Last week, Julia Ioffe asked several experts to ponder the consequences of a sudden end to further U.S. aid to Ukraine.
Pifer: Europeans lack the weapons capacity, and Kyiv would need to shift to more defense, but Ukrainians will keep fighting (forever); Kofman: Europe has become better on defense supplying, but U.S. would still be hard to replace; Eric Ciaramella: U.S. coordination is much better than Europe’s, and no U.S. aid means a longer war; an anonymous Kyiv scholar: Ukrainians won’t stop fighting because otherwise “the Russians will torture and kill us all”; Sestanovich: Euros are dangerously divided, and Moscow will pursue “the breakup of Ukraine” — “I could see Poland taking some part of Ukraine if it’s being broken up by the Russians—and then we discover we have an Article 5 commitment to greater Poland” (wow, this is a talking point I’ve seen only in the Russian media, so far), and what’s left of Ukraine could descend into Balkans-level chaos with ethnic discord and a high “amount of killing”; Angela Stent: Poland and Slovakia much bail too with their elections approaching, plus Washington’s credibility would take a hit; Alperovitch: enshrined Russian occupation would unleash even more refugees, destablizing Europe and tanking its capacity to buy U.S. LNG, tech, and agro products.
Ioffe concludes by noting that U.S. funding for Ukraine won’t actually stop “not now, now ever,” and even a “diminished rate” of dollars would take years to stop dripping. Biden Round II can still “shake the couch cushions,” and Washington can keep funneling intangibles like intel and “situational awareness.”
https://puck.news/what-happens-if-the-u-s-stops-aiding-ukraine/
@zleap Nothing lasts forever...