Senators Kelly and Duckworth on the need to continue to support Ukraine

Senator Mark Kelly, and Senator Tammy Duckworth, provided an opinion article in the New York Times detailing their argument for continued support for Ukraine. One point they made was the need for cluster munitions on the front lines. The Russians, anticipating that the Ukrainians would go on the offensive, had months to prepare their fortifications. Cluster munitions would help clear the strengthened fortifications. As commentators following the events in Ukraine have noted, a collapse of these fortifications would lead to larger Ukrainian advances into Russian-controlled territory.

From the New York Times:

War is dynamic. It requires us to look around the next corner. We heard from President Volodymyr Zelensky and met with other Ukrainian officials, and it was clear to us that Ukraine needs not just guns and ammunition but also other, newer capabilities that can decisively alter the direction of the fast-evolving conflict. In the early weeks of the war, Javelin and Stinger missiles were needed to blunt the advantage of Russian armored vehicles and aircraft. Then long-range, mobile artillery to hit Russian positions. After that, High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems to strike strategic targets farther behind Russian lines and then main battle tanks to break them.

Not every weapon system can come off a warehouse shelf and quickly be put to use on the battlefield. That is certainly the case with the F-16. We have both flown in combat. It took hundreds of flight hours to learn to fly the aircraft and more to master the range of different missions we’d be asked to carry out, whether that was dropping bombs on a target or conducting combat search and rescue. That’s why we encouraged the Pentagon in March to analyze what it would take to train Ukrainian pilots and maintainers on modern F-16 fighter jets to replace their aging fighters such as MIG-29s and understand their specific uses in the context of this war. Last week the United States reiterated its commitment to supporting its allies to train Ukrainian pilots to fly the American-made F-16 — a great step toward strengthening Ukraine’s capabilities in the long term.

In all of these cases, the United States had to assess not just whether certain weapons would be effective but also how urgent each priority was relative to others, how quickly Ukrainians could be trained to use the weapons and whether the equipment could be sustained over the course of the war. The more complex a system is, the more difficult to keep it working.

The same assessment went into the administration’s decision to provide Ukraine with cluster munitions, or rounds that disperse smaller explosives. While some oppose this decision because of the risks to civilians associated with using cluster munitions, Mr. Zelensky and his military leadership asked for these weapons because they see them as critical to their nation’s survival. Russia has used cluster munitions — with dud rates as high as 40 percent — since the early days of the war, very likely firing tens of millions of small bombs on Ukrainian soil, including in civilian areas. Unlike Russia, Ukraine has promised to deploy the weapons (U.S.-made cluster munitions have significantly lower dud rates) only in self-defense and away from civilians and to document where to facilitate cleanup after the fighting ends.

The New York Times has the rest of the opinion piece here.  The full article is available via Firefox if the link shows “subscription required.”

Also, it appears that the Ukrainians have expanded their beachhead on the eastern side of Dnieper (Dnipro) River. I remember someone telling me that the Ukrainians would never do this. However, even Russian analysts are acknowledging that the Ukrainians are getting closer to taking control of a major town on the eastern banks of the river.

Category: Russia, Ukraine