U.S. approves sale of advanced sniper rifles to Ukraine army but no direct supplies

The U.S. State Department recently approved the commercial
license that allows the sale of advanced Barrett M107 sniper rifles to the
Ukrainian government, and related ammunition and parts, at a cost of USD 41
mln, the Washington Post reported on Dec. 20. The rifles will be sold and not
paid for by the 2018 U.S. defense budget that was signed last week by U.S. President Donald Trump,
according to several news reports. No sale had been authorized of the Javelin
anti-tank missiles that had been requested by the Ukrainian government for
years, the Washington Post confirmed.

U.S.-supplied Barrett M82 rifles have already been in
use in the Donbas war zone, the pravda.com.ua news site reported. Indeed, the
U.S. State Department has already been approving commercial licenses for
armaments exports to Ukraine, but at much lower quantities, confirmed U.S.
State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert, as reported by pravda.com.ua. The
U.S. government isn’t supplying arms directly to Ukraine but may do so in the
future as part of the 2018 defense budget, she said.

Zenon Zawada: The Barretts
will be of more help to the Ukrainian army than Javelin anti-tank missiles
because Ukrainian soldiers have already been trained on them, according to
weapons experts. Therefore, they can be used immediately to combat sniper fire,
which is the leading cause of Ukrainian casualties. They have night vision
scopes, when the Russian-backed forces are particularly active, and can
penetrate armored personnel carriers, which are extensively employed. Moreover,
the Javelins would have been forbidden to use in the Donbas conflict zone, as
with all anti-tank missiles.

Yet in the big picture, we believe the supply of advanced
weapons will encourage the Russians to double down and escalate the conflict,
in our view. And with sanctions scheduled to intensify
and costs of the war mounting, the Russian government may determine that time
is running out and drastic measures are needed, such as a deeper invasion in
Ukraine in order to seize more resources and compensate those lost from the
sanctions. (We don’t expect any drastic measures until 2019, when Ukraine holds
its presidential and parliamentary elections.)

On the other hand, Putin may be able to convince
his oligarchs to wait out another two-three years until European legislatures
relax their sanctions, which we believe to be the current trend. In this
conflict between Russia and the West (in which Ukraine is a proxy), the winner
will be the side that is able to longer withstand the military, economic and
informational pressure exerted by the opposing side.