Nineteen former US diplomats and generals called on the US administration to step up military aid to Ukraine before it was too late. In their opinion, the current level of support will not be enough to push Russian forces out of the occupied territories.
By providing aid enough to hold a stalemate but not enough to deprive Russia of its territorial gains, the Biden administration may inadvertently lead to defeat, although it would seem that victory is certain – the signatories of the letter write on The Hill website, including former commanders of NATO and US forces in Europe, Philip Breedlove, Wesley Clark and Ben Hodges, as well as former US ambassadors in Ukraine, Germany, NATO, the USSR and Poland (Daniel Fried) .
They are appealing to provide Ukraine with, inter alia, ATACMS missiles, 300 km range missiles fired from HIMARS systems (the range of previously transferred missiles is 80 km), more short and medium-range air defense systems, as well as “constant supplies of ammunition and spare parts” to artillery guns that are ” in constant use “.
They also argue that if the US decides to donate more advanced weapons – such as HIMARS – they should ship it in bulkto “maximize the effect on the battlefield”.
The signatories also criticize the justification for the refusal to supply weapons with a longer range provided by, inter alia, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, who stated that this could lead to World War III.
Putin and other senior Russian officials have repeatedly (…) reminded the West of the dangers of nuclear war. But the US is also a nuclear power and it is a strategic mistake to suggest that nuclear deterrence no longer works – the authors write.
We can believe that each day that we delay the supply of weapons to Ukraine that it needs to win, we are avoiding a confrontation with the Kremlin. (But there is) exactly the opposite, (thus) we only increase the likelihood that we will face this danger on less favorable terms – they conclude.