[Goose]

Goose,

How long can Ukraine survive if the US Congress fails to provide additional aid?  Can Ukraine defend itself until after the next American election, or will its defenses collapse before then if the spigot is not turned back on?

I know the President has found various ways to continue to get some aid to Ukraine, but I presume the work-around solutions are running out.

There are two very different factors that control how long Ukraine will continue organized national resistance to Russia. One is the physical ability to keep fighting. If the US cannot deliver things like Patriot missiles and other air defense material, the Russian missile strikes will take an increasing toll on their infrastructure. No bombs and missiles from the US will limit the effectiveness of any F-16s they get. They won't be able to use their HIMARS either because they will eventually be flat out of missiles.  Most important, no 155 mm shells means that Ukraine's counter-battery operations will be limited to what they can get from the EU, which we already know is grossly inadequate to allow Ukraine to hold the line everywhere. The EU may be able to increase it's aid to Ukraine, but even best case they can't deliver anything near to what would be required for Ukraine to hold their current lines for another year. They will get pushed back by the Russians in some areas. I don't know how much and how fast it will be, but it will happen.

I don't think the "work-arounds" are running out. In fact, I expect the administration to become even more creative in making them work. The problem is some big-ticket items can't be hidden that way. Germany can supply more Patriots from their stocks in return for some promises from the administration, for example. Those promises will become public pretty quickly. How much heat will that generate? Will the administration risk adverse publicity and if so how much? Will other nations accept promises from an administration that may not be around in a year to "pay up"?

The second, and much more serious (IMO) problem is the effect that the loss of US support is having (and will have going forward) on Ukrainian military and civil morale. Ukraine is in dire straits even WITH the US support that is currently being held up. Their soldiers need to believe they can win, hopefully sooner but at least later. Without US aid, that won't happen. They know that. Delays are hard to accept, but can be rationalized. At some point the delays become too long, or worse still it becomes clear no more US aid is coming in 2024. That will cause a significant number of Ukrainian troops to simply quit. When that happens the rate at which it spreads will control how much longer Ukraine can hold on. They could easily be done by May if no US aid is forthcoming because their troops quit in mass. Ukraine will always continue to resist, but it may degenerate into guerilla warfare by a die-hard core. I don't know how long the civil government can keep organized military resistance together, but history tells us when morale reaches the breaking point, things fall apart fast. IMO Ukraine will for certain be "done" before the next administration is sworn in if nothing comes out of the Congress before that.

Obviously, I could be wrong. Ukraine may manage to sustain morale longer than I predict above. I would however say that counting on that would be at best very, very risky. That is why I have previously faulted the administration for not keeping the American public fully in the loop. It needed to be politically unpopular to oppose aid to Ukraine. It may not have been possible to maintain a consensus on that, but the administration didn't really try, IMO. It may be too late, but that message needs to get out loud and clear now. It may have been a "bad idea" to get involved in Ukraine, but we are there now. The consequences of us "abandoning" them will obviously destroy any credibility we have in the world.  Our military alliances will take a massive blow. The message it sends to other nations regarding China would be "make a deal now, because the US will leave you in the lurch if they feel like it".

[Goose]

Goose,

How long can Ukraine survive if the US Congress fails to provide additional aid?  Can Ukraine defend itself until after the next American election, or will its defenses collapse before then if the spigot is not turned back on?

I know the President has found various ways to continue to get some aid to Ukraine, but I presume the work-around solutions are running out.

There are two very different factors that control how long Ukraine will continue organized national resistance to Russia. One is the physical ability to keep fighting. If the US cannot deliver things like Patriot missiles and other air defense material, the Russian missile strikes will take an increasing toll on their infrastructure. No bombs and missiles from the US will limit the effectiveness of any F-16s they get. They won't be able to use their HIMARS either because they will eventually be flat out of missiles.  Most important, no 155 mm shells means that Ukraine's counter-battery operations will be limited to what they can get from the EU, which we already know is grossly inadequate to allow Ukraine to hold the line everywhere. The EU may be able to increase it's aid to Ukraine, but even best case they can't deliver anything near to what would be required for Ukraine to hold their current lines for another year. They will get pushed back by the Russians in some areas. I don't know how much and how fast it will be, but it will happen.

I don't think the "work-arounds" are running out. In fact, I expect the administration to become even more creative in making them work. The problem is some big-ticket items can't be hidden that way. Germany can supply more Patriots from their stocks in return for some promises from the administration, for example. Those promises will become public pretty quickly. How much heat will that generate? Will the administration risk adverse publicity and if so how much? Will other nations accept promises from an administration that may not be around in a year to "pay up"?

The second, and much more serious (IMO) problem is the effect that the loss of US support is having (and will have going forward) on Ukrainian military and civil morale. Ukraine is in dire straits even WITH the US support that is currently being held up. Their soldiers need to believe they can win, hopefully sooner but at least later. Without US aid, that won't happen. They know that. Delays are hard to accept, but can be rationalized. At some point the delays become too long, or worse still it becomes clear no more US aid is coming in 2024. That will cause a significant number of Ukrainian troops to simply quit. When that happens the rate at which it spreads will control how much longer Ukraine can hold on. They could easily be done by May if no US aid is forthcoming because their troops quit in mass. Ukraine will always continue to resist, but it may degenerate into guerilla warfare by a die-hard core. I don't know how long the civil government can keep organized military resistance together, but history tells us when morale reaches the breaking point, things fall apart fast. IMO Ukraine will for certain be "done" before the next administration is sworn in if nothing comes out of the Congress before that.

Obviously, I could be wrong. Ukraine may manage to sustain morale longer than I predict above. I would however say that counting on that would be at best very, very risky. That is why I have previously faulted the administration for not keeping the American public fully in the loop. It needed to be politically unpopular to oppose aid to Ukraine. It may not have been possible to maintain a consensus on that, but the administration didn't really try, IMO. It may be too late, but that message needs to get out loud and clear now. It may have been a "bad idea" to get involved in Ukraine, but we are there now. The consequences of us "abandoning" them will obviously destroy any credibility we have in the world.  Our military alliances will take a massive blow. The message it sends to other nations regarding China would be "make a deal now, because the US will leave you in the lurch if they feel like it".