3.29.22
Over the past weeks, the Ukrainian military has waged a surprisingly tough resistance against a much larger and more capable Russian army. While it’s too early for a full accounting, Ukraine’s performance appears to be exceeding expectations. But seven years ago, Ukraine’s military was unprepared and largely ineffective when Russia’s military seized Crimea. By 2022, Ukraine appears to have overcome at least some of the earlier challenges. Did U.S. security assistance — roughly $2 billion between 2014 and 2020 — make the Ukrainian military more effective? Our research points to one explanation for why U.S. security assistance may have had greater success in Ukraine. Ukraine seems to be a case where security assistance made a positive contribution — although Ukraine’s own efforts are probably most important. The United States sent security assistance to Ukraine between 2014 and 2020, as part of a broader Western effort to strengthen the Ukrainian military. Research suggests this type of assistance is often ineffective or counterproductive, however. Much larger programs in Iraq and Afghanistan failed to produce effective militaries, for example.
A crucial but overlooked factor enabling Ukraine’s military performance may be its defense institutions. In 2014, institutional problems contributed to Ukraine’s combat ineffectiveness — Ukraine’s armed forces could do little to stop the Russian seizure of Crimea. When the war began, only 6,000 of the 41,000 Ukrainian army personnel were available, and its battalions had rarely conducted live fire exercises. Later, in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, flaws in command and control reportedly led to delayed orders that contributed to the February 2015 defeat of Ukrainian forces at Debaltseve. Overhauling Ukraine’s procurement institutions has facilitated the recent surge of security assistance to Ukraine — and has likely enabled the military to draw on more locally produced equipment. U.S. assistance contributed to these defense updates because the necessary conditions were in place: Ukrainian leaders recognized the value of Western support for their own political success. Zelensky’s government saw the value of weakening the oligarchic interests that were working against them. Ukraine’s military performance in recent weeks reflects other factors, including combat experience gained in the 2014 conflict, broad public support and a committed population — not to mention Russian miscalculations.