HIMARS is an important system which has helped Ukraine on the battlefield, but it is also an obvious sign of how dependent Ukraine is on foreign assistance.
Since the US started delivering the M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System or HIMARS to the Ukrainian military there have been lots of reports about how this was the missing puzzle piece for Ukraine; finally they had a high-tech system which allows them to go on the offensive and strike Russian ammunition depots without being exposed to Russian counterattacks. From what I can tell, HIMARS has made a real difference but I see it as both a boon and a liability. HIMARS is a perfect symbol for how Ukraine’s fate is in the West’s hands. If the US stops sending them then Ukraine can’t produce them and lose their advantage in artillery range HIMARS provides. I wouldn’t want to leave anything important in the hands of the fickle American Congress, especially a centerpiece military system on which a country’s military relies.
This reliance on American support to keep giving Ukraine weapons and ammunition is the reason why I think Russia is on track to win the war even as Ukraine is holding strong and launching a counter-offensive. If the war drags on, as it seems likely to, then it’s a matter of time before American politicians lose interest or get side-tracked by partisan fights over the Federal debt ceiling or the culture wars at a time when Ukraine can’t afford not to have the US’ support. I also wonder if this dynamic of Ukraine being reliant on foreign support creates strong incentives for Russia to drag out the war. If a stalemate without big pitched battles on the front pages of the Washington Post can ensure that American and other Western politicians are more concerned with inflation than with Ukraine then it stands to reason that Russia has every incentive to drag out the fighting. Why settle for a cease fire or peace deal now if the West is on track to lose interest and decrease its support for Kyiv, much better to wait so that one can seize more territory from a weaker opponent tomorrow.
I don’t mean to say that supporting Ukraine is pointless, as mentioned HIMARS has enabled Ukraine to hit more important tactical targets and helped the war effort, but it changes how both sides conduct the war. As I’ve written about before on the blog, I wholeheartedly support Ukraine but I wish the conversations we have about the war were more practically minded, acknowledging both the strengths and drawbacks to the policies we enact with regards to the war. No single system will win the war for Ukraine, and sending advanced kit has consequences beyond the immediate battlefield worth contemplating.
If you liked this post you can read a previous post about disinflation here or the rest of my writings here. It would mean a lot to me if you recommended the blog to a friend or coworker. Come back next Monday for a new post!
I've always been interested in politics, economics, and the interplay between. The blog is a place for me to explore different ideas and concepts relating to economics or politics, be that national or international. The goal for the blog is to make you think; to provide new perspectives.
Written by Karl Johansson
Sources:
Cover photo by Brian Verslues from Pexels, edited by Karl Johansson
Comments