Ukraine War | Patriots for Ukraine: Who wants to pay for this?

There was great joy and hope in Kyiv after US President Donald Trump approved the delivery of urgently needed air defense systems on Monday . On July 23, the NATO countries that own Patriot systems plan to discuss who can hand over the weapons to Ukraine and then buy new ones from the US, reports the Reuters news agency. Trump told reporters that the delivery of missiles had already begun. "They are coming from Germany, and Germany will then replace its own," Trump said. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius (SPD) traveled to the US specifically to purchase two of the systems.

Trump had previously made it clear that he would no longer pay for weapons for Ukraine with US funds; instead, the European supporting states should purchase the military equipment. And that seems to be where the problem lies. According to media reports, hardly any countries seem willing to participate in the delivery plan. After Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala ruled out his country's participation, Italy and France also declined. Emmanuel Macron wants to continue supplying weapons, but insists on developing European systems instead of buying US ones, writes the portal "Politico."

Only three countries want to supply Patriots to Ukraine

The EU, which is still looking for 19 billion euros to finance the Ukrainian budget , also ruled out taking over the financing of the Patriots and referred to regulations according to which the member states are responsible for the purchase of such weapons.

At the meeting with Donald Trump, NATO chief Mark Rutte mentioned six countries willing to participate in the arms purchase: Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Canada, and the Netherlands. However, two of the countries only learned of their supposed willingness through Rutte, Reuters reports, citing diplomatic sources. According to various reports, only three countries remain that want to purchase Patriot systems for Ukraine: Great Britain, the Netherlands, and Germany.

No to long-range missiles remains

Despite Ukrainian and German requests to also release long-range missiles , Trump is sticking to his no for now. When asked whether he was willing to do so, the US president replied, "No, that is not our intention." The Republican was also asked whether Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky should target Moscow or other targets deeper inside Russia. Trump replied, "No, he should not target Moscow." He thus reiterated statements by the White House, which denied media reports that he had given Zelensky permission to fire on Russia's hinterland.

Even though Zelensky reiterated his demands on Monday, the use of long-range missiles poses more global risks than benefits for Ukraine. War observers point out that previous attacks with such weapons, apart from causing massive destruction, have had little noticeable impact on the course of the war. Neither Russia's massive missile barrage in the fall of 2022 could halt the Ukrainian counteroffensive in Kherson and Kharkiv, nor did Ukrainian attacks in the Russian hinterland halt Russia's invasion.

Trump doesn't want to be drawn into the war

In addition, Tomahawk missiles, for example, are difficult for Ukraine to deploy, Vadym Skibitsky, deputy head of the HUR military intelligence service, told the British Guardian: "They are not easy to use. The main launchers are warships or strategic bombers. We don't have strategic bombers."

The delivery of long-range missiles could also pose a problem for Trump and the US itself. Instead of withdrawing from Ukraine, as Trump wants, the US could find itself in direct confrontation with Russia, with unforeseeable consequences. "Biden's war" would become "Trump's war." And Trump doesn't want that.