NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has welcomed a new initiative aimed at boosting military support to Ukraine, speaking during an online meeting of the Ukraine Defence Contact Group (UDCG) on 21 July.
The meeting was hosted by German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius and UK Defence Secretary John Healey. According to a NATO press release, Rutte highlighted the joint initiative he announced with US President Donald Trump the previous week. The programme aims to open up additional US assets to Ukraine through investment by Allies in Europe and Canada.
NATO stated that the new effort “has already seen numerous Allies express interest in contributing” and that it “complements a range of other initiatives through which Allies support Ukraine.” It will be coordinated by NATO, leveraging its existing infrastructure, including the NATO Security Assistance and Training for Ukraine (NSATU) command in Wiesbaden, Germany. NSATU already plays a key role in logistical coordination and support delivery.
The initiative is described as open-ended and is intended to provide Ukraine with faster access to requested US equipment and technology. The UDCG, a broader multilateral forum, will continue to function in parallel.
According to NATO, the new mechanism supports the three priorities set at the recent NATO Summit in The Hague: increasing defence investment, expanding defence industrial production, and supporting Ukraine.
“The aim of all Allied security assistance to Ukraine is to bring the conflict to a just and lasting end as quickly as possible,” NATO said.
“The aim of all Allied security assistance is to bring the conflict to a just and lasting end as quickly as possible”
Meanwhile in Siberia.
An intriguing development in the geopolitical environment surrounding the Ukrainian conflict could occur relatively soon. The Donald is apparently slightly annoyed by Vlad’s recent conduct. If secondary sanctions are indeed placed upon RU exports, especially petroleum products, all manner of secondary and tertiary effects could become manifest. The RU bear may become ravenous and menacing, or potentially more cautious, and temporarily retreat deeper into the forest. Uncertain re calculating odds of varied behaviors. 🤔
Aid to Ukraine that Europe has pay for as the the USA is selling kit not gifting it,
Yup, that’s how I read it too. War profiteering.
A bit like the lean lease we paid off not that long ago, the Great USA looking after its self while not backing any one. As always but they expect us to go Iraq/Afghan with them until they got bored of it, left worse than before.
As ever. Lend-Lease was very expensive for us.
As the article says, the cost of this will come out of the UK’s 3.5%/5% commitment and the similar commitments made by the other ENATO countries, so maybe not so bad. Sure, the US makes money out of supplying the stuff, but no European supplier could do so at the necessary speed or in the necessary quantities.
No one has any useful excess kit left to donate, so someone has to pay for new stuff, either to replace stuff that can then be donated, or to give directly to Ukraine.
The suggestion that America should be paying for it, even though America already disproportionately contributes to our collective defence, and this benefits Europeans more than Americans, doesn’t have much moral justification.
If it weren’t for decades of European intransigence on defence, consistently protested by American administrations on both sides of the political divide, then Europe could be providing these weapons from its own defence industrial base, and not reliant on the Americans. Even 3 years after the start of the Ukraine war, most euro countries were doing very little other than talk big on defence. It took Trump’s relatively extreme political actions to jolt ENATO into substantive action. The best outcome would have been Europeans taking responsibility without Trump’s intervention, but this is the second best outcome. Worse still would be a still cosy EU-US relationship with no substantive ENATO action. After 3 years of nothing it was clear that the best outcome was not realistic.
Agree.
And look who is talking tough on defence.
HMG.
Nothing has changed.
Another example of all talk and no action. It amazes me that this war is still going on given all the help the superior equipped “West” has given.
One could be led to believe that War is a game of numbers rather than tech superiority.
There was a Russian chap here a few weeks back, it would be good to get his views.
“Come out come out wherever you are”.
Ah, Maggot!
Or Ulya.
It’s all a bit FAFO
‘Austin added a second goal: “We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine.” That meant Russia should “not have the capability to very quickly reproduce” the forces and equipment that had been lost in Ukraine’
‘Scholz, who belongs to Germany’s Social Democratic Party (SPD), has refused to say he wants Ukraine to win the war, saying only that “Russia must not win and Ukraine must not lose.”
One interpretation of Wang’s statement in Brussels is that while China did not ask for the war, its prolongation may suit Beijing’s strategic needs, so long as the US remains engaged in Ukraine.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told the European Union’s top diplomat on Wednesday that Beijing did not want to see a Russian loss in Ukraine“China thinks they’re fighting a proxy war through Russia,”
Carrickter, your post suggests that European nations were and are doing little to support Ukraine militarily.
Martin, I don’t think the US has gifted any aid to Ukraine. They make profits from wars and would have insisted on payment.
I thought the US equipment draw downs under Biden were free? though noting is ever free with USA,
All this “America is sick of footing the bill for European defence” and “European freeloaders blah blah”.. its BS. Its more like Europeans were spinless letting the US politic them into buying American arms and running under US military commands. Now they’re sick and tired of the corner they painted themselves into they was Europe to take care of themselves but still make sure the money ends up in US coffers and remain under US commands.. people need to get a grip
Nonsense.
So basically, Ukraine has a shopping list of things they need…
They get Britain and other countries to buy from US
Money exchanged
US sends the stuff…making a PROFIT … is just doing business as usual
But how will this speed things up ??
LOGISTICS to get the stuff into Ukraine and then to the frontline is already a nightmare
Most of the stuff soldiers ask for and get is via fundraisers, and quicker
Well, if they can make things better, then it’s a good thing🤔, but the US isn’t exactly trusted and they flip-flop their stance week to week