Will the $60.9 Billion Ukraine Aid Change the War?
Independent producer Li Jun, speaking on NTD’s “Pinnacle View” program, highlighted Ukraine’s difficult defensive position.“Last summer’s planned full-scale offensive [by the Ukrainian military] fell short of expectations due to delays in military equipment deliveries from Europe, preventing a comprehensive offensive. The critical issue now is ammunition, with Russia outgunning Ukraine at a 10:1 ratio. With China’s support in rebuilding its military industry, Russia has ample manpower, ammunition, and drones, leading to significant tactical changes. Military experts from the U.S. and Europe warn of the Ukrainian army’s potential collapse, emphasizing the seriousness of the situation,” Mr. Li explained.
“Some supplies have already reached Ukraine following President Biden’s signing of the aid bill. A video from May 1 showed the Ukrainian army firing a large number of shells, signaling relief from prolonged pressure and a demonstration to their adversaries of their renewed ammunition supply.”
According to Mr. Li, the United States has provided Army Tactical Missile Systems with a 300-kilometer range (186 miles), capable of striking all Russian military bases within Ukraine, thus significantly impacting Russian logistics. This development makes it harder for Russia to launch another fierce offensive. Additionally, the imminent arrival of F-16 fighters could grant Ukraine some air superiority, potentially leading to a stalemate where large-scale offensives from either side are unlikely.
A Defining Moment for Global Alliances
Kao Cheng-Pu, a Ph.D. fellow at Taiwan’s National Defense University, highlighted on Pinnacle View that the Russia-Ukraine war is becoming a pivotal conflict delineating two major global camps. One side, led by the United States and NATO, contrasts sharply with a bloc of countries including China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, which lean towards authoritarian regimes.
“Although the Western world and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) have not completely severed ties, recent global developments indicate that the Russia-Ukraine war is gradually forcing countries to choose sides. Russia is already utilizing Iranian-made drones and North Korean-made ammunition,” Mr. Kao said.
Guo Jun, editor-in-chief of The Epoch Times’ Hong Kong edition, emphasized on the program that the Russia-Ukraine war is highly representative, with major powers actively intervening and choosing sides.
“Historically, China has aligned itself with victorious allies over the past century. China sided with the victors in both World War I and World War II. During the Cold War, the CCP initially aligned with the Soviet Union but later switched to align with the West, which ultimately prevailed. Currently, the world is again forming opposing alliances, with the CCP siding with Russia against Europe and the United States,” Ms. Guo elaborated.
Ms. Guo argues that this time the CCP has chosen the wrong side and cannot switch alliances again, as it has become a central figure in the authoritarian bloc opposing the West.
“Since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war, the U.S. has not significantly increased its military presence in Europe but has instead focused on the Asia-Pacific region. If this confrontation continues and escalates, it could determine China’s trajectory for the next hundred years. Significant changes could occur if the CCP collapses suddenly during this period,” Ms. Guo added.
Shi Shan, host of the “Pinnacle View” and senior editor at the Chinese language edition of The Epoch Times, noted on the program several noteworthy developments since Russia invaded Ukraine.
“The U.S. has been bolstering its key military deployments, not in Europe, but in the Asia-Pacific region. This trend is becoming increasingly pronounced. The U.S. and NATO have consistently communicated to the CCP that it cannot maintain relations with Europe while supporting Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. During Secretary Blinken’s visit to China, a primary issue was the CCP’s support for Russia, including economic and military-industrial support,” Mr. Shi pointed out.
Mr. Kao further commented that European countries have been consciously strengthening their military capabilities since Russia invaded Ukraine. Traditional military powers in Europe, such as the UK and France, which are also main pillars of NATO, possess significant strength. He believes that the United States may perceive Europe’s defense needs as primarily requiring ammunition support, trusting that European countries can manage the rest.
How Significant Is Russia’s Threat?
Ms. Guo explained that Russia’s threat to Europe is deeply rooted in history. Historically, while China faced threats primarily from the north, Europe faced invasions from the east. These included the barbarian invasions of Rome, the Mongol invasions, and the Ottoman Empire, all through the Caucasus region. Consequently, Europe’s wariness towards Russia is historically grounded. As Russia expanded rapidly, earning the title of “land-grabbing czar,” it grew from a small country to a vast empire of over 10 million square kilometers (3.8 million square miles), heightening Europe’s wariness.“From a practical standpoint, Europe has not experienced interstate war since World War II. The Russia-Ukraine conflict marks the first large-scale interstate war in Europe since then. Russia’s invasion of a sovereign country has had a significant psychological impact on Europe, especially as many of the over 20 EU countries are relatively small. Russia’s reliance on brute force to resolve disputes poses a substantial threat to these smaller nations,” she said.
Ms. Guo noted that modern warfare heavily depends on logistics, weapons, and economic strength. When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, the United States responded with an aid bill of approximately $46 billion, and Europe contributed around $20 billion, altering the war’s dynamics.
The US Leverages Its Strategy
Ms. Guo believes that neither the United States nor Europe wants the war to escalate or for NATO and the United States to directly engage with Russia. Therefore, the weapons provided to Ukraine are restricted and cannot be used to attack Russian soil. There is an implicit understanding between Russia and NATO to avoid escalating the war, partly explaining the sharp decrease in European aid to Ukraine in the latter half of last year.“The U.S. does not want the war to end quickly. The prolonged conflict benefits the U.S. in two major ways: it keeps Europe under pressure, hindering efforts like Macron’s push for strategic autonomy from the U.S., and it economically strains Russia. For the U.S., spending $100–200 billion to weaken Russia’s economy and influence globally is cost-effective,” Ms. Guo explained.
Mr. Shi compared this with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which cost the United States over a trillion dollars each over several years. In contrast, countering a major power like Russia with a few hundred billion dollars is relatively inexpensive for the United States.
“Some American newspapers and media have interviewed former U.S. military experts. These experts believe that while Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has significant psychological, cultural, and geopolitical impacts on Europe, it does not pose a substantial military threat. They argue that if Russia is struggling against Ukraine, it is unlikely to succeed against other countries, even smaller ones like Sweden or Finland, let alone Germany or France,” Mr. Shi added.
“Therefore, they are not overly concerned. They believe that with adequate weapons and training support, Russia does not present a significant threat. As U.S., NATO, and European aid reach Ukraine, the dynamics on the battlefield will likely change considerably.”
