Ukraine has warned it is already being forced to downsize some military operations because of a drop-off in foreign aid.

Top general Oleksandr Tarnavskyi said troops faced ammunition shortages along the “entire front line”, creating a “big problem” for Kyiv.

It comes as billions of dollars of US and EU aid have been held up amid political wrangles.

Ukraine said it hoped to boost its own ammunition industry with western help.

But it relies heavily on western supplies, particularly on deliveries of long-range missiles and air defence systems, to fight occupying Russian forces.

    • FormerRedditMod@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      9 months ago

      Imagine a situation where an American assumes the universe revolves around the USA—now that’s the real surprise party!

      • LwL@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        This situation somewhat does. Yes there’s also been Orban being a fuck about EU help, but armament wise the US has been the primary supplier, and if US aid wasn’t running out, Ukraine wouldn’t be facing these issues, regardless of whether the EU or even other actors also could’ve prevented this.

    • FormerRedditMod@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Imagine a situation where an American assumes the universe revolves around the USA—now that’s the real surprise party!

    • Dragon_Titan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      No surprise.

      1st year of most wars RUS is in. They’re crap in but afterwards they become a force to be reckoned with.

      US-EU should have given UKR all the military equipment that UKR requested in the beginning instead of it being slowly given.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        They probably can’t become a major force like that without full mobilization, and Putin has shown he’s unwilling to do that. For good reason–it’d probably end with him committing suicide by three bullets to the back of the head. They’re not going to be able to mount any kind of new offensive without that.

        At the same time, Ukraine can’t mount any kind of counter-offensive without material support. The scenario here is either Ukraine puts up with losing territory in a negotiated peace, or things quiet down into border skirmishes for the next year with Russia sending missiles into Kyiv every few months.

        Despite the headlines, there isn’t much chance of Ukraine outright losing. Russia can’t mobilize enough to do that.

  • Neato@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’m surprised the military industrial complex isn’t just loaning them the ordinance they were buying. Ukraine is slated to win easily if they can keep supplied. Most likely financial aid will resume from the US and EU. So those loans won’t take long to pay off. And then the industry has another nation to buy their bombs.

    • massive_bereavement@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Me too. I never thought I would say this, but I’m surprised the Military Industrial Complex doesn’t hold more pull with Reps.

      • galloog1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I think the MIC holds less pull than people think. Lobbying also doesn’t work like most people think. It’s more like targeted PR.

    • Faresh@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Maybe because Ukraine isn’t going to “win” any time soon or easily as you believe?

    • Wrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      I would think much of their supply chain involves the use of US military logistics infrastructure. If the US military is prevented from funding these pipelines, they may find it cost prohibitive to even get the supplies there.

    • Dragon_Titan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      At best UKR will be able to maintain a stalemate with RUS.

      RUS is tapping into alternatives to get what they need and want. Which for the most part is currently working out.

      UKR relies heavily on the US-EU for funding and support. That support is inconsistent and will fluctuate but will mostly remain relatively standard or low unless something media worthy happens.

      When and how much they’re are funded depends on public opinion and the media, whose interest changes.

      eg. Afghanistan with the Afghan women and girls, and how support is significantly being redirected to Israel-Palestine conflict.

    • RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      That’s not extremely profitable though. It’s only “very” profitable. The US doesn’t move for “very”.

      Let’s first slow down, instead use these tax payer funds to add middle men, like US corporations and fund them instead to help Ukraine. Much more money for the chums from the club.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      You can’t transfer large weapons without the government signing off in some way. They could maybe do small arms but it’s not a guarantee. The laws around arms trafficking can get pretty draconian.

    • chitak166@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      Ukraine is slated to win easily if they can keep supplied.

      This is where you’re wrong and a victim of propaganda.

      • Neato@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Russia has been getting bounced back reliably for years. But it’ll be hard for any army to fight without munitions.

        This is a great tactic if you support Russia.

  • Jaysyn@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Yeah, but the GOP will be getting a lot of money from Russian cutouts for this betrayal of freedom & democracy.

  • Quokka@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    If Americans can shoot up a school, I’m sure they can shoot up a Republicans office.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Top general Oleksandr Tarnavskyi said troops faced ammunition shortages along the “entire front line”, creating a “big problem” for Kyiv.

    But it relies heavily on western supplies, particularly on deliveries of long-range missiles and air defence systems, to fight occupying Russian forces.

    A report by the Estonian defence ministry said Kyiv needed a minimum of 200,000 artillery shells a month to retain an edge against Russia.

    Speaking to the BBC, Ukraine’s Deputy Defence Minister Ivan Havryliuk said the country was ramping up production of kamikaze drones “to compensate [for] the lack of artillery shells”.

    However, the situation has signalled to Russia that international support for Ukraine is weakening - and there are concerns that by switching its economy onto a war footing, Moscow can outlast the West in this battle of attrition.

    Kalle Kirss, Estonia’s defence adviser to Nato, told the BBC that Europe needed to commit funding to support Ukraine.


    The original article contains 668 words, the summary contains 151 words. Saved 77%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!