BRUSSELS (AP) — NATO leaders plan to pledge next week to keep pouring arms and ammunition into Ukraine at current levels for at least another year, hoping to reassure the war-ravaged country of their ongoing support and show Russian President Vladimir Putin that they will not walk away.
U.S. President Joe Biden and his counterparts meet in Washington for a three-day summit beginning Tuesday to mark the military alliance’s 75th anniversary as Russian troops press their advantage along Ukraine’s eastern front in the third year of the war.
Speaking to reporters Friday, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said NATO’s 32 member countries have been spending around 40 billion euros ($43 billion) each year on military equipment for Ukraine since the war began in February 2022 and that this should be “a minimum baseline” going forward.
“I expect allies will decide at the summit to sustain this level within the next year,” Stoltenberg said. He said the amount would be shared among nations based on their economic growth and that the leaders will review the figure when they meet again in 2025.
NATO is desperate to do more for Ukraine but is struggling to find new ways. Already, NATO allies provide 99% of the military support it gets. Soon, the alliance will manage equipment deliveries. But two red lines remain: no NATO membership until the war is over, and no NATO boots on the ground there.
At their last summit, NATO leaders agreed to fast-track Ukraine’s membership process — although the country is unlikely to join for many years — and set up a high-level body for emergency consultations. Several countries promised more military equipment.
Because NATO has never accepted applicants with active territorial disputes.
Yes this is one of the reasons Russian trolls talking points of NATO expansion fears motivating Russia to invade whiffed of bullshit from the beginning. By annexing Crimea Russia already made them ineligible.
Well,
in 2018 Ukraine voted to enshrine the goal of NATO membership in the Constitution. source
At the June 2021 Brussels summit, NATO leaders reiterated the decision taken at the 2008 Bucharest summit that Ukraine would eventually join NATO.
Is “dispute” really the right word? Lol
Yes because it started years before the war with the annexation of Crimea.
The war started with the annexation of Crimea. It has been going on since 2014.
This is purely semantics, but neither side had launched a full scale invasion in the years following the annexation until 2022.
Russia launched an invasion in 2014 that took Crimea and created two “independent” “republics” that are backed by Russia and are fighting Ukraine still. Stop spreading misinformation about the conflict.
Read the Nemtsov report https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putin._War
On August 15, Aleksandr Zakharchenko, Prime Minister of the self-proclaimed DPR, stated that a reinforcement that came from Russia played a decisive role in the counter-offensive: “(There were) 150 units of combat armor, including about 30 tanks - the rest were AIFVs (Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicles) and APCs (Armored Personnel Carriers), and also 1,200 personnel who had undergone training during four months in the territory of the Russian Federation.” Zakharchenko emphasized, “They were inserted here at the most critical moment.” The decisive role played by the reinforcements arriving from Russian territory was confirmed in an interview in the newspaper “Zavtra” by the former33 DPR Minister Igor Girkin (aka Strelkov). The shifting of the front and in particular the deployment to Mariupol were achieved, in his words, "largely by vacationers, individual units of the militia which were subordinate to them.” “Vacationers” in Girkin’s terminology are Russian military cadres who come to the territory of Ukraine with weapons in their hands but who are officially “on vacation.”
Vyacheslav Tetekin, a Russian State Duma deputy and a member of the Committee for Defense, estimated the number of “volunteers” who had taken part and were continuing to take part in combat actions in the Donbass to be 30,000 people. "Some fought a week there, some fought for several months, but according to the information of the authorities of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics themselves, approximately 30,000 volunteers have gone through 4 9 combat," he emphasized. This same deputy submitted for State Duma review a draft law on conferring upon “volunteers” the status of participants 50 in combat with all the relevant benefits.
This is a sizable invasion too. Smaller, but enough to become a war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas--
If that is your definition of war then the USA is at war with Russia. I’m not denying that Russia is responsible for all of this and a warmongering state, but to say it’s exactly the same now as it was 8 years ago is very silly.
I wrote that it is a smaller invasion, but sizeable enough to constitute an invasion and a war, I absolutely did not say that it is the same now as it was 8 years ago, don’t strawman.
What are you saying again? That it is not a war if it is not large enough to be on the headlines you read every day? Because western media made a conscious effort to look the other way to avoid getting dragged into a conflict with russia for a country that had hardly an army to defend itself in 2014. If there were 30000 americans doing tours in Ukraine, you’d know. But there aren’t even any foreign fighters of any kind inside russia, so that is no reason to think the USA is at war with russia, there is no analogy whatsoever with sending troops to Ukraine to back up the russian separatists. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-russia-soldiers/some-12000-russian-soldiers-in-ukraine-supporting-rebels-u-s-commander-idUSKBN0LZ2FV20150303/
I really don’t get your point unless you’re trying to be a russian troll.
Ukraine is not a whipping boy and yet NATO seems to think it is.
If Ukraine had been allowed to keep their nuclear weapons none of this would be going on at all.
Ukraine could have kept its nuclear weapons… but Ukraine did not have proper leadership that could maintain such posture. These people would/could not run the state efficiently enough to fund a nuclear weapons program since they were mostly Russian plants looting the country. Corruption over national security has consequences… people need to hold their leaders accountable for their blunders.
They couldn’t have kept the weapons. They were being guarded by Russian soldiers, and Ukraine never had the activation codes. They got the best deal they could giving the USSRs nukes back to Moscow, rather than risking Moscow blowing them up in-situ. Moscow threatened that at one point during the talks.
people need to hold their leaders accountable for their blunders.
Unless you’re an American president. In which case your own supreme court has ruled you can do no wrong.
Give Ukraine back their nukes!
A year? Feckless Americans holding back statements again, it seems. Europe is certainly in for the long haul. Also plenty of countries not ruling out boots on the ground. In fact the US not having a clear stance of “you use tactical nukes we’re going to put them onto Ukrainian soil” or similar is yet another instance of fecklessness.
You may think yourself smart and strategic but in the end you’re a salami, sitting there motionless, being sliced.
The US can’t commit to more than a year. Even a year we might break that promise. You gotta remember, we have an election in November. If trump wins, there’s no telling what bullshit he might do. He might even just nuke Ukraine.
You gotta remember, half of the USA is on russia’s side.
He’d ask Putin if he do it for him
Everything russia and their cronies fearmonger, EU and USA should do it.
Ukies puppets of west. We fighting NATO now already. Oooga booga Nooks!
NATO forces should have been in Ukraine a long time ago. All russia will do is be actually impressed, put a brave face on and moan of another Uncrossable Red Line.
deleted by creator
Ukraine: Joins NATO. Russia: Runs for the hills. Ukraine: Everything goes back to normal.
The childish rhetoric and illogical manurisms of Zalinsky are profound. Its never dawned on you going to war with a superpower is extremely bad. Watching him go off and his emotional roller coaster the past few years has been painful. Defend your country. Here’s the support you need. But we aren’t stupid.
As for widespread corruption. Yeah. There’s lots of flags.
For every 100,000 dollar missle we send them that cost use 10,000 to manufacturer. We buy ourselves 9. You’re not even weaking our position.
going to war with a superpower is extremely bad
Russia isn’t ready a super power any more and Ukraine definitely didn’t have a choice on getting invaded.
Just like we didn’t see all this coronavirus shit coming. Nor could we ever do anything about it.
wait wat
To their credit we couldn’t do “anything about” the pandemic because of how many morons and suckers there out there.
Or at the least we failed to do what was most effective.
You sure we couldn’t see it coming?
Removed by mod
Reads like a boomer tbh
I’m impressed you can read it at all. I’m not only unsure what OP is saying, but which side they’re on. The beginning sounds pro-Russia, but then at the end it’s the West that’s sending missiles.
Right so you’re an expert negotiator that thinks you should never ever ask for more than you think you’ll get because you’re afraid some people on the internet will write that you have “childish rhetoric and illogical manurisms[sic]”?
Ukraine is currently using ATACMS rockets to soften up Russia’s air defenses in preparation for using the F-16s that’ll soon be arriving. It seems the “childish rhetoric” is working. I guess Zelenskyy will just have to accept that people that can’t even spell his name might think less of him. Oh well…
Theatre. Very much so.
Let’s see what happens with all these weapons when the war ends… I expect a big amount of gangs will be well armed…
And they will get spare parts how?
Africa
As is tradition. (Only sort of /s)
