SLIGHTLY OVER a year has passed since Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. The dispute traces its origins back to 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea and declared the establishment of the Donetsk People’s Republic and Luhansk People’s Republic in Ukraine, under the guise of liberating both regions’ Russian-speaking majority. The ongoing war is the culmination of eight years worth of escalating conflict between Russian-backed separatists and the Ukrainian government. Yet, despite having only a fraction of Russia’s military spending, personnel, and equipment, Ukraine has mounted a tenacious resistance, holding its ground and even managing to retake significant chunks of territory. A major driving force behind such unfaltering resistance is the outpour of military aid from foreign countries to Ukraine—the recent intensification of which holds heavy tactical and diplomatic implications for the war ahead. 

The status quo

   Currently, the United States is the single largest provider of military aid to Ukraine, having committed $27.4 billion[1] and pledged a further $3.75 billion in January, 2023[2]. In addition to equipment for individual soldiers such as body armor, helmets, and rifles, the United States has donated dozens of howitzers—devastating artillery platforms useful for hitting targets at long range. The country has also contributed a host of sophisticated missile systems like the Javelin and Stinger—the former specialized for destroying tanks and the latter for shooting down enemy aircrafts[3]. Moreover, compact switchblade suicide drones provide Ukrainian forces with lightning-strike capabilities wherever they go, while combat-tested M1A2 Abrams[4] tanks enable them to take on even the heaviest armored vehicles in the Russian arsenal. 

   The second largest benefactor is the United Kingdom, which has donated £2.3 billion worth of equipment throughout 2022, with a promise to match that amount in 2023. Similar to the United States, the United Kingdom has provided Ukrainian forces Next generation Light Anti-tank Weapons (NLAW)[5], drones, and Challenger 2[6] tanks. Instead of howitzers, the United Kingdom has sent M270 multiple-launch rocket systems, a long-range, precision-strike weapon with the capability to surgically knock out Russian artillery emplacements. Other contributions include Starstreak air defense missiles and Mastiff armored patrol vehicles, both of which provide Ukrainian ground troops with greater protection against airborne and land-based threats alike. Aid from the United Kingdom is supplemented by that from other European countries through the European Peace Facility (EPF) fund, which has facilitated the transfer of €3.6 billion worth of weapons and military infrastructure to Ukraine. 

Motivations for military aid

   The motivations of foreign arms donors are not entirely altruistic in nature; behind the flowery appeals to democracy and human rights lie numerous geopolitical and military objectives. The first is to weaken Russia’s military strength by backing Ukraine. An intense military campaign away from home not only consumes Russia’s existing arms supply but also enervates its economy and domestic industry the longer it goes on. A prolonged conflict would significantly ease the threat posed by Russia to the United States and its allies, leaving them free to divert resources towards keeping China’s rise in check; U.S. President Joe Biden has been a strong advocate for such tactic since the beginning of his presidency, emphasizing the need to “park Russia” in order to concentrate more on China[7]. 

   Another motivating factor is the war’s utility in assessing Russia’s military capabilities, as well as the effectiveness of donor countries’ own weapons. The reciprocal sharing of intelligence with Ukraine allows donors to receive the latest reports on Russian military equipment, tactics, and troop formations, which provide them with a far clearer picture of Russia’s true capabilities than what had been available from the decades of speculation since the Cold War; this process would be further facilitated through analysis of Russian hardware captured by the Ukrainians, such as the top-of-the-line T-90M[8] tank[9]. And since many of the donor countries’ own weapons are unproven in combat, sending them to battle is an invaluable opportunity to test out and improve them based on feedback from Ukrainian troops. 

How military aid has impacted the war

   Foreign military aid has been instrumental in sustaining Ukraine’s war effort, which has soldiered on for over a year with no sign of wavering. Donated artillery and anti-tank weapons have proven immensely effective at repelling Russian land forces, with American and European officials estimating 200,000 Russian soldiers killed as of February, 2023[10]; Russian casualties have been so severe that Putin ordered a significant increase in military personnel back in December, 2022. Hit-and-run attacks using portable anti-tank missiles or precise artillery strikes have dealt devastating losses to Russian mechanized infantry formations, causing the destruction, incapacitation, or capture of over 1,500 tanks—equivalent to 40% of Russia’s pre-war fleet[11]. Russia’s army is now at a standstill, failing its initial objective of taking Kyiv back in April, 2022 and conceding large swathes of territory in the Kharkiv region to the Ukrainians months after[12]. 

   The key to Ukrainian successes on the ground lies in Russia’s failure to establish air superiority over Ukraine’s sky. Over 257 Russian aircrafts have been lost to Ukraine’s air force and ground-based air defenses, with a significant chunk of the latter consisting of foreign-supplied Stinger and Starstreak missiles[13]; among the downed aircrafts are dozens of the Kremlin’s most sophisticated machines such as Sukhoi Su-34[14] fighter-bombers, Su-35S[15] air dominance fighters, and Kamov Ka-52[16] attack helicopters. Neutralizing Ukraine’s air defenses would have been imperative in providing Russian ground forces with persistent air coverage and a bird's-eye view from above. By depriving the Russians of such protection, foreign air defense systems have considerably evened the playing field for Ukrainian defenders—enabling them to effectively employ guerilla tactics without the threat of fire from overwhelming Russian air power. 

Military aid and diplomatic relations

   In addition to the military implications, there has been intense diplomatic fallout over foreign arms supply to Ukraine. Russia’s official response was predictably aggressive, with President Putin equating the West’s provision of weapons to direct participation in the war against Russia[3], even going as far as to threaten the use of nuclear weapons. Western countries have defended their position by framing their objectives as defending Ukraine’s democracy and principles outlined by the United Nations Charter[17]. Member states of the Group of Seven (G7)[18] have proposed a preliminary peace deal calling for Ukraine to retain all its territory, and for Russia to pay war reparations, though its pro-Ukrainian terms are highly unlikely to appease Russia in reality. 

   On top of harsh diplomatic statements, Russia is ramping up military cooperation with Belarus for a potential joint operation against Ukraine. This comes as no surprise as Belarus has been Russia’s steadfast ally amid overwhelming international condemnation—having allowed Russia to launch missiles from its territory since the inception of the war[19]. Over 9,000 Russian soldiers and a number of MiG-31 jet interceptors have been deployed to Belarus starting in late 2022—a move that Belarusian President Lukashenko claims is a result of Western provocations[20]. Ukraine has struck back with sanctions on 182 Russian and Belarusian firms, blocking their assets in Ukraine and repurposing their properties for Ukraine’s defense[12]. Ukraine has also submitted a fast-track application to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO); Article 5 of the organization’s foundational North Atlantic Treaty would deem an attack on any member state as an attack on all others—paving the way for direct military intervention from the United States and 29 other NATO members[21]. Although NATO officials have endorsed arms supply to Ukraine along with the potential for Ukrainian membership, the acceptance of Ukraine’s bid remains in limbo[22]. 

Controversies of military aid

   Despite a general sense of goodwill toward their contributions to Ukraine’s defense, foreign arms donations are not without their controversies. The most notable criticism is that arming Ukraine may lead to the uncontrollable escalation of warfare. Long-range weapons sent to Ukraine hold the potential to exacerbate paranoia among Russian officials over threats to their mainland, leading to increasingly aggressive tactics to the detriment of Ukrainian citizens. A precedent for such a response already exists, with transfers of long-ranged High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) to Ukraine having prompted renewed Russian missile strikes on Kyiv after a brief period of respite[23]. Russia is also beginning to target supply lines to Ukraine to curtail the flow of foreign arms; personnel from non-belligerent countries being caught up and harmed in such attacks could become the seed for a third party entering the dispute, and the conflict spreading beyond Ukraine’s borders. 

   Furthermore, there remains the ever-present concern of donated weapons falling into the wrong hands. The sheer amount of weapons being sent, along with the Ukrainian armed forces’ prioritization of combat over managing donations, renders the covert smuggling of equipment an extremely real possibility. Ukraine itself has long been a hub of illicit arms trade; surplus weapons in the country found their way to various war zones abroad following the Soviet Union’s downfall, while up to 300,000 firearms were lost during Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea[19]. Precedents are aplenty outside of Ukraine, with American arms destined for Saudi Arabia having been found in use by Al-Qaeda and thousands of weapons sent to Yugoslavia still being smuggled throughout Europe[21]. 

The future of weapons to Ukraine

   As of now, winding down military aid to Ukraine does not appear to be on the table for donor countries. Multiple world leaders have pledged continued support, with U.S. President Biden stating that his country would provide aid to the Ukrainian war effort for “as long as it takes[24].” U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak echoed Biden’s assertion, emphasizing that “nothing is off the table” regarding the types of weapons and training being readied by the United Kingdom[25]. Indeed, the general scope of military assistance has only increased in recent times; the United Kingdom is complementing its provision of weapons with a training program for Ukrainian fighter pilots[22], while the previously-reluctant Germany has finally declared its intention to supply Ukraine with lethal arms[22]. 

   Ideally, the massive losses due to sustained Ukrainian resistance and its own failure to make significant headway will eventually push Russia into withdrawing. But the expansion of military aid to its adversary may alternatively instigate Russia towards escalating further, a prospect that is gaining plausibility with Kremlin forces’ launch of a major new offensive in Eastern Ukraine[26]. Undeterred Russian aggression seems all the more probable when considering the high stakes for Putin, who has claimed to have invaded Ukraine to claim Russia’s rightful territory[27]. The continued supply of foreign weapons to Ukraine will likely act as a defensive bulwark against such renewed attacks, providing Ukraine with just enough firepower to maintain a stalemate for the foreseeable future. 

[1] United Kingdom Parliament

[2] Al Jazeera

[3] BBC News

[4] M1A2 Abrams: Main battle tank used by the United States Army

[5] Next generation Light Anti-tank Weapons (NLAW): A man-portable missile system capable of destroying tanks

[6] Challenger 2: Main battle tank used by the British Army

[7] Atlantic Council

[8] T-90M: The latest modernized variant of Russia’s T-90 main battle tank

[9] The Economist

[10] The Wall Street Journal

[11] Oryx

[12] Reuters

[13] Forbes

[14] Su-34: Russian strike fighter designed to attack ground and naval targets

[15] Su-35S: An improved variant of Russia’s Su-27 fighter, optimized for air-to-air combat

[16] Ka-52: Russian scout-attack helicopter designed to neutralize enemy armored vehicles, troops and helicopters

[17] Brookings

[18] Group of Seven (G7): A political forum consisting of the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan

[19] France 24

[20] Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

[21] CNN

[22] Politico

[23] PBS NewsHour

[24] Voice of America

[25] The New York Times

[26] The Guardian

[27] Foreign Affairs