It’s time we gave Ukraine the tools it needs to finish the job

The presence in Kyiv of the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, at what is becoming a critical juncture in Ukraine’s war of survival against Russia, is, of course, extremely welcome.

Were they being undiplomatically honest, however, the Ukrainians would admit that they would far rather have received a bumper consignment of Patriot missile defence systems, F-16 fighters and Abrams armoured vehicles than the distinguished statesman. That way, they might have a better chance of preventing the Russians from destroying their second city, Kharkiv. Such a denouement is unlikely – but the possibility of it cannot be dismissed.

Like Mr Blinken, Joe Biden has obviously been preoccupied with the Middle East in recent months – and, while a superpower has more than sufficient political and diplomatic “bandwidth” to cope with multiple crises, the decision to send America’s most senior diplomat to Ukraine is an important visible signal that the West is not entirely distracted by the war in Gaza.

Indeed, while spending time and political capital on his efforts to restrain Benjamin Netanyahu, the US president has simultaneously brought to bear the prestige of his office and his powers of persuasion to convince the speaker of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, to relent and allow the passage of a bill approving delivery of vital military aid to Ukraine.

Yet the recent successes of the Russian military in the Kharkiv region confirm that the delay in the provision of essential aid has critically weakened Ukraine’s defences, as well as its offensive capabilities, and has sapped domestic morale. Volodymyr Zelensky has been virtually begging Washington for help, and was, for many months, ignored. This has been widely attributed to the ever malign influence of Donald Trump, who supposedly, should he win the presidential election in November, wants to achieve instant “peace” in the region within one day.

The thought that Mr Trump’s sham peace deal would amount to allowing Vladimir Putin to annex whatever territory was occupied by Russian forces at that point seems not to have overly troubled some Congressional Republicans, even after Mr Johnson’s conversion.

In any case, Mr Trump’s manoeuvrings have meant that a just peace is going to be that much more costly to achieve. So the free world should be clear that Mr Trump is to blame for the recent progress made by Russian forces, and for the further emboldening of President Putin as he menaces Georgia, Moldova and the Baltic states in his mission to rebuild the Russian empire.

The Russians, despite the Kremlin’s callous attitude to loss of life, are growing in strength. It may even be that Mr Putin’s reshuffle of his top defence and security team will turn the country’s military, which has previously resembled a corrupt, ill-disciplined barbaric mob, into an effective force. A ready supply of North Korean and Iranian equipment is certainly helping, as is China’s non-lethal industrial and financial help. Chinese president Xi Jinping is to join his Russian counterpart for talks this week, and a falling out is not predicted.

Ideally, Europe would have been able to make up for the loss of American hardware, but the continent is divided. Some leaders, such as Viktor Orban of Hungary, openly favour Russian aggression. Others, such as those of France and Estonia, are openly discussing sending their own troops to be stationed on Ukrainian territory. That is plainly a step too far for the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, even though he is happy to send weapons systems, while the Danes and the Dutch are delivering modern fighter jets.

The Poles are re-arming at what is reportedly a record pace. The British, who were the first to sense the danger, are loyal, but seem nervous about a pan-European alliance, and have been slow to boost defence spending.

Even Mr Trump’s open contempt for Nato, coupled with his longstanding buddy relationship with Mr Putin, hasn’t been enough to force Europe to get its act together. We should not have to wait for the Russians to cross the Polish border to realise what is at stake.

As things stand, and despite the clearer-sighted leadership offered by the French president Emmanuel Macron, the fact is that, even if Europe were determined enough to form a common front, its resources and capabilities fall far short of those America is able to draw upon in order to assist Ukraine (even if it is only doing so belatedly).

In the circumstances, struggling with shortages of everything from fighter jets to drones and artillery shells, Ukraine has done well to contain the Russian advance and to inflict heavy casualties on its enemy. Yet in order to overcome a foe such as Russia, whose military supplies far outnumber those of the smaller country, Ukraine needs to extend the technological advantage afforded by Western kit. That means being afforded the very best Western defensive air systems (as showcased recently in the failed Iranian bombing of Israel), fighter jets, and limitless munitions.

Even now, sadly, Mr Zelensky cannot be wholly confident of getting the help he needs.

In immediate terms, the Russians need to be pushed back as far as possible to their own borders. Mr Putin is plainly trying to control as much land as he can before the latest wave of Western armaments arrives, so that he can maximise the amount of territory occupied when Mr Trump – he hopes – takes the stage and gifts it to him after a ceasefire.

The closest precedents for such an outcome would be the division of Korea at the armistice line in 1953, and Russia’s occupation of East Germany for four decades after the Second World War – something Mr Putin is well familiar with as a former KGB officer who was stationed in the so-called German Democratic Republic during the Cold War.

Almost continuously, since the “special military operation” launched more than two years ago, the West has vacillated about its support for Ukraine, usually willing the ends without willing the means. Nato has opted to give Ukraine just enough help to avoid the country’s capitulation – nothing more, nothing less. A war of attrition has ensued. Civilian casualties have been commensurately heavy. For all the rhetoric about Europe, and the wider West, being in danger, there has been a sometimes cynical lack of substance in delivery.

The West, for the sake of all concerned, should make up its mind whether it wants to accept the generous offer made by President Zelensky and his brave people to defeat Russia on its behalf. If it does not wish to do so, then it should tell Mr Zelensky and allow him to draw the necessary conclusions. If it decides, however, that victory is still the aim, then – to recycle an apt saying from a more heroic past – it should give the Ukrainians the tools, and they will finish the job.