– Every delay costs Ukraine dearly and leads to more territories falling into Russian hands. We need clear deadlines, was the clear call from Ukraine’s Deputy Defense Minister Anna Maljar on Ukrainian TV on Tuesday night.
Without the help of our Western partners, we will not be able to win this war.
That same evening, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg went out and said that Western countries should send more heavy weapons to the war-torn country.
The blows can be decisive
Several reasons
There are several reasons why western weapons are delayed, says retired Lieutenant General Arne Bård Dalhaug to Dagbladet.
– It is also a bit unclear exactly what they are talking about. Is 10 percent who have reached the front, or to Ukraine? What we do know is that many of the weapons Ukraine has been promised are in NATO territory. The reason for that is that Ukrainian forces train with them there, says Dalhaug.
HARD BATTLES: Car wrecks are lying along the road at the front line at Sievjerodonetsk in the Luhansk region on Wednesday 8 June. In recent weeks, there have been fierce fighting in the area. Photo: Oleksandr Ratushniak / Reuters / NTB
sea view
The delays may also be due to the deliveries having to be transported by rail or in large lorries, he believes. In addition, he points out that one must balance the shipment of ammunition to weapons that are already in Ukraine, and the shipment of new weapons.
– It is an obvious logistical bottleneck to carry so much forward, and it again helps to explain Ukraine’s approach to the war: They are waging a defense war with relatively few forces compared to the Russians, while they are waiting to bring in more and more guns.
“Putin’s nightmare”: – Increased sharply
Tom Røseth, head teacher in intelligence at the staff school, believes, however, that much of the challenge may also lie with some of the donor countries, where arms donations stop in bureaucratic processes.
But, like Dalhaug, he also points out that it is important to have proper training in the western weapon systems, before they are used in Ukraine.
SUMMIT: NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg has announced that NATO countries will probably agree on a comprehensive package for Ukraine at the summit to be held at the end of June. Photo: Valeria Mongelli / AFP 7 NTB
sea view
That is why Ukraine is struggling
Røseth says Ukraine is now in a tough situation, with the danger of further Russian progress in the Donbas.
“The main reason is that Ukraine does not have enough ammunition for its own Soviet-produced weapons and lacks heavier weapon systems to hold back the Russians,” he said.
sea view
–
– What does Ukraine need most now?
– It is long-range artillery, or rocket battery that is long-range, and larger air defense systems to protect big cities, political leadership, and important defense functions, Røseth answers.
For Norway, the assessment may therefore be to send more of the artillery that has already been sent, he believes.
– But it will be a military professional assessment whether we can deliver more in terms of our own defense capability, and whether they are usable. Secondly, it is a political decision.
NEED MORE: Ukrainian forces fire MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System) at Russian positions in the Donbas region on June 7. Experts point out that Ukraine has a great need for more supplies of Western missile systems. Photo: Aris Messinis / AFP / NTB
sea view
– A formidable capacity
Arne Bård Dalhaug points to the same need.
– At the moment, it seems as if artillery is just as important, if not more important, than, for example, tanks. Long-range artillery with sufficient ammunition is probably the picture that is best painted when talking about heavy weapons, but you can of course add armored vehicles, missiles and so on.
– What about Norwegian weapons?
– Naval strike missile, which is produced by Kongsberg, would have been a formidable capacity for Ukraine, Dalhaug answers.
OBSERVER IN UKRAINE: Lieutenant General Arne Bård Dalhaug worked as a civilian observer for the OSCE in Ukraine in 2016-2018. Photo: The Armed Forces.
sea view
He adds that Norway would not have had to donate these directly, as Poland already has such missiles operational on trucks.
– One could have imagined that Poland could have donated these, and that Kongsberg then produced new ones for Poland, he says.
Dalhaug also believes that Ukraine could have benefited from more drones.
– As of now, they have received Switchblade drones, but if the US had been willing to send the Gray Eagle drone equipped with Hellfire missiles, Ukraine would have had a completely different range and capacity. It has been considered in the USA, and Ukraine has also asked for it, says Dalhaug.
sea view
–
Unused weapons in stock
Norway also has the rocket battery system MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System) in stock, which is not in use, says Tom Røseth.
The problem is that the system is equipped with cluster munitions.
Cluster munitions hurl explosives over a larger area, and there is thus a greater risk of hitting civilians. On Monday, Amnesty International accused Russia of committing war crimes in Ukraine using similar ammunition, claiming hundreds of civilian lives had been lost.
EXPERT: Associate professor and head teacher in intelligence at the Norwegian Defense College, Tom Røseth. Photo: The Armed Forces
sea view
– Whether Norway can provide the weapons system is a dilemma, and there may be more Western governments struggling with the same issues. One possible solution is to provide the system, and not the cluster munitions, but then the system needs a modification that will cost, Røseth points out.
Claiming they have destroyed weapons stockpiles
The heaviest weapons
Both the USA and the UK have already delivered MLRS systems, with a different configuration than Norway’s, to Ukraine.
According to Røseth, it is currently the United States that has donated the heaviest weapons to Ukraine, with its MLRS rocket batteries with a range of around 80 kilometers.
Additional donations of air defense systems, which, among other things, are capable of firing Russian missiles, are also much needed in Ukraine, Røseth believes.
– Who’s sitting on that?
– Most NATO countries do, but there are few who have enough of it to be able to dispose of it, and then it quickly becomes the big countries such as the United States and Great Britain.
–
