By Karina Mariotti
The U.S. has contributed to Ukraine’s defense since Russia’s February invasion, ambiguously framing the conflict as a battle for democracy and sending billions in military aid to “weaken” Russia. Now, Congress has overwhelmingly approved an additional $40 billion in aid to Ukraine – even more than the $33 billion President Biden originally requested. In the first set of aid to be delivered through this package, the US will provide Ukraine with advanced rocket systems, a request which had previously been denied given the escalation risks. While there is a case to be made for assisting Ukraine in some capacity, the surge of weapons is increasingly risky as the environment becomes more unstable and the weapons become more advanced. This strategy is creating additional security concerns, while depleting U.S. economic and military resources.
Even before Russia’s invasion, Ukraine was a risky arms recipient. Ukraine had a score of 66 in Cato’s 2021 Arms Sales Risk Index, making it in opportune times about as risky as Venezuela (67), a state on the brink of failure, and only slightly less risky than Saudi Arabia (71), an authoritarian state perpetuating a military and humanitarian crisis. Ukraine’s risk score can be attributed to corruption and state fragility. For 2021, Ukraine scored in the “warning” category in the Fragile States Index, while the Corruption Perceptions Index suggests a significant degree of corruption. Publicly, Ukraine has been the subject of concern for years due to issues with weapons trafficking and its ability to safeguard the weapons it receives. These existing concerns, combined with the fog of war, reasonably indicate that the riskiness of sending arms to Ukraine has increased significantly over three months in.
In continuing to deliver large volumes of weapons to Ukraine regardless, the U.S. helps prolong what was initially anticipated to be a short conflict. Fueled by arms shipments, the conflict becomes riskier and more damaging the longer it goes on. This is despite these weapons having limited prospects for influencing the outcome. That the arms shipments have enabled the Ukrainian military to fight this long does not indicate a clear path to victory. Mariupol was recently lost and Russia is nearing control over all of the Luhansk region. Both come after several weeks of fighting and at high casualty and humanitarian costs.
At the same time, the U.S. risks being perceived by Russia as a participant in the war. Russian leadership has repeatedly hinted at escalation, including to the nuclear level, should there be interference with its actions in Ukraine. Russia is also treating arms shipments as legitimate military targets. With the announcement of rocket systems, the risk of escalation is only increased. The US is sending rockets with an approximate reach of 50 miles, while the systems themselves have an even longer range. In sending these systems, the U.S. is relying on Ukrainian assurances that they will not be used to reach Russian territory, which is a risk in itself. The announcement has already generated a response from Russia, including nuclear drills and a claim that the U.S. is “directly and intentionally” fueling the conflict. Russia’s threats were falsely dismissed as bluffing prior to the invasion. It would be a mistake to continue to do so. There is real risk for escalation both within Ukraine and towards those supplying arms.
This piece was originally published in Townhall on June 19, 2022. Read more HERE.