Yesterday, we found out or, rather, got confirmation that NATO countries are starting to supply battle tanks to Ukraine.
Germany announced the shipments of the first company of Leopard tanks and authorized the allies to provide their equipment.
The U.S. vowed to supply M1 Abrams tanks.
So far we are only talking about roughly one hundred Leopard tanks combined from all the allies.
The first batch of the Abrams, according to the U.S., will include 31 such vehicles.
We have already discussed the impact of such a decision amid the announcement of the new military aid package.
Let’s not go into details now. Let’s just mention the key points and move on to the main topic of this video.
Before we start, I’d like to remind you that your kind monthly donations on Patreon make a huge difference.
Ukraine’s switch to fundamentally new equipment, such as the Abrams, the Leopards, the Challengers,
and apparently in the future the French Leclercs, even fast-tracked to an emergency mode, takes months.
We won’t see the Leopards on the battlefield before the end of spring.
And, if we’re lucky, the Abrams will be combat-ready in summer at best, since they come with a sophisticated power unit
and are really sensitive to maintenance infrastructure.
And let’s hope there are enough tanks and enough trained personnel to make a real difference on the battlefield,
at least this year.
Unlike HIMARS systems, battle tanks won’t swing the momentum right away.
The role of tanks is quite different, and the numbers required are very different, too.
Right now there are two things that matter.
First, since Ukraine is backed up by the promised allied help, it has much more wiggle room in terms of using
its current military capabilities, facing no risk of running out.
Second, building the infrastructure for the new tanks will be tough.
But once completed, it will fix all the issues regarding the mass supply of the Ukrainian army with the Western
tanks that the allies have a lot of.
They will no longer need to scavenge foreign warehouses for Soviet military scrap.
Building the infrastructure is something you must do only once, but it makes things way much easier afterward.
And lastly, of course, that’s a direct signal to Vladimir Putin and his cronies that there is no way they are winning this war.
It is impossible to fight against such resources that Ukraine’s allies can build up.
That the Kremlin is only left to choose between more honorable or less honorable surrender.
Today we are going to talk about Putin’s unbelievable and almost impossible achievements in just one year.
We’ll discuss what Putin has done for Ukraine and for its army.
REARMAMENT
Let’s think about it.
What would be the chance to see the Abrams with Ukrainian flags in times of peace, even bracketing the “just do not p*ss
that evil Putin” factor?
Independent Ukraine is carrying out successful public administration reforms,
curbing corruption to the level of its EU neighbors, and completing its military reform.
With such a success in economic and government reforms, with simplified legislation, the deregulation,
the property ownership regulation, and a renewed judiciary that can ensure property rights,
it is guaranteed that investments wouldn’t take long, investments that lead to an excess of funds needed
to reequip the army worth billions of dollars.
Long story short, if we took a look at other Eastern European countries,
the best option for Ukraine would be to get the Abrams, like, in 15 years.
Given that they dump the “one step forward, three steps back” principle in the reform implementation.
Which isn’t the simplest of tasks for our country.
And the complete switch to the Western equipment couldn’t even be projected in the future.
Take a look at the countries of the former Socialist Bloc.
Following the reforms, they joined NATO more than two decades ago but still continue using mostly Soviet equipment.
Switching to fundamentally new military equipment is nothing like switching from an old Ford to a new Tesla.
First, it’s way too expensive. The nominal price of a single Abrams is $10 mln, for starters.
But you need to build significant infrastructure for its maintenance, train technicians and tank crews,
purchase additional equipment custom-designed for the Abrams, and maintain the spare parts reserves.
Long story short, everything the Soviet Union built to accommodate its tanks throughout its history needs to be done from scratch.
PUSHBACK TO THE KREMLIN’S BLUFF
Bluffing is what the Kremlin’s elders are remarkably effective at.
All the slogans we heard at the outbreak of the war became a reality within a year.
They claimed NATO was expanding and stepping up their armaments, whereas NATO didn’t give a damn and,
instead, was busy with global warming.
But now NATO almost reaches St. Petersburg, is rethinking its strategies, ramping up its military capabilities,
and redeploying extra manpower to Europe.
They claimed the West was pumping weapons into Ukraine when the West would not risk giving anything more lethal
than a flak vest so as not to provoke Putin.
But now they really are.
True, everyone supporting Ukraine has been disgruntled all year, since the decisions are made slowly
and the supplies are insufficient.
Every time Olaf Scholz started saying that “escalation is unacceptable” many viewers felt like smashing their TV sets.
European leaders seemed to be simply doing their best to prove to Putin there was no need to take them into account,
that they were punching bags.
But let’s look at it from their perspective.
From the point of view of the people who’ve built their political careers in supremely prosperous democracies.
Countries where the voters have absolutely no need for revolutionary changes or charismatic leaders.
Countries where everything works well, kind of, and politicians are there not to build anything new but to maintain what they have.
From the very outset of their political careers, people like Olaf Scholz could spend years discussing paint jobs
for their offices with no decision made, and continuous discussions wouldn’t have harmed anyway.
Such people would get into politics to address the effects of sugar consumption on life expectancy
or ensure an inclusive school environment.
The last thing they could imagine would be becoming wartime leaders.
From our perspective, Europe’s speed when it comes to supporting Ukraine could only be compared
to the rate at which Bruce Willis’ mane grows.
However, from their point of view, from the perspective of their political models, to go such a long way — from helmets, flak vests,
and deep concerns to heavy tanks — that's lightspeed, going to warp.
They have made more decisions this year than they did in the past two decades.
Only two biological entities, the coronavirus and Vladimir Putin, managed to force
all those quiet and unobtrusive bureaucrats to make tough decisions against the clock.
How did Putin manage that?
By doing lots of serious things. His irresponsible banter, for one.
Threats are a very important technique in negotiation. It’s not humanity that came up with this trick.
In the wild, it’s much more efficient to evolve a menacing appearance and coloring,
showing that you’re not to be messed with instead of expending energy on every encounter.
But, as with any effective and attractive tool, you’d better not get carried away with threats.
Because if you constantly promise terrible punishment or constantly raise the level of threats without ever fulfilling them,
even the most careful and cowardly opponent will realize that you are bluffing. And that’s it. Your words won’t matter anymore.
You can find that in any parenting book. Nothing undermines the authority of the parent more than making empty threats.
If you’re doing that, you’re just losing the leverage.
Later, you may be screaming at the top of your lungs, threatening to leave the child without an iPad for a week,
but they know it’s going to be fine again in ten minutes.
Even rugrats can call your bluff, let alone American presidents or German chancellors.
It seems that no one before has mentioned nuclear weapons as many times as the Russian officials over the past year.
No one has threatened European countries and NATO members that often. No one has drawn so many “red lines.”
Both Ukraine and NATO are issued a regular weekly “final” warning. None of those threats were fulfilled.
Not even close. Including the very first one during Putin's February 24 address
when he threatened an armageddon for any interference in the war.
Putin and his regime have made it impossible to take their words seriously.
They’ve gotten used to a disconnect between their words and actions.
They have long believed that words are better the louder they sound in a headline.
And now they can no longer outscream themselves. They have maxed out on threats with no further action.
A crook can put up a front of being a fanatic all he wants. But everyone has figured out by now that he’s a crook.
The crook wants to live in a palace, but he doesn’t want to die in a nuclear war.
Putin won’t start a war with NATO and won’t use a nuclear bomb in the heart of Europe.
He may be a fool, but he isn’t that dumb. He knows where he can get his a*s beaten.
TIME TO RAISE THE STAKES
It’s become obvious. No matter how long, expensive, or difficult Ukraine’s victory may be, no matter the political costs,
turning the war into a protracted or endless one costs much more.
The aid the Western allies are providing Ukraine with does look impressive. It’s worth billions of dollars.
But, firstly, compared to the economies of the countries providing this essential aid,
such money is negligible and affordable.
Secondly, 11 months into this war, Putin has already damaged the world economy and led to trillions
of dollars in losses for a decade ahead.
By destroying supply chains and increasing poverty and political instability in the poorest countries.
By forcing the rebuild of the European industry and utility infrastructure to accommodate new fuels.
Finally, by inflicting increasing damage daily as the war in Ukraine drags on and thus multiplying the amount needed for restoration.
Compared to the damage the war deals to the world economy daily, supplying tanks and air defense systems
or even fully re-arming the Ukrainian army is like tipping a delivery driver, something you won’t give a second thought to.
Ending the war, total de-occupation of Ukraine, and the beginning of a rebuild would provide such a jolt to global economy,
it would invigorate global supply chains, and the costs would pay off tenfold.
Aiding Ukraine isn’t about spending money.
These are investments made in the future to help the world get back to normal. They are profitable by default.
That brings us back to COVID, by the way.
There was never such a dire call for spending in the history of humanity in such a short time as that in the spring of 2020.
It proved to be the best return on investments ever.
The very moment the problem subsided, the world economy broke through the stone and skyrocketed.
There was growth in industries that hadn’t seen it for 20 years.
Here is the full picture we see. Systematic supplies of state-of-the-art powerful weapons to the Ukrainian army
are bringing the war closer to an end.
It is profitable for all the parties involved and carries no risks, since all the risks are coming from the source,
which has proved over again to be a blabbermouth, and not a kamikaze.
Any delays or limitations imposed on those supplies would cost so dearly, we couldn’t let that happen.
The faster the hopes of Russia’s top brass to achieve victory are dashed, the faster there will be political changes in Russia.
That means that investing into warfare is investing into war ending outside the battlefield.
Looking at our previous video, it is getting harder to maintain the belief that Putin will be able to get away with it again,
since Ukraine is getting stronger by the day.
Since the Ukrainian rear is all of the Western world, with all its economic and military power.
Ukrainian allies are in a position when it pays to raise the stakes. The more you escalate, the shorter the war gets.
That means that stakes will continue to grow, and Ukraine will continue to get stronger.
Over the past 11 months, Putin has done more to beef up Ukrainian military power than it could have achieved
in 20 years in the best-case scenario.
He dreamt of going down in history as the conqueror of lands. He is in the books alright, just as a different character.
See you tomorrow!