The last chance of Western weapons. Why do partners have to give Ukraine the whole old stock

" There is a tiny nuance that crosses this logic. When the phrase "resources are exhausted" sounds - it is necessary to understand that weapons were to share without harming their defense capability according to the current standards and with political amendments (first of all, it is about the ground component, about the fleet and aviation - a slightly different story).

In the arsenals and in the warehouses of the US, Britain, other NATO and EU countries, there are a huge number of weapons and ammunition. And there is a completely reinforced concrete argument why these weapons should be shared largely with Ukraine right now and very quickly. The fact is that war is a period of rapid modernization of weapons and doctrines. Which in peacetime can last for years or ten years, is now happening for months.

Both the Ukrainian army and Russian have accumulated such experience that no one else has. The Russians will necessarily share their knowledge with the divisors along the axis of evil. They are already shared. Hamas has already used drones as he could only learn from the Russians. Iran has already modernized drones so that his new experience will be extremely in demand for distances of about 1000 km (to Taiwan - less than 200, to Tokyo from North Korea - just almost 1000).

The question of the time when the conditional "Nigerian-Emeni-Philippine" pirates with the help of sea drone will strike on a merchant vessel (Russians are carefully trying to recreate Ukrainian development). FV-zeroes already create a strip up to 20 km, where armored vehicles do not live, or lives badly and for a short time. A year ago it was not. High -precision weapons, which got 10 out of 10 years ago (mention the Antonov Bridge), no longer hit. That is, a lot has changed.

What has been accumulated in the arsenals and warehouses is rapidly obsolete. In fact, for a considerable share of available weapons and equipment, our war is the last chance to speak with decent. Now this weapon is stored for reasons "and suddenly something happens. " The trouble is that if something happens, it will be late: the enemy will have knowledge that will radically reduce the effectiveness of what is preserved for a rainy day. Or you need to fit largely into modernization.

That is not always rationally. Or large -scale production of new. What could be more expensive and longer, but will provide a longer prospect. This is a political decision. But the bottom line is that any option is impossible without the deployment of MIC under new threats. Those of partners who want to stretch, de facto, call "not to look up". Even if the front in Ukraine dies in Ukraine, it will not solve the problem - it has already happened. What you think about Ukraine is no longer important.

For the sake of yourself you need to unfold the MIC. If there is a pause in the war, the Kremlin and its allies will use this pause as effectively as possible. In addition to knowledge, there are hundreds of thousands of people with real combat experience in the Russian Federation. Therefore, the most optimal option is not only for us, but also for Western (as well as Asian) partners - to transfer to Ukraine everything that they have (with obvious exceptions) and gradually obsolete.

We will get a chance to protect ourselves, win time (more precisely - help to catch up) and will not allow the Russian Federation to accumulate the resource for the attack. During this time, partners will be able to restore defense production. Actually, Germany does it quietly. Who is the first to bust out his MIC - he will remove the cream. So you should not believe in "exhaustion". Many more moves that, in fact, mean costs, but a change in investment priorities.