A year ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine, claiming it was reclaiming a historic part of Russia. The ensuing war was largely a civil war among Soviet-era systems, with both sides relying on Russian ammunition and systems. In response, the West decided to transition Ukraine to Western systems, an unprecedented decision for Europe. This created a dilemma: how far and how fast should the West go in opposing Russia in a proxy war? According to Russian principles on nuclear deterrence, Moscow may retaliate if it is targeted with a nuclear attack or use nuclear arms if a conventional assault “threatens the very existence of the state”.
The West initially provided only defensive weapons to Ukraine, but its inhibitions have since evaporated due to a series of turning points in the war. The first came with the defeat of Russia’s original war aims soon after the war had begun. Ukraine used US-made Javelin missiles to skewer a 65km (40-mile) column of Russian armour as it tried to reach Kyiv. NATO then sent anti-ship Neptune missiles, which Ukraine used to sink the Russian Black Sea flagship Moskva on April 24.
The second turning point came in response to Russia’s high-intensity warfare in Luhansk and Donetsk in the Donbas region. In April, allies for the first time provided armoured personnel carriers, long-range howitzer artillery and Phoenix Ghost kamikaze drones. The most consequential decision of the war came when US President Joe Biden approved sending High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) on May 30, a GPS-guided multiple rocket launch system with three times the range of field artillery and an accuracy of two metres (2.2 yards) at 80km (50 miles). Ukraine put HIMARS to devastating use, targeting Russian command posts and ammunition depots far behind the front lines.
NATO allies then promised 223 Western main battle tanks, marking a fifth turning point in the war. A sixth came on February 3, when the US agreed to supply Ground Launched Small Diameter Bombs (GLSDB), giving Ukraine twice the striking range of HIMARS. However, there are practical concerns to this military aid, such as Ukraine rapidly depleting its allies’ reserves of NATO artillery shells, and defence industries needing time to ramp up production. An unnamed senior White House official told The Washington Post that Ukraine might not enjoy current levels of support indefinitely, but others dismiss these political concerns. The US is increasing shell production sixfold to 90,000 a month over a two-year period, and has approved $112bn in aid to Ukraine. Despite some concerns, it appears that the US and its allies are committed to supporting Ukraine in the long-term.