russia's main narratives this week were hysterics over arms transfers to Ukraine, attempts to accuse Ukraine of disrupting grain supplies, and the world's food crisis. Also, as a political signal to other countries, particularly over the death sentences in the so-called "DPR" of three foreigners who fought for Ukraine. In Friday's "War Speeches" online discussion, participants discussed how to make Ukraine's arms transfer process more efficient.
"And this is even more common on the agenda than, for example, NATO enlargement, which has been a mantra and was repeated as an existential threat, or whether Ukraine's status as an EU candidate is possible. These topics are not so relevant as arms supplies. The demilitarization boomerang is returning to russia with such a powerful blow that I don't know if it will be able to cope with its approach. russia is trying to discredit Ukraine or realize its own goals, inventing contrived slogans. These slogans are then implemented to some extent, as we have seen in the case of Sweden and Finland in preparing for NATO accession. Why is this topic so relevant? The answer seems obvious. The militarization of Ukraine, not in the russian sense, but in the sense of a country that cares about its sovereignty, is the key to truly winning, either in the short term or in the long run. This is a condition for us to preserve our independence, restore our territorial integrity, and call into question russia's imperial ambitions without even doing anything about any attack or aggression against the russian federation. Obviously, this is the first push of the domino, which could ruin the russian empire or the current configuration of the russian federation with its imperial ambitions. That's why they understand it," OPORA's analyst Oleksandr Neberykut said.
According to OPORA's analyst Anatolii Bondarchuk, the issue of arms transfer was, of course, one of the key topics this week. Especially considering that another meeting will take place in Rammstein next week. He also notes that the Ukrainian side expects a gradual but successful move to increase the supplies of heavy weapons. In its propaganda, russia is trying to promote the thesis that, on the one hand, these weapons do not strengthen Ukraine's position but only cover the losses that Ukraine suffers. On the other hand, russia is reacting aggressively to the possibility of supplying Ukraine with MLRS and ammunition, which can hit targets at a distance of more than 100 km. russia was trying to counter this, the analyst said.
Also, this week, there were several important topics in the Ukrainian war speeches. In particular, the statement of the Minister of Defense on the transfer of Polish Krab anti-aircraft guns, which became the 5th type of 155 mm artillery of Western caliber handed over to us. But we can assume, according to Bondarchuk, that this artillery is not the last to be handed over to us.
In addition, the topic of European integration, which is extremely important for Ukraine, was circulating in the information space. The EU Summit will take place on 23-24 June. During it, the European Council may decide to grant Ukraine EU candidate status. Verkhovna Rada Speaker Ruslan Stefanchuk visited Germany and France on a European integration tour. He attended a meeting of the European Parliament, which adopted a resolution recommending that the European Council grant Ukraine EU candidate status. Also, next week we are waiting for the decision of the European Commission on the basis of the Questionnaire completed by Ukraine.
Another important topic was the situation around the unblocking of Ukrainian ports. A meeting of Turkish and russian foreign ministers took place in Turkiye. russian diplomacy is trying to work as a propaganda promoter on all diplomatic platforms. In particular, russia again accuses Ukraine of a grain crisis. From public statements, it's currently impossible to trace the results of agreements to resolve this issue. But Ukraine won't support any negotiations without its participation on any issue. russian propaganda has actively raised the issue of death sentences from the so-called "DPR" pseudo-court to three foreign nationals who fought for Ukraine. The Ukrainian side appeals that these prisoners of war cannot be brought to justice. Direct participation in hostilities can't be the reason for punishment if they have not committed war and other crimes defined by international law. Formally, this is the so-called "DPR" decision, but we understand this is another russian action, which is unacceptable in this hybrid war. russia also constantly emphasizes that it will investigate crimes allegedly committed by the Ukrainian military on the territory of Mariupol and will allegedly be assisted by "residents of the liberated city."
"We understand the fakeness of all this, although it all grows into rhetoric, which is correct in terms of jurisprudence, international law, and so on - that's how the occupiers present it all. But we understand that in terms of compliance with the standards, this lawsuit is an injustice court. And neither the russian federation nor the so-called republics controlled by it can give any guarantees of a fair trial. Despite the unprecedented brutality and cynicism of such sanctions and the approaches themselves, it is obvious that there will be a parade of such show tribunals. And this, obviously, will also be used for diplomatic purposes. Because this is a clear signal specifically for the countries whose representatives were convicted in this case. Like, you can react - whether exchange or concessions. It will be used politically," Oleksandr Neberykut said.
As noted by Olena Tregub, Secretary General of the Independent Anti-Corruption Commission (NACO), one of russia's goals is to harm Ukraine and stop the supply of weapons from the Allies. They achieve this not only by launching missiles at logistics points but also by information campaigns with relevant narratives.
The expert listed the main russia's narratives:
1) do not give Ukrainians weapons because they are corrupt, they will steal everything and sell it;
2) do not give Ukrainians weapons because they will turn into Syria or Afghanistan - the situation will get out of control;
3) do not give weapons to Ukrainians because then some terrorists will shoot down the plane with these weapons (for example, with the help of Stinger) somewhere in Eastern Europe or elsewhere.
"We must understand that these narratives are not only spread and launched as opinions among experts, not necessarily enemies of Ukraine but among all. And russia is working on this discreditation. There should be no surprise if the russians do some provocation with these Western weapons, which, for example, they will seize on the battlefield, and our special services won't have time to prevent it. They will accuse Ukraine of something. I think our government is well aware of this. That is why Ukraine has shown itself responsibly with the weapons we have already received, we use them responsibly. We cannot allow ourselves to be compared to Syria or Afghanistan. Because, unlike, for example, Afghanistan, Ukraine has our entire government, our entire army. We have everything under control, everything works. Therefore, we must say that we function as a state today. And our Armed Forces are repelling the enemy, who has ten times more weapons potential," Olena Tregub said.
According to the expert, the narrative about corruption is not very harmful to us because if there is corruption, which is a standard practice in the world during any armed conflict, it usually concerns something small, not lethal weapons. And the main thing is that law enforcement agencies act immediately, criminal cases are initiated, and parliamentary oversight functions. There is no division of weapons into defensive and offensive, this division is artificial and political. The Western world is now moving to "weapons that can escalate the conflict," terminology, e.g., the weapons that can increase violence and aggression. "It is, in fact, an escalation of the war between Ukraine and russia. But it is also an escalation of, how to say, such a diplomatic conflict between the United States and russia, an escalation of a new Cold War, I would say. Ukraine's argument should use the answer that all weapons provided to Ukraine are of a defensive nature. Because Ukraine is not an aggressor country. We are defending our territory. What kind of offensive weapon can we talk about? If we counterattack, we do so in our territory, which is now occupied. Our goal is to liberate our people, our territories. That's all. This is one of the excuses for explaining why we cannot receive what we ask for. They still have many excuses, and Ukraine needs to know how to respond to everything. Because we need to prove not only to the administrations of those countries, in particular the United States, that we need to receive weapons faster, in larger quantities and more serious heavy weapons, but we also need to tell all these arguments to the electorate. Because not all voters in the United States, for example, understand that Ukraine is not really given the weapons it needs. Because the administration is doing everything to convince its voters that it is doing everything possible and giving Ukraine everything they can. Therefore, we must explain that no, we need such a weapon, and it costs us 200 lives a day, as today the representative of OP declares. I think Ukraine should conduct this advocacy not only through the OP but also from civil society representatives," Olena Tregub said.
According to the expert, the voters of our partner countries should know that despite their intelligence since October talked about a plan for a full-scale russian war in Ukraine, we were given only guerrilla weapons at our request for powerful weapons for protection. Now there can be no excuses that russia will occupy Ukraine in 3 days. Therefore, there should be a clear rule that Ukraine should get what it needs and what it asks for. But Ukraine also needs to justify its weapons needs seriously. For example, in official weapons applications, we must mathematically calculate how many lives Ukraine will save with these weapons, how many losses it will inflict on the enemy, how many economic assets it will protect, and so on. This will help level out the excuse, "We don't understand why you need it. We know better what you need." The expert believes that there is a problem in communication. "It is the effective communication that directly determines how many weapons we will receive," Olena Tregub said.
"The collective security that exists in NATO is unalterable at this stage. Any country in Europe, if it was attacked by russia, could not resist alone. It is simply impossible in terms of mathematics and military that protection could have been done by allies," Olena Tregub said. One of the theoretical options for ensuring security guarantees is to saturate Ukraine with weapons in order to surpass russia in parity so that in the coming years, it will not dare to attack again. But, as the expert notes, we now have only 10% of this saturation in practice. The expert emphasizes that for the front we have now and so that russia does not attack us in the future, for this parity, we need 96 HIMARS, at least 50 F-16 aircraft, and at least 250 modern Abrams tanks. No one has provided us with these weapons on such a scale.
"The fact that we now have a lot of weapons, as it may seem, does not mean that we are creating such a defense that russia will be afraid of us. Because every weapon must be integrated into the defense system," Olena Tregub said. According to her, from other countries, we receive, in particular, Soviet weapons, which are close to losing their usefulness. We now have more weapons than we did before the full-scale war, but this is not the level to have security guarantees. And all the new generation weapons can be introduced in our country only over time because we still need to learn how to use these weapons.
"To have these security guarantees, we need to be funded on a huge scale for weapons in the tens of billions of dollars," Olena Tregub said. The expert emphasizes that in the $ 40 billion aid package for Ukraine from the United States, only $ 15 billion are weapons. And this $ 15 billion is the most significant amount we've ever received for weapons. But, according to the expert, this package also includes the money that goes to help NATO countries. They receive this assistance precisely because russia started the war in Ukraine. Therefore, the aid package is generally called "for Ukraine", but it is not for Ukraine only. "We need to build this whole security guarantee, such saturation, gradually. But there is a problem with this - this gradualness and this insufficiency. So, for now, it is unrealistic to expect that we will have security guarantees with weapons in the next year or two. Let's say it's a five-year perspective. If let's say our war ends in victory now, and if russia postpones its next war against Ukraine for a while, which seems inevitable, Ukraine will be able to build it. But I do not think that russia does not understand this and therefore is unlikely to delay it. The next war with russia could happen in 2023, 2024, 2025. All these scenarios have long been known and written. Therefore, I think that, of course, we need to insist on the weapons supplies - this is our greatest hope. We rely on our army and Western weapons. And on our own defense industry (defense-industrial complex), which should be on new rails after the war, to start joint ventures with NATO companies. But on the other hand, we must look for additional security guarantees. If not with NATO, then to sign alliances with Britain and other strong countries with strong armies, ready to sign a document with us saying that if Ukraine is attacked, our ally goes to war. Nobody is ready to sign such a document with us yet," Olena Tregub said.
Regarding the volume of arms transfers, the expert notes that different countries have different capabilities. This is often manipulated. Because it depends on how you count. If we count on GDP, on how much money per capita is allocated for weapons, then in the US, it will be $ 10-12, and in Germany € 20-30. And for example, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania gave us the most in terms of availability because they provided half of their defense budget.
"We understand that this is meager despite all the unprecedented assistance provided. Obviously, all the weapons provided allow us to increase our actions' effectiveness now, but this is not enough to end this war. So far, I see that these arms supplies are a signal to the russian federation that Ukraine's allies are ready for a protracted war," Oleksandr Neberykut said.
"On the one hand, russia is trying very hard to work in terms of internal and external propaganda. It is trying to break and disperse this unity of the West, thus creating additional benefits for itself. But on the other hand, many russia's public statements seem to indicate that russia wants an end to this war, of course, on its terms and with the preservation of the occupied territories. And this point must also be taken into account. When they feel ready to finish the war, they will try to finish it. Especially realizing that Ukraine will receive a large number of weapons," Anatolii Bondarchuk said. He also noted that next week would be crucial for Ukraine. There will be a meeting in Rammstein, as well as the decision of the European Commission. This will be a powerful signal to our citizens from our allies.