Why it is Time for NATO to Stop Fixating on What Constitutes Offensive and Defensive Weaponry
As the conflict in Europe drags on, Ukraine finds itself evermore reliant on the constant influx of weapons provided by NATO member states, which are propping up Volodymyr Zelensky’s outnumbered army. In the past weeks, Ukraine has upped the ante by repeatedly requesting main battle tanks to push back the Russian aggressor. Recent developments such as the UK’s pledge to supply Challenger 2 tanks indicate that NATO’s policy towards providing Kiev with offensive weaponry is changing. The confirmation of this change came earlier this week when both the US and Germany agreed to part with their M1 Abrams and Leopard 2 tanks. This event indicates how Western concerns over the signals that a deal like this could send to Moscow have subsided, as it has become clear that Ukraine is in dire need of further military support.
Up until recently, NATO’s doctrine on military trade with Ukraine remained consistent in an attempt to mitigate the expansion of the conflict in Europe. The unwritten rule that dictated what type of weapons Ukraine received from NATO members was clear, as allied support had been restricted to equipment that has mainly defensive capabilities. Examples range from Himars rocket launchers to M777 howitzers and S-300 air defence systems, which all have the express purpose of defending Ukraine from air and land incursions. Ultimately, “defensive”, which has become the buzzword of the NATO bloc in press conferences and public statements, has come to characterise NATO’s approach to military trade with Ukraine. The metaphorical red line between what distinguishes offensive and defensive that has been created in the heads of European bureaucrats though, is slowly being eroded and here’s why.
First and foremost, the Ukrainian army has shown that it is more than capable of using the West’s military equipment effectively. Due to this, policy experts should not worry over the possibility of high-tech weapons provided by NATO falling into the hands of the Russians. It is also of imperative importance to continue the process of making the Ukrainian forces fully compatible with NATO standards. Kiev, currently finds itself stuck between the past and the present, as the Ukrainian army still operates Soviet-era equipment. This raises an issue that needs to be addressed if the West wants its promise to Ukraine that the country will eventually be admitted into NATO to remain credible. Moreover, Ukraine has already sourced hundreds of modernised T-72 tanks from ex-Warsaw Pact countries, which has garnered no particular reaction from Russia. These specific events indicate that NATO’s concerns often are misplaced given that main battle tanks have already been flowing into Ukraine since the start of the conflict.
The time that the West has wasted over its defensive versus offensive weapons paranoia has also enabled the Russians to regroup and score victories as seen in Soledar. To prevent this conflict from protracting itself and becoming a contest of attrition between the two sides, which plays into the interests of no one, NATO is slowly abandoning its self-imposed restrictions that are hindering Kiev’s war effort. Drastic change is on the horizon as Western practitioners are coming to the realisation that if Ukraine loses Europe loses as well. The West is already knee-deep in this conflict, as the US and the EU have committed roughly €99.6 billion in financial, humanitarian and military aid from 24 January to 20 November 2022. Beyond the financial interests, Ukraine’s defence of its right to democracy and self-determination is a highly symbolic battle that must be supported. Firmly standing with Ukraine by supplying the military equipment requested sends a strong message to other authoritarian regimes around the world that are looking to threaten global political stability.
Even though NATO members have broken the ice regarding their strict military trade doctrine it still remains to be seen if the West is willing to fully grant Zelensky’s requests. Reports coming out of Kiev indicate that around 300 main battle tanks are needed for the Ukrainian army to reconquer its lost territory. Currently, Germany and the US have pledged to supply 14 Leopard 2’s and 31 M1 Abrams, which falls considerably short of the estimated number needed by the Ukranians to launch a new offensive. On top of this, the logistical issues that surround the transportation and training of personnel mean that we are unlikely to see these vehicles on the battlefield for the next two to three months. While Ukraine waits for its new tanks, Kiev must continue to exert pressure on European Leopard 2 operators. With Holland, Finland, and Denmark in talks with Ukraine over this matter, these next few weeks will be decisive in determining if Zelensky can get close to obtaining 300 main battle tanks from NATO.