538
NATO Proposes $100 Billion, Five-Year Fund to Aid Ukraine
(www.bloomberg.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
538 points (97.4% liked)
World News
32317 readers
1020 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
The problem NATO has with this proxy war can't be solved by printing money. The issue lies in the lack of industrial production in the west, and you can't just create a huge industry for producing weapons and ammunition out of whole cloth.
This will be a fantastic vehicle for pushing for austerity in Europe though. The oligarchs have been very upset that Europeans enjoy a social safety net and things like pensions. The need for massive military spending will be a perfect justification for stripping these rights away from the workers. Europeans are about to start enjoying American style freedoms.
what too much finance capital does to a mf
Who said anything about printing money? NATO manages trillions upon trillions of dollars of already in circulation currency.
That money is already allocated, it's not just sitting there in a big pile collecting dust.
warning to all, this guy does nothing but spread russian propaganda all day. check their post history.
That's right, I spread Russian propaganda as reported by mainstream western media.
Who goes back and reads new comments in two-day old posts, anyway?
Based on votes, more people than I thought…
Lemmy is still small enough that older posts have a chance to stick around. Another benefit over a huge forum like reddit where the sheer volume of stuff buries things really fast.
Industrial production is not a significant issue the collective West has within the context of supplying Ukraine armaments and ammunition.
The issue is a lack of, or decline in, domestic political capital in key member states, cohesive unified policy, and a long term strategy.
Now, if the United States was completely removed from the equation, then industrial production capacity constraints, especially around munitions, may become a real issue.
lol CNN disagrees with you there bud https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/10/politics/russia-artillery-shell-production-us-europe-ukraine/index.html
I mean the article seemingly agrees with CircusCritic, they're only outproducing because of lack of funding from NATO countries in combination with the control Russia has over its own economy. If NATO, NATO countries, or the US can actually begin to deliver a lot of funds, production will increase rapidly.
We have industries for creating these armaments, they just don't have the incentive to create a lot due to a lack of funding.
The when is of course an important question. Providing 100 billion to Ukraine in funding in 2 years will have a different impact than 100 billion next month.
Does the west actually have those industries? Turns out decades of outsourcing as much production as possible overseas was a bad idea. Who would have thunk it.
Munition factories aren't typically outsourced, but a lot were decommissioned after the Cold War ended. That problem is especially acute within European NATO member states.
But, in the context of NATO, as a whole, just supplying Ukraine for their existing conflict, production isn't the limiting factor.
The munitions themselves are made in the US, but the raw materials, tooling, and various components in more advanced weaponry have complicated supply chains and are sourced from all over.
The US military is going through massive headaches because domestic supply chains arent able to support the construction of new ships, missles, tanks, aircraft, and other equipment like mobile launchers and uniforms because the domestic production of raw materials and skilled labor required for production have been gutted. Just look at the fiasco that AUKUS is currently undergoing trying to produce submarines. Sure the Navy never technically stopped building it's ships domestically, but allowing the rest of the domestic shipbuilding industry to collapse has lead to the US being comically inept at at producing serviceable ships.
Free market capitalism is incompatible with national security as capital is only interested in quarterly profits and will sacrifice long term security to meet that goal. Defense contractors have de facto monopolies today and use the threat of going out of business to pressure the Pentagon into giving them massive paychecks to fuck around.
As I explained in my original comment, you can't just create such industries overnight. These require building out supply chains, training workers, and so on. You can just look at how great reshoring chip production is going despite untold billions being poured into that to get an idea of what a monumental task this is.
Building out an industry on this scale is going to take years if not decades. Providing 100 billion to Ukraine in funding isn't going to do jack shit. Ukraine is running out of weapons and ammunition. Replacements for any of these don't exist, and production capacity is insufficient to make any actual difference in the foreseeable future.
Highly recommend reading this article from RUSI explaining these problems https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/attritional-art-war-lessons-russian-war-ukraine
Ship building and shell production are on the polar opposite ends of time requirements for industrial capacity building....the fact that you used ship building as an example here makes me wonder if you're being intentionally disingenuous....
Also, you don't seem to understand how these funding programs actually work if you think this is being allocated to build out Ukrainian domestic production capacity.
Chip production might have different requirements from shell production, but it's a good example of how difficult it is to bootstrap an industry. Also, nobody is talking about allocating anything to Ukrainian domestic production capacity here. Maybe actually try and read that RUSI article till you understand what it's saying.