Seeing people say that the U.S. should not announce what military aid it's sending Ukraine for fear of provoking Russia or inciting retaliation. The problem with this argument is that clandestinity isn't necessarily a safeguard and may even be a liability.
Previous armers of Ukraine (e.g. the Bulgarian arms dealer Emilian Gebrev, the Czech MoD-licensed depot in Vrbětice) hardly advertised their activity. The GRU figured it out anyway. And poisoned Gebrev and blew up the depot.
The secrecy of these supply lines, in fact, may have made it more difficult for NATO intelligence services/government to respond in real time. I interviewed Gebrev and he was quite cagey about his clients.
By announcing Javelin and Stinger shipments, the U.S. is signposting that any attempt to interdict them is Russia interfering with a completely lawful security arrangement between two partners.
Ukraine has a conventional military (and from the looks of things, it isn't going away soon). Washington is not arming non-state actors or insurgents -- at least not yet. Having nothing to hide underscores how Ukraine is still very much a normal country defending itself from...
... and unprovoked and unlawful invasion. It also creates enormous good will for America within Ukraine that every Ukrainian knows the provenance of his anti-armor or anti-aircraft missile and that more are on the way.
As ever, don't let the enemy do your thinking for you. Russia may have preferred the U.S. to opt for plausible deniability because it forces awkward explanations and engenders public mistrust when things go wrong.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
