Arms and intelligence: the United States is becoming more active in Ukraine and less afraid of Russia
- Grigor Atanesyan
- BBC
The BBC News Russian Service app is available for iOS and android. You can also subscribe to our channel at Telegram.
If at the beginning of the Russian Invasion the US and its allies made it their goal to preserve Ukraine as a state, now they say they believe in achieving it and achieving this victory.
Moscow’s protests, its arrival and hints of nuclear weapons have not been successful – Kyiv’s partners are increasing arms supplies. And if in the first place they transferred only defensive weapons, now even primarily cautious Germany promises to transfer tanks in Ukraine.
American officials began to address how they feel about the Ukrainian army in confronting Russian aggression. This also applies to the statements of the Pentagon, and even more information that they tell off the record.
Western experts interviewed by the BBC say that the United States and its allies began to perceive aviation with a share of skepticism – however, they deliberately continue to filter the direct conflict between NATO and the Russian Federation.
“The war between Russia and Ukraine, the confrontation between the West and Russia”
Thursday NBC told referring to high-ranking military officials that American intelligence helped the Armed Forces of Ukraine knock out the Moskva cruiser. And in the environment The New York Times wrotethat the US is receiving intelligence that relates to Ukrainian forces killing the generals commanding the invasion.
Following a visit to Kyiv for Orthodox Easter by Lloyd Austin and Anthony Blinken – the territory of US defense and foreign affairs – the US government declared that Ukraine could win the war.
About the US getting into a strong and independent Ukraine, which completely controls its entire mass, Mark Milley saidChairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States Armed Forces.
British Foreign Minister Liz Truss is also possible for Kyiv support in total liberation from all occupied effects.
The rhetoric of country leaders has indeed changed, General Richard Barrons, the former head of the British Joint Command, said in a conversation with the BBC Russian Service.
“There is a discovery of support for Ukraine, but it is based on an iron rule,” said the retired general. “This is a war between Russia and Ukraine, but a confrontation between the West and Russia.”
On the eve of the war, the leaders of the United States and Great Britain confront Moscow that the invasion of Ukraine would be costly. He noted that the West is ready to make the most stringent demands and supply the Ukrainian army with a limited set of defensive weapons, which will complicate the advance of Russian forces.
Sir, it happened by accident.
However, after Russia’s entry into Kyiv bogged down, NATO’s position began to change.
“We found the defeat of the Russian army, and this created an opportunity for more defensive purposes,” says Barrons, emphasizing that instead of a defensive military, the West began to supply weapons for self-defense.
If in the first place the type of armed forces sent to Ukraine was portable anti-tank anti-tank and portable air defense systems, then new deliveries from countries include attack drones, artillery, armored vehicles and military aircraft.
In Washington, confidence has emerged that Ukraine has not only its own capabilities, but also advantages, Michael Mazarr, a senior researcher at the RAND Corporation, told the BBC in an interview.
“This is the trajectory of the war itself: when the Russian attack on Kyiv failed, and Russia moved to the operation in the south and in the production units of the troops, which had already caused serious losses, the context changed,” says Mazarr.
However, there was another reason for the new appeal of the United States – indignation at the atrocities of the Russian army.
Evidence of war crimes in Bucha and Mariupol has drawn strong scrutiny in the US, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, who frequently uses intelligence sources in his columns, told the BBC.
“Both Democrats and Republicans have rightly been outraged by the constitutional intrusion, and it has given the Biden administration the opportunity to bring an unprecedented $33 billion aid package to a vote in Congress,” Ignatius, recently named to Russia’s sanctions list.
This package will be approved to receive $46.6 billion of preliminary assistance received by Ukraine from the US since the start of the invasion. This is more than two thirds defense budget of Russia for 2021.
Few doubt the approval of the Congress: representatives of his faction have already responded in support. 73% American messages arms supplies to Ukraine, according to a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll.
But the need to reconsider previous approaches was also dictated by a new stage: the war, the battle for the Donbass, created the task of clarifying, and primarily in artillery, says Barrons.
“More rhetorical attacks”
Russia sent American notes of protest to the United States against the offer of American weapons and during the war. His ministers warn that Russian military forces will destroy NATO infectious shipments on Ukrainian soil.
The US and its allies are suddenly pouring in deliveries. British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss rejected the arguments of those who propose not to create difficult conditions so as not to provoke Russia.
“In my opinion, inaction is the most terrible provocation. Now is the time for courage, not caution,” Truss said.
The West is less and less afraid of the Russian army, because it turned out to be much less combat-ready than it is delayed, the British general of the army.
The Russian army is weakened and participates in its participation in Ukraine.
Ignatius of The Washington Post suggests that there were outliers in Washington after the first month of the war, that the epidemic in Russia should not be taken too seriously, because they were not backed up by the appearance.
“Russia’s resources are stretched to the limit and its troops will be in real danger if it escalates the conflict,” Ignatius said. He says US strength in Europe is enough to support Ukraine without worrying too much about possible escalation from Russia.
In mid-April, CIA director Williams warned of another danger – the possible use of a social movement tactical mechanism against Ukraine.
Such a scenario was advocated, in particular, by the head of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov. Tactical use suggests the smallest use of nuclear weapons designed for the battlefield.
The head of the CIA, however, emphasizes that the US intelligence forces have no data on the deployment or deployment of the armed forces, which indicated that the Russian Federation was preparing for a nuclear strike on Ukraine.
“Yes, Russia has two tactical nuclear warheads, ten times more than the United States. The likelihood of using this crime in Ukraine and especially outside the country is small, because it is simply not in the detention of Russia,” Barrons said.
According to him, such an unchanging course of the conflict, but, above all, the first blow to control the end of the world war, shakes the world: a whole generation.”
In addition, such a move will only strengthen NATO cohesion, the expert says. He therefore assumes that Western leaders have assessed these risks and made a selection based on the reality of the threat.
Ignatius agrees with this assessment – he believes that the Russian wording is very vague, and tactical nuclear weapons by themselves are unlikely to change the course of the war, so their use by Russia does not make any practical sense.
“These are more rhetorical cases than receipts,” says Ignatius.
However, this does not mean that the US and the US are increasing the risk of escalation.
Despite the appeal of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the Biden administration did not respond to a request to “close the skies over Ukraine” – there is to introduce a no-fly zone. This measure was a step towards a direct confrontation with NATO, according to many experts.
“The US continues to be very clear that it is not in their plans to actively participate in the war. The United States does not send troops to the territory of Ukraine, ”says Mazarr of the RAND Corporation.
The expert recalled that during the Vietnam War, the USSR provided weapons to North Vietnam that were used to fight the languid US army and to destroy American soldiers. Russian specialists are also usually supplied to the American weapons depot for the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, who used them against the Soviet army.
“I think that the current situation cannot be called unprecedented, although the United States does have the value of significant military assistance to Ukraine,” says Mazarr.