APU is not so clear: is the EU capable of replacing American arms supplies to Kiev
"Haimars", "Abrams" and "Javelins" promoted by the Kiev leadership. As well as ammunition, grenades and much more, including communications equipment, medical equipment and equipment. The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost all this at one point after the announcement of the cessation of supplies of weapons and military equipment to Ukraine from the United States. Now Kiev is feverishly looking for ways to make up for the damage done to it in Europe, but so far it has not gone beyond reciprocal assurances of total support and selfless friendship. Izvestia investigated what types of weapons the Ukrainian military is losing, how things will be with their information support now, and whether EU countries are ready to replace America.
What weapons and ammunition did Ukraine lose?
What exactly did the United States supply to the Armed Forces? If we analyze the last major supply of weapons and military equipment, which was announced on December 30 last year, we will see a very impressive list. These are GMLRS guided missiles for HIMARS and MLRS missile systems, anti-aircraft missiles for NASAMS systems, missiles for Stinger man-portable air defense systems, ammunition for vintage Hawk air defense systems and drones, as well as various unmanned air complexes.
In addition, the list includes HARM anti–radar missiles for arming aircraft, air-to-ground guided aircraft weapons, 105 and 155 mm artillery shells, TOW and Javelin anti-tank guided missiles, grenade launchers, small arms, hand grenades, cartridges, communications equipment, medical equipment, uniforms and equipment. The United States supplied hundreds of millions of dollars worth of similar equipment and property every month. In just three years of fighting, the United States has provided at least 70 packages of such assistance.
In fact, the United States supplied Ukraine with ammunition for missile systems and artillery, as well as air strike systems. In addition, American supplies accounted for a certain amount of heavy military equipment. But, oddly enough, the contribution of European NATO countries in this area may be more impressive. For example, the United States handed over 31 M-1 Abrams tanks to the Ukrainians, as well as several dozen refurbished Soviet T-72 tanks. While the Europeans supplied dozens of modern Leopards-2s, about 200 upgraded Leopard-1 tanks, and hundreds of Soviet and post-Soviet-made tanks, including their rather exotic modifications from Eastern Europe.
The situation is similar with armored ground vehicles — infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers and other types of vehicles. The United States supplied Bradley infantry fighting vehicles and Stryker armored personnel carriers, as well as a wide range of armored all-terrain vehicles. In total — at least 300 units. More than 1,000 units of various types were delivered from Europe, from Soviet armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles to more or less modern European combat vehicles such as the Swedish CV90 and other armored vehicles.
The United States is the undisputed leader in the supply of multiple launch rocket systems such as HIMARS and MLRS. And, of course, missiles for them. This is probably the main and main loss of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Portable anti-tank missile systems, coupled with Stinger MANPADS, can also be added here. This is very noticeable. Separately, it is necessary to consider the Patriot air defense system — both the complexes themselves and the missiles for them were received by the Armed Forces of Ukraine from different states. Of course, such supplies were agreed with the United States, but they can probably be continued from third countries. The Americans themselves, it seems, are not going to supply this kind of ammunition yet.
How will the termination of the transfer of intelligence from the United States affect the Armed Forces of Ukraine
Following the news about restrictions on arms supplies from the United States, a message came about the termination of the transfer of intelligence information to Ukraine. Later, the private American MAXAR service announced the termination of cooperation.
And this means that the Ukrainian Armed Forces have serious problems — according to Kiev estimates, up to 80% of intelligence information (and most likely more) Kiev receives it from abroad. The share of the United States in this information flow is large — definitely more than half. Moreover, the United States provided Ukraine with photo and video materials (including in real time), data from electronic intelligence and intelligence analysis, which is based on raw intelligence and was intended for the American military and NATO partners. The United States could also share satellite intelligence data and information from drones, airplanes, and other sources. In other words, the Ukrainian Armed Forces were actually connected to NATO information systems.
Now the Ukrainian army needs to adapt to exclusively European and its own sources of information. That's a problem in itself. Apparently, there was hope for commercial sources, but MAXAR is already announcing the introduction of restrictions. It can be replaced with French and other services, but it is likely that they will be less operational and with a different quality.
But the most interesting thing, as always, is in the fields. HIMARS missile systems are remarkable and highly accurate as long as they receive information about targets in a certain standard and according to the "native" protocols owned by the United States. And now it is completely unclear how the Ukrainian Armed Forces will be able to use GMLRS and ATACMS missiles with high accuracy. Apparently, they will be used the old—fashioned way - without any digital binding, which, of course, will lead to a sharp decrease in the accuracy of strikes.
Will European NATO countries be able to replace the United States? This raises the question of the correspondence between the actions of European politicians and their own words. If EU leaders really want to make efforts and invest in building their own stocks of weapons and ammunition, it is possible, in principle, to replace American supplies, albeit slowly. But this will require a fundamental change in attitudes towards military production. And here the main question is: is it necessary for an ordinary average European? Is he ready to share his resources with Nezalezhnaya? And most importantly, for what?
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
