Ukraine military aid doesn’t always get to the front lines: “Like 30% of it reaches its final destination”
Watch the CBS Reports documentary “Arming Ukraine” in the video player above, or stream it on the CBS News app Sunday, Aug. 7, at 8 pm, 11 pm or 2 am ET.
In a war being fought alive in World War II era, with Soviet ammunition, the vast influx of modern NATO weapons and military supplies from the West into Ukraine has proven to be among the largest determinants of whether territory is lost, or gained, along Ukraine’s embattled border region with Russia.
The bulk of these weapons and military supplies make their way to the border of Poland, where US and NATO allies quickly ferry it across the border and into the hands of Ukrainian officials. That’s where US oversight ends.
“All of this stuff goes across the border, and then something happens, kind of like 30% of it reaches its final destination,” said Jonas Ohman, founder and CEO of Blue-Yellow, a Lithuania-based organization that has been meeting with and supplying frontline units with military aid in Ukraine since the start of the conflict with Russia-backed separatists in 2014.
“30-40%, that’s my estimation,” he said in April of this year.
Theover $23 billion in military aid to Ukraine since the start of the war at the end of February, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, which has been tracking global commitments of aid to Ukraine. The United Kingdom has committed $3.7 billion, Germany $1.4 billion, and Poland $1.8 billion, with multiple other countries following suit.
A combination of Ukraine’s constantly shifting front lines with itsand paramilitary forces has made delivery of the military aid difficult for those attempting to navigate the dangerous supply lines to their destination. Some have raised concerns about weapons falling into Ukraine’s black market, which has thrived on corruption since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Ohman relies largely on his unofficial channels to deliver supplies, which can include anything from night-vision scopes and radios to Kevlar vests, ballistic helmets and modern drones, which have proven to be essential eyes in the sky for breaking through stalemates on the battlefield. His group’s status as an NGO does not permit him to deliver “lethal weapons.”
“There are like power lords, oligarchs, political players,” Ohman said, describing the corruption and bureaucracy he has to work around. “The system itself, it’s like, ‘We are the armed forces of Ukraine. If security forces want it, well, the Americans gave it to us.’ It’s kind of like power games all day long, and so eventually people need the stuff, and they go to us.”
Andy Millburn is a retired US Marine colonel who served in Iraq and Somalia and recently founded the Mozart Group, a company dedicated to training frontline Ukrainian soldiers. He traveled to Ukraine after the Russian invasion and set up a base in the capital Kyiv.
“If you provide supplies, or a logistics pipeline, there has got to be some organization to it, right? If the ability to which you’re willing to be involved in that stops at the Ukrainian border, the surprise isn’t that, Oh, all this stuff isn’t getting to where it needs to go — the surprise is that people actually expected it to,” Millburn said.
“If the United States’ policy is to support Ukraine in the defense of its country against the Russian Federation, you can’t go halfway with that. You can’t create artificial lines. I understand that means that US troops are not fighting Russians.” I understand even US troops are not crossing the border. But why not at least put people in place to supervise the country?
In July, Ambassador Bonnie Denise Jenkins, Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security at the US State Department, said “the potential for illicit diversion of weapons is among a host of political-military rights and human considerations.”
But she added, “We are confident in the Ukrainian Government’s commitment to appropriately safeguard and account for the US-origin defense equipment.”
Ukraine has created a temporary special commission to track the flow of weapons inside the country. But still, weapons experts say they have seen situations like this before.
“Every country and every situation is very different, but certainly if I look back, Iraq is another country where there have been cyclical deliveries. We saw a lot of weapons come in 2003 with the US-led invasion of Iraq, and then 2014 happened when ISIS took over large parts of the country and took over large stocks of weapons that had been meant for Iraqi forces,” said Donatella Rovera, a senior crisis advisor for Amnesty International who has been monitoring human rights violations in Ukraine.
“More recently, we saw the same situation occur in Afghanistan,” she said of the US withdrawal and Taliban takeover of the country. “Oversight mechanisms should be in place to avoid that.”
“That’s one of the reasons we have to win the war,” said Ohman. “If we lose the war, if we have this kind of gray zone, semi-failed state scenario or something like that. If you do this — you funnel lots of lethal resources into a place and you lose — then you will have to face the consequences.”
Dymtro Vlasov contributed to this report.