“It's quite clear that it's going to be difficult for them to try to do the same kind of significant pressure on all fronts that they tried to do last year,” a senior administration official said.
The idea now is to put Ukraine where it is on the battlefield right now, but “put it on a different path to be much stronger by the end of 2024… and put it on a more sustainable path,” the senior official said. One of many who described the internal policy-making process on condition of anonymity.
The U.S. planning is part of a multilateral effort by nearly three dozen countries that support Ukraine to pledge long-term security and economic support — both out of necessity, given the disappointing results of last year's counteroffensive and the conviction that a similar effort this year is likely to materialize. To achieve the same result, and as a testament to the enduring determination of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Each prepares a document setting out its specific commitments extending out a decade into the future. Britain announced its 10-year agreement with Ukraine publicly last week, and it was signed by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Kiev. It identified contributions to “maritime, air, air defense, artillery and armour” as well as financial support and access to its financial sector. France is expected to be next, with President Emmanuel Macron's upcoming visit to Ukraine.
But the success of this strategy depends almost entirely on the United States, which is the largest donor of funds and equipment to Ukraine, and the coordinator of multilateral efforts. This spring, the administration hopes to launch its 10-year commitment, which the State Department is now putting together with the White House's blessing — assuming President Biden's $61 billion request for additional funding for Ukraine is approved by a recalcitrant Congress.
The shaky ground on which this assumption now rests — as House Republicans appear to be digging deeper into rejecting the money — is worrying for Western allies and Ukraine itself.
“Certainly the leadership and engagement of the United States in the long term, but also at this very important stage, is crucial,” a senior European official said. He added: “The additional annex is a must to continue… not only on the ground, but as a demonstration of the West’s resolve… [Putin] Understand that he will not win.
“We will not be able to survive without the support of the United States, it is a real fact,” Zelensky said in a television interview last week.
Fortifying Ukraine against Trump in the future
According to US officials, the US document will ensure support for short-term military operations as well as build a future Ukrainian military force that can deter Russian aggression. This plan will include specific promises and programs to help protect, rebuild and expand Ukraine's industrial and export base, and to assist the country in implementing the political reforms necessary for full integration into Western institutions.
A US official said it was no coincidence that the hope was that the long-term promise — assuming Congress approves again — would also provide “future-proofed” aid to Ukraine against the possibility of former President Donald Trump winning his re-election bid.
While the White House continues to try to convince lawmakers, another senior administration official stressed that this strategy does not mean that the Ukrainians will build their defensive trenches and “sit behind them” all year. “There is still territory swapping” in small towns and villages of little strategic value, “missile and drone firing” by both sides, and “Russian attacks on civilian infrastructure,” this official said.
Instead of the massive artillery bombardment that dominated most of the fighting in the second half of 2022 and much of 2023, the West's hope is As for 2024, Ukraine will avoid losing any area larger than a fifth of the country's area that Russia now occupies. In addition, Western governments want Kiev to focus on tactics in which its forces have had more success recently — firing at longer ranges, including French cruise missiles that it has promised to deliver within the next few months; reining in the Russian Black Sea Fleet to protect sea transit from Ukrainian ports; And restricting Russian forces inside the Crimean Peninsula with missile strikes and special sabotage operations.
Zelensky insists that Ukraine remains on the offensive. He said in a recent video speech that plans for 2024 are “not just defensive.” We want our country to maintain the initiative, not the enemy.”
But US policymakers who recently met with him privately say Zelensky has doubts about how ambitious he will be in the coming year without clarity on US aid.
“We have been asked about our plan, but we need to understand what resources we will get,” Ukrainian MP Roman Kostenko said. “At the moment, everything points to the possibility that we will have less than last year, when we tried to counterattack and it did not work. … If we have less than that, it is clear what the plan is. It will be defence.”
“No one excludes offensive measures from the equation,” said Serhiy Rachmanin, another member of parliament. “But in general… it is very difficult to envision a serious global strategic offensive operation in 2024. Especially if we look at the general situation of foreign aid, and not just from the United States.”
Even those who believe that Ukraine can eventually overcome Russia acknowledge that 2024 will be lean and dangerous. “Most likely there will not be huge territorial gains,” Latvian President Edgars Rinkević said in an interview. “The only strategy is to get as much as possible into Ukraine to help them firstly defend their cities… and secondly to simply help them not lose ground.”
Kosti Salim, Permanent Secretary of the Estonian Ministry of Defence, agrees: “We have become a hostage of time to some extent.” “It's just a question of whether we can walk through this valley of death.”
“You must have something to fight with.”
Along the front line, the Ukrainian military has begun preparing accordingly, aiming to replicate the Russian multi-layered defenses of trenches and minefields in the country's southeastern Zaporizhya region that hampered last year's counteroffensive.
“Ordinary soldiers are not very interested in that [Ukrainian] “Politics and foreign policy,” said a Ukrainian commander in the eastern Donetsk region, who was not authorized to speak publicly. “But when you feel yourself that this is not enough, as is the case now with ammunition, mortars and shells, it immediately raises concern. You can fight, but you must have something to fight with.”
US policymakers say they expect the war to eventually end through negotiations — but they also believe Putin will not be serious about talks this year, in part because he holds out hope that Trump will reclaim the presidency in November and back away from his support. To Kyiv.
Trump, who has long promoted a special relationship with Putin, said months ago that if he returned to the White House, he would “settle this war in one day, within 24 hours.” In a television interview last week, Zelensky called the allegation “very serious” and called on Trump to visit Kiev to share any plan he might have.
The long-term strategy to transform Ukraine for the future has its roots in the G7 declaration of support issued last summer in which Western leaders promised to build a “sustainable” military force that is interoperable with the West, and to promote “economic stability and prosperity” in Ukraine. “Hold on.”
However, this policy carries risks, including political risks, if Ukrainians begin to blame their government for the stagnancy of the front lines. Likewise, officials in Western capitals are keenly aware that their citizens' patience with financing the war in Ukraine is not unlimited.
In the midst of planning, Washington also appears to be preparing the argument that even if Ukraine cannot regain all of its territory in the near term, it needs significant ongoing assistance to be able to defend itself and become an integral part of the West. .
“We can see what Ukraine’s future can and should be, regardless of exactly where the lines are drawn,” Blinken said earlier this month at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “This is a future in which it stands firmly on its feet militarily, economically and democratically.”
'There is no silver bullet' for arming Ukraine
In talks with lawmakers, administration officials emphasized that only about half of the requested $61 billion is targeted at the current battlefield, while the rest is directed toward helping Ukraine strengthen its resilience. A secure future without massive Western aid.
The US document, according to US officials closely involved in the planning, was written with four phases in mind: combat, build, recover, and repair.
Eric Ciaramella, a former CIA intelligence analyst and now a senior fellow on Russian affairs, said what was urgently needed in the “fight” phase was “artillery ammunition, some replacement of vehicles” lost in the counterattack, and “a lot of Of drones. and the Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which consulted with administration officials. “A lot of electronic warfare and anti-drone technology – that's where the Russians have an advantage. They need more air defense systems to cover more cities.
Although Ukraine is still eagerly awaiting the promised delivery of fighter jets and more armored vehicles this year, these are “expensive systems with single points of failure,” Ciaramella said. “I think the Ukrainians realize there is no silver bullet, after seeing a $1 million tank destroyed by a $10,000 mine” during the counterattack.
The “build” phase of the strategy focuses on pledges for future Ukrainian security forces on land, sea and air, so that Ukrainians “can see what they will get from the international community over a 10-year period… “We will emerge from 10 years,” the first senior administration official said. 2024 with a road map towards a highly deterrent army.” At the same time, some of the additional funds requested are aimed at developing Ukraine’s industrial base for weapons production, which, along with increases achieved by the United States and its allies, can “at least keep pace with Russian production.”
The plan also includes additional air defense to create protective “bubbles” around Ukrainian cities outside Kiev and Odessa, and allow key parts of the Ukrainian economy and exports, including steel and agriculture, to recover. Last fall, Biden appointed former Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker as a US envoy to lead efforts to rebuild the Ukrainian economy and mobilize public and private investments.
US officials acknowledge that attracting foreign investment back to Ukraine will also require additional efforts to root out corruption. Zelensky has taken some steps, including dismissing and, in some cases, arresting allegedly corrupt military procurement officials and judges; The European Union has called for other initiatives as it considers Ukraine's eventual EU membership.
But as talks and planning for the future continue, not all Ukraine supporters believe this is the moment to shift focus away from sending what is necessary for Ukraine to confront the Russians as quickly and decisively as possible on the battlefield this year.
“Whatever strategy you use, you need every weapon you can think of,” former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said during a visit last week to pressure Republican lawmakers to approve funding for Ukraine.
He added: “You cannot win a war by taking an incremental, step-by-step approach.” “You have to surprise and overwhelm your opponent.”
Khurshudyan reported from Kiev and Ruhala from Brussels. Camilla Hrabchuk and Anastasia Galuszka in Kiev contributed to this report.
