and I don't mean just underwear and armor vests here,
but the backbone of warfare, the artillery — is evident.
Suffice it to recall the recent appeal of the Wagner mercenaries to General Valery Gerasimov.
To the commander of the General Staff:
You (expletive), we've got no shells, the guys are dying out there for us, and we're sitting here of no help.
We need shells, we should be shooting the (expletive) out of them.
Here, near Bakhmut, we are fighting against the whole Ukrainian army.
Where are you? Help us, please. Where are you when our guys are dying?
For some time, the war has been in a state of equilibrium in terms of resources,
and the offensives have stalled as both sides are now evenly matched.
However, Russia is now obviously running out of resources, making it the perfect opportunity for Ukraine
to strike back and gain an upper hand.
Reason number four, though not as important as the others, is the following:
war is a perfect testing ground and a perfect advertisement platform for weapons.
This war showed that many Western weapons, specifically Panzerhaubitze, develop major issues during intensive fire.
Their barrels wear out faster than expected, and their electronic components begin to malfunction.
On the other hand, this war has been a boon for Turkish Bayraktars, which played a vital role in the early stages,
and for the HIMARS with GMLRS missiles, which gave Ukraine a strategic edge.
The Western military, which has been weakening and underfunded in recent decades, is now experiencing a resurgence.
True, significant investment will be needed to revive the old and develop new technologies.
But the success of certain weapons and the obvious militarization of Europe will pay off.
Additionally, there is a fundamental issue at play.
It hasn't come easy, but Russia has eventually proved that it cannot be negotiated with.
SELF-DISCREDITATION. NO MORE COMPROMISES
Over the course of these 20 years, in an informational autocracy mired in non-existent entities,
the Russian political elite has grown accustomed to empty gabfests.
In the words of a United Russia deputy, selling wolf tickets unrestrained.
Words spewed out by public state officials no longer serve to convey information,
and are instead used to win favors, make headlines, and senselessly fawn on higher-ups.
That last bit is particularly important.
By donning a clown's cap and playing the fool, you not only make the headlines and gain the attention of his majesty —
you’re also proving your allegiance.
Your verbal exhibitionism shows that you have no concerns for the future or even your own reputation
and not trying to win political scores.
You’re showing that you don’t strive to be anything other than a court jester,
who only lives for as long as the king is in a good mood, and will follow him to the grave.
In many civilizations, there was an important institution of court eunuchs.
They served as advisors, oversaw harems, and sometimes even ruled on behalf of their lord.
There is a reason why eunuchs were entrusted with so much power. Their ambitions were limited.
A eunuch can’t start a dynasty, can’t have an affair with a woman from your harem, and will never doubt your birthright.
He is despised by the political elite and can’t benefit from a coup.
A eunuch can be entrusted with as much power and authority as you need without the fear of it being turned against you.
No wonder talking gibberish has become a commonplace among the officials in 2012
since the sixth convocation of the State Duma was elected.
It was then, after the protests and after the creation of the loyal “systemic opposition” that headlines like
“a deputy has proposed” were invented as a way to display unconditional loyalty.
It seemed that members of the parliament had nothing else to do but to annoy news editors with insanity like,
“A deputy has proposed to ban kittens, force-feed children with steamed onions, and bring back the witch hunts.”
It was self-mutilation of sorts. Like, you have nothing to fear from me m’lord, I have no voters,
I will never be allowed to speak out at a rally, people don’t want to even sit near me, and so I’m all yours.
Over the course of 10 years, it has evolved into a whole new political culture.
Probably only those who deal with finances, the “systemic liberals,” had the privilege to not play the fool.
All the other pro-government politicians spat out nothing but drivel.
A year of warfare turned the mounting abnormality in the public field into an outbreak of collective madness.
Because when there is a constant search for enemies, traitors, saboteurs, and scapegoats for the failed war,
the level of loyalty you’re expected to show skyrockets. One cannot overdo self-humiliation and dehumanization.
Ask Dmitry Medvedev, for one. There’s no limit you can stoop to. But this is what we see.
Those who lived in Russia and for years observed its political regime.
We know what Dmitry Medvedev is worth, and we understand that he lives in constant fear and terror.
We know that while he is threatening the world with his paper sword, the people around him are being purged and imprisoned.
There, just recently, on December 1, the Magomedov brothers, businessmen who were close to Medvedev
(he even awarded them medals when he was president) were sentenced to 18 and 19 years in prison.
We realize that a man who once was a living answer to the question “Who but Putin?”
cannot just settle at the normal level of self-humiliation. He must be outstripping everyone else by a country mile.
We know that his words shouldn't be taken seriously, as they are nothing more than him trying to save his own skin.
But how does the Pentagon see it? How do American politicians see it?
How do European politicians see it?
A former president, a member of the Security Council, a man with the best career in politics imaginable does nothing
but threaten the U.S. every single day.
Every day, they gain information from Russia, in which people labeled as deputies, ministers,
and governors, people of power and authority, are threatening the entire Western world and especially the U.S.
with an armageddon.
They must be shocked.
The only conclusion that American politicians can make is this:
we’re dealing with a bunch of nutcases who do not take responsibility for their words and actions.
Negotiating with these madmen is not an option. Either they lose in Ukraine, or they become a pain in the neck for the entire world.
For now, they are Ukraine’s problem, and Ukraine seems to be handling it just right.
And we must do all in our power to help their cause.
Those are not expenses — we’re investing in global security as well as our own.
What is especially hilarious is that the very people who every day threaten the U.S. put some hopes on the G.O.P. politicians.
The very politicians who build their careers on patriotic slogans and love national security more than they do Jesus.
And they do love Jesus.
And they’re supposed to refuse to help Ukraine after threats to send a shipload of missiles to the American shores.
Of course, members of the Russian establishment don’t really mean a word they say.
All that humbug has always been intended only for domestic consumption,
but by other members of the power vertical.
Except the situation has now changed, and their words are heard by the people whom they unwillingly threatened.
And of course, whenever there is a discussion in the West about helping Ukraine,
the common argument is this: Ukraine is fighting madmen.
Our government has become too corrupt and too accustomed to a disconnect between words and actions.
They believe they can threaten NATO countries with nuclear annihilation from the comfort of their own palace in France.
The current leaders in Russia are relatively old guys, but their attitude toward language is immature
and attention-seeking at best.
Things were going so well for them when they could blame the West for everything,
when they could even achieve final victory over it without leaving the TV screen. And then the war started.
Now, the West is finally paying attention, as they have instigated the bloodiest conflict in Europe since World War II,
and, being the ones who call the shots, they bear full responsibility for it.
The west has come to realize that it is impossible to communicate with these people using words,
as any attempt at verbal negotiation would be viewed as a chink in the armor.
There are no options for a peaceful resolution — Ukraine must win this war.
The rhetoric of Russian officials has long sought to be portrayed as bullies and terrorists.
They have achieved their goal. NATO, which did not even list Russia as a global threat just a year ago,
now takes it all too seriously.
We all know how one should deal with bullies who don’t respond to words,
and the recent increase in military aid to Ukraine is a testimony of just that.
See you tomorrow.