Game-Changing Aid: How Allied Support Shaped Russo-Ukraine war

In the context of U.S. President Donald Trump's statements about military support being the only reason Ukraine exists, it is necessary to take an unbiased look at the assistance provided to Ukraine.

It is also important to examine the weapons supplied by other partners, not just the United States. This is particularly relevant because the volume of weapons provided by other allies was comparable to that of the U.S., including systems that became emblematic of the largest war in Europe since World War II.

Among the various forms of assistance, certain weapons significantly enhanced the combat capabilities of the Ukrainian Defense Forces, temporarily shifting the dynamics on the battlefield, contributing to successes, and playing a crucial role in Ukraine's confrontation with Russia.

However, in almost all cases, politics interfered, preventing these advantages from being fully exploited. The reasons for these limitations were primarily external to Ukraine.

On the contrary, some weapons' "game-changer" status was due to the Ukrainian military's ability to harness their potential through unconventional and creative tactics.

Artillery 

When discussing the Russo-Ukrainian war, one cannot overlook the role of artillery—both cannon and rocket systems. The 155-mm British-American M-777 howitzers (nicknamed “three axes” by Ukrainian gunners due to the resemblance between the number seven and an axe) proved to be far more accurate than the Russian and Soviet artillery used by both the Russian and Ukrainian armies. Moreover, the quality and variety of shells provided with these howitzers played a significant role.

The High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) was a true game-changer. According to Soviet military doctrine, multiple-launch rocket systems (MLRS) were seen as direct equivalents of their Soviet counterparts. However, Russia's war against Ukraine demonstrated that HIMARS operates on a completely different level, offering unprecedented accuracy.

HIMARS played a key role in Ukraine's summer and autumn 2022 offensives, leading to the liberation of the right bank of the Kherson region and Kherson city. Repeated HIMARS and M-777 strikes on the Antonivsky Bridge severely damaged it, effectively trapping Russian forces and forcing their retreat to the left bank, preventing complete annihilation. HIMARS also struck Russian warehouses and logistics hubs in Donbas during the summer of 2022, with numerous examples of its battlefield impact.

Ukrainian artillery crews and commanders developed innovative firing methods using NATO artillery, prompting Western experts to reevaluate their capabilities. The Ukrainian command adeptly employed HIMARS at the operational level, significantly influencing the strategic situation. Russian forces found HIMARS strikes devastating and consequently launched an extensive effort to locate and destroy them.

In an amusing turn of events, Russian officials resorted to outright fabrications. At press briefings, Russian Defense Ministry spokesperson Igor Konashenkov repeatedly claimed that Russia had destroyed more HIMARS systems than Ukraine had ever received.

Recognizing their strategic importance, the Ukrainian Armed Forces took extensive measures to conceal and protect HIMARS launchers. These efforts included the widespread use of decoy systems, which Russian forces often targeted in mistaken strikes.

HIMARS could have been even more effective had it been supplied with ATACMS ballistic missiles sooner. These missiles would have enabled long-range strikes at the operational level. However, adhering to the principle of "controlled escalation," the U.S. initially withheld ATACMS and later imposed restrictions on their use, particularly against targets on Russian territory. As a result, ATACMS did not fulfill its full potential to disrupt Russian airfields.

The American fear of escalation proved unfounded. ATACMS successfully struck several critical Russian targets, including command headquarters, during the Kursk operation, without provoking any significant escalation.

Air Defense

Many global experts predicted that Russia's overwhelming air superiority would define Russia's war against Ukraine. It was widely assumed that Ukraine would suffer devastating missile and bomb strikes in the war's opening hours, leading to the collapse of organized resistance, loss of command and control, and the destruction of Ukrainian aviation and air defenses.

These assumptions were based on Russia's possession of strategic bombers—Tu-22M3, Tu-95MS, and Tu-160—which were designed to launch nuclear-armed missiles but were repurposed for conventional cruise missile strikes in Ukraine. Additionally, Russia deployed MiG-31K aircraft armed with "Kinzhal" air-launched ballistic missiles, touted as "invincible" by Russian propaganda.

Despite these challenges, Ukraine's air defense forces, relying on Soviet-era equipment, withstood the initial strikes and established effective countermeasures. By the spring of 2023, after prolonged deliberations and training, Ukraine received the Patriot air defense system in a configuration capable of intercepting ballistic missiles.

These U.S.-supplied Patriot systems, delivered by multiple NATO countries, achieved notable successes in shooting down Russian combat aircraft. Their primary mission, however, was to defend Ukrainian cities and infrastructure. Integrated with Ukraine's Soviet and Western-made air defense systems, the Patriots played a key role in protecting against Russian missile attacks. Notably, Ukrainian Patriot batteries successfully intercepted previously "unstoppable" Russian hypersonic "Kinzhal" and "Zircon" missiles, as well as North Korean-designed KN-23 ballistic missiles.

In late 2022, Russia began deploying Iranian-made Shahed-136 kamikaze drones en masse. Around the same time, Ukraine received German-made Gepard self-propelled anti-aircraft guns, originally developed in the 1970s but upgraded for modern conflicts. Initially, the Gepards became Ukraine's most effective weapon against Shahed drones. Despite their relatively high cost, they proved invaluable due to their accuracy and efficient use of ammunition, requiring just six rounds per drone. Eventually, Ukraine developed a more comprehensive counter-drone strategy involving cooperation between its armed forces, interior ministry, and electronic warfare units, reducing the Gepard's singular prominence.

Weapons that fell short of expectation 

Some weapons, despite their potential, failed to become game-changers. Political constraints were the primary reason. This was particularly true for Western-supplied tanks and armored vehicles.

The German Leopard 2, British Challenger 2, and American Abrams tanks were expected to play a decisive role in Ukraine's 2023 summer offensive. Similarly, the German Marder and American Bradley infantry fighting vehicles were anticipated to exploit breakthroughs in Russian defenses. However, for these vehicles to be effective, they needed to be supplied in sufficient numbers.

With only 20 British Challengers, 31 Abrams (some without full armor packages), and approximately 100 Leopard 2 tanks of various configurations, these numbers were inadequate to achieve strategic breakthroughs. While Ukrainian crews praised their combat performance, these vehicles alone could not change the course of the war.

Similarly, the British-French Storm Shadow/SCALP air-launched cruise missile came close to game-changer status. It was used effectively to strike deep Russian targets, including the headquarters of Russia's Black Sea Fleet in occupied Sevastopol. However, due to limited availability and the lack of sufficient carrier aircraft, its impact remained constrained.

The much-anticipated F-16 fighter jets also failed to become a game-changer. While they strengthened Ukraine's air force, they were not delivered in advanced modifications capable of directly countering Russian air superiority.

The Fleeting Nature of Technological Advantages

The war has shown that no weapon remains a "game-changer" indefinitely. An enemy with scientific, industrial, and military capabilities will inevitably develop countermeasures.

For instance, the effectiveness of GPS-guided Excalibur shells fired from M-777 howitzers declined dramatically from 70% to 7% due to Russian electronic warfare. Similarly, HIMARS became less effective as Russia improved its countermeasures.

Ultimately, delays in political decisions have hampered Ukraine's ability to fully exploit Western technology. The mistakes of 2022-2024 should not be repeated. European allies, in particular, must step up to prevent security risks for the entire continent.

Dmytro Levus, Expert at Kyiv-based United Ukraine Think Tank