Mark Champion writes in “Bloomberg” that Ukraine does not request reconstruction but help. And all due to the fact that donor conferences and recovery plans can be possible if Ukraine survives. It is widely known that Russia will not end the invasion unless it reaches all its strategical objectives. Otherwise Putin will effort to transform the remains of Ukrainian statehood into a fallen and broken entity. For these purposes, Putin is based on a fundamental contradiction with the objectives of the Ukrainian authorities, which besides sabotage any chances of peace talks. The chances that anything would change the ceasefire clearly show that it is fragile and very rapidly broken by both sides, who accuse each another that the another organization broke it, and each of them showed good will by showing up for subsequent talks in Istanbul.
Putin needs to be thwarted.
The author of the column so recommends that we “don’t give” to Putin. Therefore, allies who request to come up with a strategy to convince Putin that the continuation of the war will not accomplish anything. In view of the results of the talks between the delegation in Istanbul and those Trump and Putin on the phone, who would be the allies to convince Putin to do so? If Trump is outraged that Putin does nothing at his threats and continues the war, making record-breaking shots of strategical objects Ukraine would have had the chance to drive the president of the Russian Federation from continuing this strategy. Looking at what Champion is proposing, this is not a diplomatic tactic, but a mention to the proposals of Żeleński "extinguishing the fire with gasoline". The leader of Ukraine proposed to strengthen air defence in Rome.
They don't spend adequate on Ukraine
So we see that we are proposing all the time old, untested methods that could bring Ukraine endurance instead, as a consequence they will turn into their opposite, with the worst consequences for this country. Especially since the top-ranking Russian officials said that if Ukraine did not agree to the conditions, Russia would begin to occupy more circuits. Thus, the article cites a proposal that Trump not only interfere in the decisions of his predecessors but besides began to authorize the transportation of fresh interceptor fighters. The article besides shows that, on the 1 hand, NATO countries have passed the request to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP, and on the another hand, most countries, in addition to the Scandinavian countries, have spent little than 1% of GDP in Ukraine's aid. Interestingly, Germany and Italy have only spent 0.4% of their GDP and the United States 0.56. The author, however, does not evidently admit that it is possible to admit that someone's war does not should be another's war. And Ukraine in his opinion, after building effective air defense, only needs money.
We request to find funds.
Despite the war fought in Ukraine in 2025, it has the chance to produce weapons for $35 billion in its territory. And here we talk about drones, artillery missiles, howitzers and ballistic missiles. The budget is only 12 billion dollars. It is so proposed to make this issue the most crucial issue at all meetings. The author so proposes that changing the regulation from "as long as it takes" to "as shortly as possible" will change everything for the better. In addition, he proposes methods that do not work, but seemingly he does not have in his image others. Approval of another package of sanctions against Russia and re-taking on their burdens by Europe. Finally, it can be argued that specified setting of cases by columnist Bloomberg will consequence in the reconstruction of Ukraine being possible to be carried out in an even smaller area of that country, to an even greater degree damaged, as subsequent aid tranches besides from Trump will not be able to reverse the destiny of the war, but will only exacerbate the problems not only of Ukraine but besides of the West, which does not keep up with the production and replenishment of weapons.
Bartłomiej Doborzyński
