5 ms·

We should have given Ukraine more weapons earlier, says ex-NATO chief

37 points by wslh 2y ago

alephnerd 2y ago
> “I think we all have to admit, we should have given them more weapons pre-invasion.” Absolutely. Pre-2022, it was largely US, Canada, UK, and Turkiye taking unilateral action in helping Ukraine rebuild military capacity, along with Poroshenko's reforms. The rest of NATO remained aloof of Ukraine until 2022 Germany especially did too little by placing irrationally high expectations about Poroshenko's ability to reform Ukraine [0] while ignoring the strides he made in building administrative capacity within Ukraine [1]. Furthermore, it might be heresy on HN/Reddit, but Zelensky's administration is extremely lackluster (even before the war began), and most of the recent missteps that Ukraine has done recently are due to Zelensky and his cabinet (eg. UKR-PL relations being lead by a UKR AgBusiness oligarch, politicization of upper levels of the military administration, active procurement corruption scandals, not arresting Ihor Kolomoisky until arm-twisted by the US, Pandora Papers). Once this war is over, Ukraine will need to work hard to build it's institutions. They have the capacity, but it will require having to finally end the oligarch model, which will be extremely difficult politically. If it does not, it will stagnate like Serbia and BH - which is something the oligarchs might gladly accept. [0] - https://www.dw.com/en/poroshenkos-promises-merkels-disappointment/a-46126047 https://www.dw.com/en/poroshenkos-promises-merkels-disappoin... [1] - https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/how-history-will-judge-poroshenko/ https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/how-histo...
- izend 2y ago
  What is the end game for the war? I personally don’t believe the millions of Ukrainians who have left are going to return. Secondly how does the Ukraine military recruit new young troops when the prospects of victory are so slim and Ukraine is slowly being ground down and losing territory.
  - alephnerd 2y ago
    At this point, it looks like outside countries are pushing for Ukraine and Russia to at best return to pre-2022 borders, or at worst current borders with Ukraine as part of NATO. That said, either option is political suicide in both Ukraine and Russia. > Secondly how does the Ukraine military recruit new young troops when the prospects of victory are so slim and Ukraine is slowly being ground down and losing territory Big picture, borders have remained consistent and there aren't going to be significant changes one way or the other. It's become a stalemate. Russia or Ukraine can mobilize and mobilize, but both sides are too dug in to have a significant impact one way or the other. This is how an A2AD war will be fought.
    - falcor84 2y ago
      > A2AD war I wasn't familiar with this acronym, so just putting this here for others like me - A2/AD(Anti-access/area_denial) is the strategy of preventing your opponent from entering an operational area and maneuvering within it[0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-access/area_denial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-access/area_denial
    - aguaviva 2y ago
      No one is pushing too hard for any change to the status quo at present, unfortunately. But you're ignoring a 3rd option: a working cease fire with no change in positions of forces on the ground -- but no recognition of Russia's sovereignty claims either. A classic frozen conflict, in other words. The latter option is getting some discussion among Ukrainians. It is a minority position, but it's perfectly possible discuss it as an option. It also doesn't have to be a permanent arrangement: Sooner or later Putin will expire or become enfeebled, and the RF will likely enter a period of stagnation and instability. Which will open the door for a possible resolution to the question of final borders and positions of forces. Perhaps something along the lines of what Croatia did to Serbia in 1995 (but at a much larger scale -- perhaps not retaking all of the occupied territories at once, but it may suffice to reclaim a large enough chunk to persuade whoever is running the RF by the point see that the writing is on the wall, and that the time is up on their optional colonial project): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Storm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Storm Assuming it isn't resolved by diplomatic means somehow (possible, but unlikely).
nikolay 2y ago
Russia would have had more decisive steps, then too. Most Russians criticize Putin for not taking this too seriously. Just like America in Iraq, Russia could've destroyed all energy infrastructure on day one, all airport fields, etc. Russia has a lot more capacity unlike Ukraine.
- namaria 2y ago
  Their goal was never to occupy Ukraine. They got what they wanted, the land corridor to Crimea and a nearly permanent quagmire blocking Ukraine from EU and NATO membership. The US has always had to contend with the risk of coming up too hard and collapsing Russia. No one wants rogue generals with nuclear armed ICMB.
  - nikolay 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - valeg 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - timeon 2y ago
    This seems pretty naive. Crimea and Ukraine's NATO membership was already quagmire since 2014. Only thing that has changed here is that Finland and Sweden are now in NATO.
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      Nah bro that’s 15 dimensional chess. Only in dimensions 2 through 14 does “Finland and Sweden join NATO” sound like a bad thing. Putin’s 15th degree of chess is where it all is revealed as strategic genius.
      - 2y ago
amai 2y ago
[flagged]
- alephnerd 2y ago
  Then we should allow Iran to build nukes, which means Turkiye, KSA, and UAE need to build nukes, which means.... Nuclear Proliferation only increases the risk of conflict, not decreases it.
  - amai 2y ago
    50 years of cold war proof otherwise. Better a new cold nuclear war, than a hot conventional war.
    - tivert 2y ago
      > 50 years of cold war proof otherwise. Better a new cold nuclear war, than a hot conventional war. The Cold War was a bipolar conflict. Rampant nuclear proliferation will not result in a similar situation and will not have the same result.
  - timeon 2y ago
    I probably missed it, but is someone invading Iran?
- valeg 2y ago
  NATO is afraid to move the nukes to even Poland. Putin moved the nukes to Belarus. As I see, such constant displays of weakness may provoke Putin to some wider war. Russian society has transformed. There can be only war in the future. Just look at his government budget: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/30/russias-defence-spending-to-rise-by-25-next-year-the-highest-since-the-cold-war https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/30/russias-defenc...
  - TiredOfLife 2y ago
    Russia already keeps nukes in Temporary occupied Królewiec.
deepfriedchokes 2y ago
They should have and now they should put boots on the ground to rectify the mistake.
- karmakurtisaani 2y ago
  I wonder if bringing in NATO forces to Ukraine, not to fight at the front, but to free up reserves, training/supply/other non-combat units to serve on the front lines would work as the first step. It wouldn't bring NATO forces to direct contact with Russians, but help Ukraine squeeze out the last troops for the battlefield. Putin would of course cry wolf with his nuclear weapons, but the provocation would still be so limited that it would be hard to justify such a major move.
  - deepfriedchokes 2y ago
    I think NATO should directly engage with Russia within the boundaries of Ukraine, including Crimea. Putin is demanding that everyone stand by the sidelines and allow him to abuse people. It’s like a schoolyard bully who threatens bystanders into tacitly supporting their actions through their inaction. China is watching this closely and it’s clear that if a bully wants to abuse someone all they need to do is make threats and the West will demonstrate cowardice and allow the bully to do whatever they please. The West should grow a pair and slap that shit down with extreme prejudice. If we don’t do it now it will just enable other bullies to test the meekness of the West. The way to deal with someone who abuses people is to take their power away, not act meekly, which just empowers them.
    - karmakurtisaani 2y ago
      And if he starts a nuclear war, what do you do then? Direct engagement with NATO would almost surely guarantee massive loss to Putin, possibly leading to his fall. He would have very little to lose in that scenario, and so nuclear war would not be impossible.
    - Have7878forever 2y ago
      NATO was defeated in Afghanistan and humiliated in northern Syria. Bringing in them into Ukraine not going to do anything other than further antagonize Russia. You can dig around what really happen during the last days of Kabul flee (hint, way worst than what reported on the mass media). To date, Russians weapon production are easily at 6x more than entire NATO combined (even if you add in Hungary and Turkey). With China supplying, that numbers unofficially up to 20x. The entire Ukraine population now is maybe about 1/5 of 2021. NATO is weak on battle field (remember their economies now out of cheap Russian oil and cheap Chinese green tech). The correct chess moves for NATO is to get Ukraine negotiate a peace truce with Russia. Had they ignore BoJo back then, at least 500K Ukrainians would be alive today and they get to keep their only route to sea. Now? Pretty much gameover for them. 2 generations of men gone. Best of the best lands 100% gone. Russians planning to seal off Ukraine as land-lock and willing to fight another 20 years at US-Afghan level to render Ukraine as a former country. Good luck. Got time read Sun Tzu. Winning battles on the nego table is always the better option than to render country-cide. American idealism of revolutionary independence war is very rare in history and not practical today especially world most powerful army as neighbor and enemy. Ukrainians failed to read that book and have to pay for the price deary.
tim333 2y ago
Yeah it's all been a bit wishy washy. The west should have stood up for the principle that you can't just invade democracies and take their land because your army is bigger.

37 points by wslh 2y ago

> “I think we all have to admit, we should have given them more weapons pre-invasion.” Absolutely. Pre-2022, it was largely US, Canada, UK, and Turkiye taking unilateral action in helping Ukraine rebuild military capacity, along with Poroshenko's reforms. The rest of NATO remained aloof of Ukraine until 2022 Germany especially did too little by placing irrationally high expectations about Poroshenko's ability to reform Ukraine [0] while ignoring the strides he made in building administrative capacity within Ukraine [1]. Furthermore, it might be heresy on HN/Reddit, but Zelensky's administration is extremely lackluster (even before the war began), and most of the recent missteps that Ukraine has done recently are due to Zelensky and his cabinet (eg. UKR-PL relations being lead by a UKR AgBusiness oligarch, politicization of upper levels of the military administration, active procurement corruption scandals, not arresting Ihor Kolomoisky until arm-twisted by the US, Pandora Papers). Once this war is over, Ukraine will need to work hard to build it's institutions. They have the capacity, but it will require having to finally end the oligarch model, which will be extremely difficult politically. If it does not, it will stagnate like Serbia and BH - which is something the oligarchs might gladly accept. [0] - https://www.dw.com/en/poroshenkos-promises-merkels-disappointment/a-46126047 https://www.dw.com/en/poroshenkos-promises-merkels-disappoin... [1] - https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/how-history-will-judge-poroshenko/ https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/how-histo...

izend 2y ago
What is the end game for the war? I personally don’t believe the millions of Ukrainians who have left are going to return. Secondly how does the Ukraine military recruit new young troops when the prospects of victory are so slim and Ukraine is slowly being ground down and losing territory.
- alephnerd 2y ago
  At this point, it looks like outside countries are pushing for Ukraine and Russia to at best return to pre-2022 borders, or at worst current borders with Ukraine as part of NATO. That said, either option is political suicide in both Ukraine and Russia. > Secondly how does the Ukraine military recruit new young troops when the prospects of victory are so slim and Ukraine is slowly being ground down and losing territory Big picture, borders have remained consistent and there aren't going to be significant changes one way or the other. It's become a stalemate. Russia or Ukraine can mobilize and mobilize, but both sides are too dug in to have a significant impact one way or the other. This is how an A2AD war will be fought.
  - falcor84 2y ago
    > A2AD war I wasn't familiar with this acronym, so just putting this here for others like me - A2/AD(Anti-access/area_denial) is the strategy of preventing your opponent from entering an operational area and maneuvering within it[0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-access/area_denial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-access/area_denial
  - aguaviva 2y ago
    No one is pushing too hard for any change to the status quo at present, unfortunately. But you're ignoring a 3rd option: a working cease fire with no change in positions of forces on the ground -- but no recognition of Russia's sovereignty claims either. A classic frozen conflict, in other words. The latter option is getting some discussion among Ukrainians. It is a minority position, but it's perfectly possible discuss it as an option. It also doesn't have to be a permanent arrangement: Sooner or later Putin will expire or become enfeebled, and the RF will likely enter a period of stagnation and instability. Which will open the door for a possible resolution to the question of final borders and positions of forces. Perhaps something along the lines of what Croatia did to Serbia in 1995 (but at a much larger scale -- perhaps not retaking all of the occupied territories at once, but it may suffice to reclaim a large enough chunk to persuade whoever is running the RF by the point see that the writing is on the wall, and that the time is up on their optional colonial project): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Storm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Storm Assuming it isn't resolved by diplomatic means somehow (possible, but unlikely).

nikolay 2y ago

Russia would have had more decisive steps, then too. Most Russians criticize Putin for not taking this too seriously. Just like America in Iraq, Russia could've destroyed all energy infrastructure on day one, all airport fields, etc. Russia has a lot more capacity unlike Ukraine.

namaria 2y ago
Their goal was never to occupy Ukraine. They got what they wanted, the land corridor to Crimea and a nearly permanent quagmire blocking Ukraine from EU and NATO membership. The US has always had to contend with the risk of coming up too hard and collapsing Russia. No one wants rogue generals with nuclear armed ICMB.
- nikolay 2y ago
  [flagged]
- valeg 2y ago
  [flagged]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- timeon 2y ago
  This seems pretty naive. Crimea and Ukraine's NATO membership was already quagmire since 2014. Only thing that has changed here is that Finland and Sweden are now in NATO.
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    Nah bro that’s 15 dimensional chess. Only in dimensions 2 through 14 does “Finland and Sweden join NATO” sound like a bad thing. Putin’s 15th degree of chess is where it all is revealed as strategic genius.
    - 2y ago

amai 2y ago

[flagged]

alephnerd 2y ago
Then we should allow Iran to build nukes, which means Turkiye, KSA, and UAE need to build nukes, which means.... Nuclear Proliferation only increases the risk of conflict, not decreases it.
- amai 2y ago
  50 years of cold war proof otherwise. Better a new cold nuclear war, than a hot conventional war.
  - tivert 2y ago
    > 50 years of cold war proof otherwise. Better a new cold nuclear war, than a hot conventional war. The Cold War was a bipolar conflict. Rampant nuclear proliferation will not result in a similar situation and will not have the same result.
- timeon 2y ago
  I probably missed it, but is someone invading Iran?
valeg 2y ago
NATO is afraid to move the nukes to even Poland. Putin moved the nukes to Belarus. As I see, such constant displays of weakness may provoke Putin to some wider war. Russian society has transformed. There can be only war in the future. Just look at his government budget: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/30/russias-defence-spending-to-rise-by-25-next-year-the-highest-since-the-cold-war https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/30/russias-defenc...
- TiredOfLife 2y ago
  Russia already keeps nukes in Temporary occupied Królewiec.

deepfriedchokes 2y ago

They should have and now they should put boots on the ground to rectify the mistake.

karmakurtisaani 2y ago
I wonder if bringing in NATO forces to Ukraine, not to fight at the front, but to free up reserves, training/supply/other non-combat units to serve on the front lines would work as the first step. It wouldn't bring NATO forces to direct contact with Russians, but help Ukraine squeeze out the last troops for the battlefield. Putin would of course cry wolf with his nuclear weapons, but the provocation would still be so limited that it would be hard to justify such a major move.
- deepfriedchokes 2y ago
  I think NATO should directly engage with Russia within the boundaries of Ukraine, including Crimea. Putin is demanding that everyone stand by the sidelines and allow him to abuse people. It’s like a schoolyard bully who threatens bystanders into tacitly supporting their actions through their inaction. China is watching this closely and it’s clear that if a bully wants to abuse someone all they need to do is make threats and the West will demonstrate cowardice and allow the bully to do whatever they please. The West should grow a pair and slap that shit down with extreme prejudice. If we don’t do it now it will just enable other bullies to test the meekness of the West. The way to deal with someone who abuses people is to take their power away, not act meekly, which just empowers them.
  - karmakurtisaani 2y ago
    And if he starts a nuclear war, what do you do then? Direct engagement with NATO would almost surely guarantee massive loss to Putin, possibly leading to his fall. He would have very little to lose in that scenario, and so nuclear war would not be impossible.
  - Have7878forever 2y ago
    NATO was defeated in Afghanistan and humiliated in northern Syria. Bringing in them into Ukraine not going to do anything other than further antagonize Russia. You can dig around what really happen during the last days of Kabul flee (hint, way worst than what reported on the mass media). To date, Russians weapon production are easily at 6x more than entire NATO combined (even if you add in Hungary and Turkey). With China supplying, that numbers unofficially up to 20x. The entire Ukraine population now is maybe about 1/5 of 2021. NATO is weak on battle field (remember their economies now out of cheap Russian oil and cheap Chinese green tech). The correct chess moves for NATO is to get Ukraine negotiate a peace truce with Russia. Had they ignore BoJo back then, at least 500K Ukrainians would be alive today and they get to keep their only route to sea. Now? Pretty much gameover for them. 2 generations of men gone. Best of the best lands 100% gone. Russians planning to seal off Ukraine as land-lock and willing to fight another 20 years at US-Afghan level to render Ukraine as a former country. Good luck. Got time read Sun Tzu. Winning battles on the nego table is always the better option than to render country-cide. American idealism of revolutionary independence war is very rare in history and not practical today especially world most powerful army as neighbor and enemy. Ukrainians failed to read that book and have to pay for the price deary.

tim333 2y ago

Yeah it's all been a bit wishy washy. The west should have stood up for the principle that you can't just invade democracies and take their land because your army is bigger.