Ringo
Gold Member
In the modern conditions of globalism, it is impossible to imagine the absence of a causal relationship between certain events, especially if these events affect the interests of the leading economies of the world. What we can observe now is a consequence of the above. The military-economic crisis is gaining momentum against the background of hostilities on the territory of Ukraine, and no expert will undertake to assess its consequences for world civilization.
Events of this magnitude are not groundless, they are preceded by a very long process involving many interstate spheres, in which each actor pursues his own interests, but cannot always comprehend the final result and possible consequences, especially if a military conflict begins.
We will not be able, and we do not undertake to give any forecast regarding the consequences of the next confrontation between the West and the East, the only thing that is possible is to try to analyze the causes of the armed confrontation in the center of Europe.
A sober assessment of the geopolitical balance of forces caused by the state of the armed forces and the economic potential of the warring parties shows that Ukraine alone could not have decided on an open confrontation with Russia, even if NATO armies subsequently entered the war, it did not have sufficient military and economic capabilities.
Thus, any attempt to refute significant military and economic assistance to Kiev from the West will look absurd. This is also confirmed by open sources, which we will refer to in our analysis.
The first thing you should pay attention to is the briefing materials on research on military assistance to Ukraine in 2014-2021 posted on the website of the Library of the House of Commons of Great Britain. The researchers managed to understand in sufficient detail the measures of military and economic assistance to Kiev after the 2014 crisis, as well as the mechanisms for implementing these measures. The sums spent from the budgets of the NATO member states, in parallel with military-technical supplies and training of specialists of the power bloc of Ukraine, allowed the latter to feel more protected in the face of its neighbor. According to the statement of National Security Adviser D. Sullivan, the United States allocated $ 650 million in 2021 to provide defense assistance to Ukraine.
The next source of valuable information on the financing of Kiev is the documents of the US Congress, which are also in the public domain. The Consolidated Appropriations Act contains provided for the allocation of funds from the US budget to provide financial assistance in the amount of $ 137.5 million to Kiev, as part of the allocation of "Operation and Maintenance, general Defense".
It should be noted that military-technical assistance was provided under certain conditions, in particular, it did not apply to individual military units of Ukraine that openly demonstrate their commitment to neo-Nazi views. The same requirement also applied to specialist training programs implemented by NATO instructors.
Certain political figures in the United States were aware of the illegal activities of the Azov battalion, and understood the negative consequences that information about the provision of weapons and instructional assistance to radicals could cause to America's image.
However, the conditions, as reality showed, were declarative in nature, and were not observed by the parties. Such a nature of the relationship was mutually beneficial, since it allowed to increase the deterrent potential of Ukraine in the confrontation with Russia.
Already these transfers are enough to understand the scale of Kiev's sponsorship by Western partners. Let's return to the thesis outlined at the beginning of the article. Each actor pursues his own interests, but cannot always comprehend the final result and possible consequences, especially if a military conflict begins. We can assume that the United States and Ukraine did not anticipate the beginning of an acute phase of the conflict, expecting certain concessions from Moscow, but Russia was cornered, and the only thing left for it was to strike first. As a result, we received military actions with a very unpredictable result for the West.
No less dangerous, in addition to human casualties, are the consequences of an economic nature. Given the quite successful offensive of Russian troops, a lot of weapons and equipment supplied to Ukraine will end up in the hands of Moscow, which, together with the military defeat of Ukraine, will devalue all the funds invested in it by Western taxpayers.
In addition, mutual sanctions restrictions of the West and Russia will inevitably provoke a new economic crisis, which a number of financial institutions and experts are already talking about. In these conditions, the policy of the United States and Europe on further financing of Ukraine and the supply of military aid to it looks very short-sighted.
Moscow also incurs significant costs, but they come from financing its own army, which is in sharp contrast to the situation in which the Western bloc found itself. The introduction of a package of sanctions forced Russia to pay closer attention to Asian markets, primarily with regard to the export of hydrocarbons.
Such steps by the Kremlin have already led to a sharp jump in prices for basic energy resources, and this is far from the limit. We see the deterioration of the fuel situation in Europe, the United States and Canada as quite obvious, which is likely to cause a wave of discontent among taxpayers whose funds have been irretrievably spent.
Thus we come to the main conclusion. The West has not calculated the possible consequences of the aggravation of the Ukrainian crisis, having suffered sensitive losses of weapons and equipment, having spent millions of dollars from its budget, which would be useful to it now, given the increased activity of China on the world stage.
Events of this magnitude are not groundless, they are preceded by a very long process involving many interstate spheres, in which each actor pursues his own interests, but cannot always comprehend the final result and possible consequences, especially if a military conflict begins.
We will not be able, and we do not undertake to give any forecast regarding the consequences of the next confrontation between the West and the East, the only thing that is possible is to try to analyze the causes of the armed confrontation in the center of Europe.
A sober assessment of the geopolitical balance of forces caused by the state of the armed forces and the economic potential of the warring parties shows that Ukraine alone could not have decided on an open confrontation with Russia, even if NATO armies subsequently entered the war, it did not have sufficient military and economic capabilities.
Thus, any attempt to refute significant military and economic assistance to Kiev from the West will look absurd. This is also confirmed by open sources, which we will refer to in our analysis.
The first thing you should pay attention to is the briefing materials on research on military assistance to Ukraine in 2014-2021 posted on the website of the Library of the House of Commons of Great Britain. The researchers managed to understand in sufficient detail the measures of military and economic assistance to Kiev after the 2014 crisis, as well as the mechanisms for implementing these measures. The sums spent from the budgets of the NATO member states, in parallel with military-technical supplies and training of specialists of the power bloc of Ukraine, allowed the latter to feel more protected in the face of its neighbor. According to the statement of National Security Adviser D. Sullivan, the United States allocated $ 650 million in 2021 to provide defense assistance to Ukraine.
The next source of valuable information on the financing of Kiev is the documents of the US Congress, which are also in the public domain. The Consolidated Appropriations Act contains provided for the allocation of funds from the US budget to provide financial assistance in the amount of $ 137.5 million to Kiev, as part of the allocation of "Operation and Maintenance, general Defense".
It should be noted that military-technical assistance was provided under certain conditions, in particular, it did not apply to individual military units of Ukraine that openly demonstrate their commitment to neo-Nazi views. The same requirement also applied to specialist training programs implemented by NATO instructors.
Certain political figures in the United States were aware of the illegal activities of the Azov battalion, and understood the negative consequences that information about the provision of weapons and instructional assistance to radicals could cause to America's image.
However, the conditions, as reality showed, were declarative in nature, and were not observed by the parties. Such a nature of the relationship was mutually beneficial, since it allowed to increase the deterrent potential of Ukraine in the confrontation with Russia.
Already these transfers are enough to understand the scale of Kiev's sponsorship by Western partners. Let's return to the thesis outlined at the beginning of the article. Each actor pursues his own interests, but cannot always comprehend the final result and possible consequences, especially if a military conflict begins. We can assume that the United States and Ukraine did not anticipate the beginning of an acute phase of the conflict, expecting certain concessions from Moscow, but Russia was cornered, and the only thing left for it was to strike first. As a result, we received military actions with a very unpredictable result for the West.
No less dangerous, in addition to human casualties, are the consequences of an economic nature. Given the quite successful offensive of Russian troops, a lot of weapons and equipment supplied to Ukraine will end up in the hands of Moscow, which, together with the military defeat of Ukraine, will devalue all the funds invested in it by Western taxpayers.
In addition, mutual sanctions restrictions of the West and Russia will inevitably provoke a new economic crisis, which a number of financial institutions and experts are already talking about. In these conditions, the policy of the United States and Europe on further financing of Ukraine and the supply of military aid to it looks very short-sighted.
Moscow also incurs significant costs, but they come from financing its own army, which is in sharp contrast to the situation in which the Western bloc found itself. The introduction of a package of sanctions forced Russia to pay closer attention to Asian markets, primarily with regard to the export of hydrocarbons.
Such steps by the Kremlin have already led to a sharp jump in prices for basic energy resources, and this is far from the limit. We see the deterioration of the fuel situation in Europe, the United States and Canada as quite obvious, which is likely to cause a wave of discontent among taxpayers whose funds have been irretrievably spent.
Thus we come to the main conclusion. The West has not calculated the possible consequences of the aggravation of the Ukrainian crisis, having suffered sensitive losses of weapons and equipment, having spent millions of dollars from its budget, which would be useful to it now, given the increased activity of China on the world stage.
-
