Next week, several heads of state and defense ministers will meet in Washington, DC, for the 2024 NATO Summit. The three-day meeting will “address the challenges facing the Alliance” and discuss how to “further strengthen NATO’s deterrence and defense in the 21st century.” Topping the agenda will be NATO’s deterrence and defense initiatives and how NATO can build and strengthen partnerships and relationships with different countries.
Alliance members will also discuss the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine. In addition, they will need to address supply chain management and defense procurement, two issues that will be critical at this year’s conference.
During the 2023 NATO Summit, members reaffirmed their commitment to defend Ukraine. The Alliance established the NATO-Ukraine Council, a “joint body where Allies and Ukraine sit together as equal participants to advance Ukraine’s political dialogue, engagement, cooperation and aspirations for NATO membership.” NATO members also decided to eliminate a Membership Action Plan as a prerequisite for Ukraine’s membership. Despite this progress, the Alliance decided not to extend an official invitation to the Ukrainians.
In the area of defense procurement, the Alliance discussed massive military capabilities. Several members also committed to increasing their defense spending and discussed supplying various types of military equipment to Ukraine. The discussions were seen as a major victory for the Alliance, and many experts predicted a significant change.
What happened, however, was quite different. Almost a year after the 2023 NATO summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, several Western media outlets reported that Russia had made progress in eastern Ukraine. In addition, it was stated that the Russian Federation produces “almost three times” more artillery ammunition than the US and Europe. Russia has also increased its defense capabilities by purchasing defense equipment from North Korea and Iran. This has allowed the Russians to rearm and continue their invasion of Ukraine.
RELATED
Finland and Sweden are strategic assets in NATO, not a burden
The two Nordic countries bring two relatively small but highly modern armies into NATO, significantly increasing its military capabilities and improving the Alliance’s ability to deter further Russian aggression.
From Bradley Bowman, Ryan Brobst, Jack Sullivan and John Hardie
While the Russians made their advances in the east, the European Union and the USA delayed further aid for Ukraine. In Europe, a new aid package was initially proposed for June 2023. This included financial and humanitarian aid for Ukraine.
However, the package stalled as EU members disagreed on the total cost of the aid, its impact and how it should be distributed. (The majority of EU members are also members of NATO.) After months of debate, the aid package was finally adopted in February 2024. In other words, EU aid to Ukraine was delayed by eight months.
Similarly, in the US, a new defense and humanitarian aid package for Ukraine was proposed in October 2023. Elected representatives in the House and Senate argued for the need for the aid and constantly revised the legislation. After several deliberations and delays, the new US aid package was finally passed in April 2024, almost seven months after it was first presented.
While lawmakers in the EU and US delayed aid to Ukraine, several reports said Ukrainians were running out of ammunition. In the fall and winter of 2023/24, Ukrainians had to re-prioritize and strategically refocus their efforts to minimize casualties while protecting their citizens. In the east, Ukrainians lost some territory to Russia.
Given these developments over the past year, NATO members must work more closely and carefully with the Ukrainians to ensure they are victorious in the fight against the Russians. One important place to start is addressing defense procurement. NATO members should consider at least three areas.
First, NATO should promote technology sharing to improve interoperability among member countries. Information sharing “reduces duplication, enables pooling of resources and creates synergies among all Allies.” It would enable NATO members to produce equipment more efficiently and effectively, and would limit production backlogs.
In addition, it would reduce the burden on the defense industry in countries like the US and the UK and force other NATO members to do their part in the defense industry. This would also strengthen their common national security.
Once the information sharing is complete, NATO members could expand their defense industries using these new technological capabilities. Outdated manufacturing facilities in the US and Europe could be refurbished to produce new equipment. This would allow Western countries to develop equipment and hardware more quickly and provide Ukraine with the tools it needs to win the war.
Producing these materials would also help NATO replenish its supplies while supplying the Ukrainians with weapons. In addition, using these factories would create new job opportunities for Americans and Europeans and lead to job growth. This would help boost Western economies.
Finally, producing more equipment more efficiently and quickly could help avoid delays in providing defense assistance to Ukraine. A production surplus would increase the equipment and hardware available to NATO members. These countries can then more easily send that hardware to the Ukrainians because the equipment will be available.
In addition, instead of manufacturing equipment from scratch, some Western countries have refurbished older defense equipment, thereby reducing delays in the delivery of goods.
In short, improving NATO’s defense procurement sector will take time. It will not be easy and will require cooperation from all 32 NATO members to ensure supply chain issues are resolved, production is increased, and assistance to Ukraine is delivered more efficiently and effectively. Equipping Ukraine with the tools it needs will help it defend itself against the ongoing Russian invasion and reclaim its territory.
However, further delays in aid to Ukraine would allow the Russians to strengthen their defenses. It would give the Russians additional time to increase their weapons production, buy equipment from North Korea and Iran, and continue their war against Ukraine. This would lead to further destruction and devastation throughout Ukraine. It would also lead to further loss of life.
So if NATO is serious about helping Ukraine win the war against Russia, it must address these past munitions deficiencies and improve arms procurement. Otherwise, if there are any delays in the future, the Russian invasion of Ukraine could quickly turn into a perpetual war. No one will want that.
Mark Temnycky is a non-resident fellow at the Eurasia Center of the Atlantic Council think tank.
NATO must defeat Russia in the ammunition war
Next week, several heads of state and defense ministers will meet in Washington, DC, for the 2024 NATO Summit. The three-day meeting will “address the challenges facing the Alliance” and discuss how to “further strengthen NATO’s deterrence and defense in the 21st century.” Topping the agenda will be NATO’s deterrence and defense initiatives and how NATO can build and strengthen partnerships and relationships with different countries.
Alliance members will also discuss the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine. In addition, they will need to address supply chain management and defense procurement, two issues that will be critical at this year’s conference.
During the 2023 NATO Summit, members reaffirmed their commitment to defend Ukraine. The Alliance established the NATO-Ukraine Council, a “joint body where Allies and Ukraine sit together as equal participants to advance Ukraine’s political dialogue, engagement, cooperation and aspirations for NATO membership.” NATO members also decided to eliminate a Membership Action Plan as a prerequisite for Ukraine’s membership. Despite this progress, the Alliance decided not to extend an official invitation to the Ukrainians.
In the area of defense procurement, the Alliance discussed massive military capabilities. Several members also committed to increasing their defense spending and discussed supplying various types of military equipment to Ukraine. The discussions were seen as a major victory for the Alliance, and many experts predicted a significant change.
What happened, however, was quite different. Almost a year after the 2023 NATO summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, several Western media outlets reported that Russia had made progress in eastern Ukraine. In addition, it was stated that the Russian Federation produces “almost three times” more artillery ammunition than the US and Europe. Russia has also increased its defense capabilities by purchasing defense equipment from North Korea and Iran. This has allowed the Russians to rearm and continue their invasion of Ukraine.
RELATED
Finland and Sweden are strategic assets in NATO, not a burden
The two Nordic countries bring two relatively small but highly modern armies into NATO, significantly increasing its military capabilities and improving the Alliance’s ability to deter further Russian aggression.
From Bradley Bowman, Ryan Brobst, Jack Sullivan and John Hardie
While the Russians made their advances in the east, the European Union and the USA delayed further aid for Ukraine. In Europe, a new aid package was initially proposed for June 2023. This included financial and humanitarian aid for Ukraine.
However, the package stalled as EU members disagreed on the total cost of the aid, its impact and how it should be distributed. (The majority of EU members are also members of NATO.) After months of debate, the aid package was finally adopted in February 2024. In other words, EU aid to Ukraine was delayed by eight months.
Similarly, in the US, a new defense and humanitarian aid package for Ukraine was proposed in October 2023. Elected representatives in the House and Senate argued for the need for the aid and constantly revised the legislation. After several deliberations and delays, the new US aid package was finally passed in April 2024, almost seven months after it was first presented.
While lawmakers in the EU and US delayed aid to Ukraine, several reports said Ukrainians were running out of ammunition. In the fall and winter of 2023/24, Ukrainians had to re-prioritize and strategically refocus their efforts to minimize casualties while protecting their citizens. In the east, Ukrainians lost some territory to Russia.
Given these developments over the past year, NATO members must work more closely and carefully with the Ukrainians to ensure they are victorious in the fight against the Russians. One important place to start is addressing defense procurement. NATO members should consider at least three areas.
First, NATO should promote technology sharing to improve interoperability among member countries. Information sharing “reduces duplication, enables pooling of resources and creates synergies among all Allies.” It would enable NATO members to produce equipment more efficiently and effectively, and would limit production backlogs.
In addition, it would reduce the burden on the defense industry in countries like the US and the UK and force other NATO members to do their part in the defense industry. This would also strengthen their common national security.
Once the information sharing is complete, NATO members could expand their defense industries using these new technological capabilities. Outdated manufacturing facilities in the US and Europe could be refurbished to produce new equipment. This would allow Western countries to develop equipment and hardware more quickly and provide Ukraine with the tools it needs to win the war.
Producing these materials would also help NATO replenish its supplies while supplying the Ukrainians with weapons. In addition, using these factories would create new job opportunities for Americans and Europeans and lead to job growth. This would help boost Western economies.
Finally, producing more equipment more efficiently and quickly could help avoid delays in providing defense assistance to Ukraine. A production surplus would increase the equipment and hardware available to NATO members. These countries can then more easily send that hardware to the Ukrainians because the equipment will be available.
In addition, instead of manufacturing equipment from scratch, some Western countries have refurbished older defense equipment, thereby reducing delays in the delivery of goods.
In short, improving NATO’s defense procurement sector will take time. It will not be easy and will require cooperation from all 32 NATO members to ensure supply chain issues are resolved, production is increased, and assistance to Ukraine is delivered more efficiently and effectively. Equipping Ukraine with the tools it needs will help it defend itself against the ongoing Russian invasion and reclaim its territory.
However, further delays in aid to Ukraine would allow the Russians to strengthen their defenses. It would give the Russians additional time to increase their weapons production, buy equipment from North Korea and Iran, and continue their war against Ukraine. This would lead to further destruction and devastation throughout Ukraine. It would also lead to further loss of life.
So if NATO is serious about helping Ukraine win the war against Russia, it must address these past munitions deficiencies and improve arms procurement. Otherwise, if there are any delays in the future, the Russian invasion of Ukraine could quickly turn into a perpetual war. No one will want that.
Mark Temnycky is a non-resident fellow at the Eurasia Center of the Atlantic Council think tank.
Related Posts
Report: Ukrainian soldiers on the war front rely on yoga for healing, well-being and recovery
RB coach Chris Barclay is still enthusiastic about Louisville’s running back room despite the departures
Oklahoma executes man sentenced to death for kidnapping, raping and killing a seven-year-old girl in 1984
About The Author
hinata