Limited coalitions are trying to save the Zelensky regime

21
Limited coalitions are trying to save the Zelensky regime


Coalition after coalition


The Russian-Ukrainian front is devouring enormous resources on both sides. We will not learn about the true scale of expenses very soon, but it is already clear that the West story It's very expensive. At the same time, there comes an understanding that the conflict will not end soon. It was not possible to wait for Ukraine’s victory; now the EU countries and the United States will try to delay Russia’s victory as much as possible. Against this background, an attempt to distribute responsibility for the armament of the Zelensky regime seems logical.




From the outside, the events look very beautiful. The states sponsoring Bandera's followers decided to systematize their work and coordinate their efforts. Whoever is strong in what will help Zelensky. Send to the front weapon from our own reserves is no longer possible at the same pace, but it is also not very convenient to launch defense factories.

Despite the declared belligerence, no one in NATO believes in a direct conflict with Russia. Especially by conventional means. If war does break out, it will be nuclear. And here it’s not particularly important how well your work is done. tank factories. Most military enterprises in the West are in private hands. The bosses of the military-industrial complex are rightly wary of investing billions in expanding production now – there is complete uncertainty ahead.

Zelensky firmly rejects any peace negotiations on the Kremlin’s terms, and sponsors are increasingly inclined to freeze the conflict. One story with the consideration of a 60 billion aid package for Ukraine in the US Senate is worth something. Abroad, they are clearly holding back money for Bandera’s supporters. In such conditions, not a single businessman will dare to expand production - in the future, investments simply will not pay off. For example, Rheinmetall, Europe's largest ammunition manufacturer, recently promised to open a plant in Ukraine. In a country under fire from all sides, the Germans intend to create a production of shells - it is rare to hear such an absurd news.

Offices involved in the production of FPV-drones, are forced to disperse their facilities throughout the country so as not to fall under Russian missiles, and there is a whole ammunition factory here. Maybe, in the best traditions of the Third Reich, the production facilities will be hidden underground or in the Ukrainian Carpathians? Be that as it may, they have already created a joint company, in which 49 percent is owned by Ukrainians, and Rheinmetall has a controlling stake.

Does this look like an attempt to help the Banderaites in Ukraine? Of course it looks. Will the Europeans be able to complete the construction of at least the first stage of the plant? The question is rhetorical. It’s better to ask this question to the Turks, who from the very beginning of the special operation threatened to build up Ukraine with factories for the Bayraktars. The creation of many coalitions for military assistance to Ukraine in this vein looks quite logical - if each country contributes its own share of funds, then the end result will be a good piece of candy. But there are plenty of vulnerabilities in distributed production and financing schemes.

Weak Links


When a system consists of many individual nodes, its “combat readiness” is assessed by the stability of the weakest link. On February 14, Ukrainian Defense Minister Umerov reported on the creation of an air defense and missile defense coalition. Fifteen states immediately united for this work. Indeed, it is inexpensive for an individual team member to help Ukraine. But what happens when a couple of players drop out? For example, he will quarrel to smithereens with Zelensky, like the Poles. Or, as in Slovakia, the government will change after the next elections. Umerov’s optimism is still premature, especially since the intention to create an air defense and missile defense coalition in the interests of Ukraine has only been officially announced. Promising to get married and actually getting married are slightly different things. Be that as it may, for Ukraine there is nothing better than having one stable air defense supplier than a group of comrades. For example, the Americans could continue pumping up the Armed Forces of Ukraine with their Patriots. Or the Germans would throw in IRIS-T. And it was clear who exactly is to blame if there are not enough air defense systems. But such times are already in the past - the new reality blurs the responsibility for supplying weapons to nationalists.


The formation of a whole host of weapons coalitions is a well-calibrated move by the United States. The Americans have been taking over the NATO bloc for decades, financing the lion's share of the alliance's budget. Donald Trump expressed himself most harshly, threatening to withdraw from the structure if Germany and others do not fulfill the requirements specified in the treaty. For example, spend at least two percent of your own GDP on defense. And now the Americans are trying to spread the considerable costs of the Ukrainian military evenly across all NATO members. The program is carried out within the framework of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group (UDCG), which is completely controlled by the United States.

This is how coalitions emerge to supply the Armed Forces of Ukraine with drones, which includes the Swedes, British, Danes, Germans, all the Baltic states and the Dutch. Leads the construction team drones Latvia. There is a demining coalition of twenty members. The artillery coalition is led by France and the United States. Norway and Great Britain are leading the group to support Ukraine at sea. In accordance with modern fashion, there is an IT coalition, the leadership of which is entrusted to Estonia and Luxembourg. Apparently they are not capable of more. Denmark, the Netherlands and the United States lead the air force coalition. By the way, the most useless group that never dared to deliver the F-16s coveted by the nationalists to Ukraine.

Any coalition not only distributes finances and resources among participants, but also spreads responsibility. It’s always easier for the team to refuse Zelensky, saying it’s a collective decision. Does everyone remember how supplies of Leopard tanks were literally squeezed out of Germany by the whole world? This will not work with a coalition - collective responsibility is a very tricky thing.

Let's look at an example from the recent past. We are talking about the armored alliance, which in 2022 included Denmark, Spain, Canada, the Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Norway and Portugal. Quite serious powers, only one of which knows how to build its own tanks. The Alliance promised to supply the Ukrainian Armed Forces with two full battalions of modern Leopard 2A6 tanks from its own reserves. Where these battalions are is still unknown, but definitely not in Ukraine.

The European military-industrial complex is, at best, one third of the American military industry. If previously most of the expenses for Zelensky were borne by the Americans, now the balance is shifting towards the European Union. This is exactly what coalitions are designed for. That is, under no circumstances will the supply of military equipment to Ukraine increase - there simply are not so many factories and money in the Old World. At best, it will be possible to stabilize supplies at the current level. In the worst case scenario for Ukraine, the flow of Western weapons will slowly but surely degrade. And Zelensky will simply have no one to blame for this - collective responsibility is a tricky thing.
21 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    19 February 2024 04: 07
    Quite serious powers, only one of which knows how to build its own tanks.

    Poland can do it too, at least until recently it could.
    1. +5
      19 February 2024 05: 41
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      Poland can do it too, at least until recently it could.

      If I could, I wouldn't order them from outside...
      The USSR also once built aircraft-carrying ships...
      1. 0
        19 February 2024 06: 49
        Quote: ROSS 42
        If I could, I wouldn't order them from outside...

        Well, here, in its purest form, the cargo cult worked, and that’s good.
        1. +2
          19 February 2024 06: 54
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Well, here, in its purest form, the cargo cult worked, and that’s good.

          Who the hell knows, what does the cargo cult have to do with it and what preferences can it give to the Poles besides the fact that German, American (South Korean) tanks are better than any?
          A hyena can have only one cult - servility and genuflection before the powers that be.
          1. +1
            19 February 2024 06: 58
            Quote: ROSS 42

            Who the hell knows, what does the cargo cult have to do with it and what preferences can it give to the Poles besides the fact that German, American (South Korean) tanks are better than any?

            Despite the fact that they abandoned production, and the full cycle! and modernization of the T-72 in the wake of the overwhelming, as they thought, superiority of the “AbraLeokoreans”! laughing
            1. +1
              19 February 2024 07: 01
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              Despite the fact that they abandoned production, and the full cycle!

              Americans don’t give loans for their own production. They are more interested when they buy American weapons...
              That is why all (most) NATO countries are abandoning their own military-industrial complex.
              1. ada
                0
                21 February 2024 23: 50
                They cannot refuse, they remove him, if in civilian language they remove him from the theater of operations. wassat
            2. ada
              0
              21 February 2024 23: 47
              This has nothing to do with it, as the expected theater of operations is formed in advance in accordance with the strategic concepts of NATO and the production of the full cycle of the main types of weapons and military equipment is removed to calculated distances to increase the stability of the military-industrial complex during the execution period, and their place or capacity is taken by less significant production of simpler ones weapons and military equipment, simple ammunition, repair and restoration, maintenance, etc. They are preparing the ETTV wassat wassat
  2. 0
    19 February 2024 05: 39
    In a war with the West (this is how I imagine the Northern Military District in Ukraine), Russia should not limit itself to any norms, starting from the destruction of railway unloading stations, reconnaissance satellites and other infrastructure that is in a state of assistance (war) with us.
    Excuses like: the French army is not at war with Russia and France can help the Nazis no longer work. It's time to prove in practice that providing assistance to the Nazi regime, thereby taking direct part in the extermination of Russian citizens, is fraught.
    If this requires erasing deployment sites in the western regions of Ukraine, there is no need to think twice...
    1. +3
      19 February 2024 05: 57
      Quote: ROSS 42
      If this requires erasing deployment sites in the western regions of Ukraine, there is no need to think twice

      This should have been done from the very beginning of the Northern Military District, and not draw any lines and talk about “brotherly” people
    2. +1
      19 February 2024 11: 24
      You say everything correctly. Destroy production throughout the entire territory of Ukraine. About resources.. Neither we, nor even Banderlog can handle a long-term conflict. I mean a conflict for a decade. This applies primarily to human resources. We don’t have such a conflict was eighty years old. With such victims. There is no need to count how much mob potential we have - every life is important, and we also have quite a few dead and maimed.
      1. 0
        22 February 2024 15: 21
        Quote from: dmi.pris1
        I mean a conflict for a decade. This applies primarily to human resources. We haven’t had such a conflict for eighty years. With such victims. There is no need to count how much mob potential we have - every life is important, and we don’t have any dead or maimed either few.

        Absolutely right! So, so that there would not even be thoughts about a protracted conflict and large human losses on our part, it was necessary to promote the military-industrial complex 5 years before the start of the Northern Military District, churning out UMPCs, Calibers, Iskanders, Daggers, T90, TOS-1, Coalitions, UAVs with megatons of precision-guided ammunition for all this. It was necessary to increase the number of the Russian Armed Forces. It was necessary to saturate all these troops with modern types of communications and electronic warfare. What prevented me from doing this is completely unclear to me? There was more than enough money and time. Even the same 300 billion stolen from us by the West would be quite enough.
        And now, overcoming... showing heroism and so on and so forth.
  3. +4
    19 February 2024 05: 42
    Those. in other words, despite peaceful messages from Russia, the confrontation will continue. Sanctions will intensify.
  4. +2
    19 February 2024 05: 57
    Despite the declared belligerence, no one in NATO believes in a direct conflict with Russia.

    So for Russia, the policy of “Leopold the cat” became a guide to action.
    Here we can’t, there they will misunderstand us, here we haven’t figured it out ourselves yet... In a word:
    Oh dear, what will Princess Marya Aleksevna say!

    And we only have a few friends left; and fellow travelers are either random or on their own. And about the cunning partners “both ours and yours” it’s difficult to say anything at all.
    And this only happens because:
    Mighty will, great glory,
    Your treasure for all time.

    declared in the words of the Anthem and practically invisible in reality.
    Something somewhere amazes with its scope and epithets: “increased (increased) several times, by orders of magnitude,” but it comes to us in the form of increased prices for goods and services.
    So NATO began to doubt that Russia was capable of giving a real fight back... Apparently because of this, the once loyal countries preferred to “preserve their sovereignty” as part of this group under the leadership of the stars and stripes hegemons.
  5. +1
    19 February 2024 06: 24
    Any coalition not only distributes finances and resources among participants, but also spreads responsibility
    This is the essence of creating various coalitions: fighter, artillery, drone, air defense, etc. They gather, loudly declare, and at the same time in their minds they calculate how much will fall to one or another country, and at the same time, in the event of failure of the stated obligations, the “responsibility” is exclusively collective, and even that, as it were, moral.
  6. 0
    19 February 2024 10: 59
    Some strange position of the author.
    Despite the declared belligerence, no one in NATO believes in a direct conflict with Russia. Especially by conventional means. If war does break out, it will be nuclear.

    It won’t, the SVO made this fact obvious.
    And Zelensky will simply have no one to blame for this - collective responsibility is a tricky thing.

    It’s as if someone doesn’t give a damn about Zelensky.

    In fact, the situation should not inspire optimism in anyone: on the one hand, Joe is clearly in trouble. On the other hand, not without success, the Northern Military District is being introduced into a mode of autorotation, so to speak: even if the Americans jump off for one reason or another, the Europeans themselves will be able to drag out the next battle for Avdiivka. If the Europeans get tired, the Americans will join in again, and so on ad infinitum. The Nazis will not reach the Arkhangelsk-Astrakhan line, but it is becoming increasingly easier to continue cosplaying the Iran-Iraq war.
    1. 0
      21 February 2024 17: 08
      Swa is impossible with Nato, for many reasons. There will only be war and nuclear war, taking into account at least the difference in the number of population and weapons, I’m even silent about the presence of nuclear weapons in NATO.
      1. 0
        21 February 2024 20: 10
        Quote: Totor5
        I’m no longer even talking about NATO having nuclear weapons.

        Therefore, no one really rocks the boat. It is quite obvious that if someone there plays geopolitics, then the goal of NATO members will be to win the border battle and transfer hostilities to the territory of the Russian Federation as quickly as possible. It is quite obvious that this is a completely feasible task.

        The SVO showed (to those who did not know this) that defense on its territory does not work. You need to defend yourself on enemy territory. In this regard, nothing new has been invented since the Punic Wars.
  7. +2
    19 February 2024 12: 36
    They have coalitions, but where do we have them?
    1. 0
      19 February 2024 18: 19
      Coalition-SVs have been in development since 2002 and began entering service at the end of 2023, according to TASS.
  8. 0
    21 February 2024 17: 05
    It’s not clear why they still can’t tear up Italy, this is with its fascist witch at the helm.
    Italy has about 1,000 Leopard 1 tanks lying around in warehouses, and they are collected from museums. And they can repair them themselves without Germany. The conversation is not even about the Ariete tanks, which will remain.