By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The UK is providing Ukraine with a new package of military aid, utilizing £70 million in interest from frozen Russian assets to fund 350 advanced air defense missiles. These missiles, built in Britain and rapidly adapted for ground launch, will be deployed via UK-supplied Raven systems. This marks the first instance of the UK directly using Russia-linked funds to finance weaponry for Kyiv. The aid package is part of the UK’s largest-ever yearly commitment to Ukraine, totaling £4.5 billion, with discussions on long-term defense spending at the upcoming NATO summit.
Read the original article here
Starmer to give missiles to Ukraine paid for with £70m interest on Russian assets, and it seems like a rather complex situation playing out right now. It’s almost poetic, isn’t it? Using the interest generated from frozen Russian assets to provide Ukraine with the weaponry it desperately needs. The idea of Russians, in a way, funding their own troubles… it’s a satisfying thought, though the scale of what’s being offered seems to be the real discussion point.
So, the UK is stepping up, using the interest accrued from those frozen assets, about £70 million, to procure missiles for Ukraine. The question is, what does £70 million actually *buy* in terms of military hardware? Some see this as a significant contribution, a real step forward in supporting Ukraine. Others aren’t so sure, describing it as a mere gesture, candy sticks compared to the magnitude of what’s needed.
Of course, the real issue is, what’s the total picture? The UK has frozen a substantial amount of Russian assets, potentially billions worth. The £70 million figure is just the interest. Some calculations suggest the yearly interest could reach up to a billion. It seems like there might be a discrepancy and that’s what everyone is trying to comprehend. The government is saying they are doing good.
But let’s look at the bigger picture. The UK is, in effect, giving and paying at the same time. This isn’t a simple matter of handing over money. It’s about using funds generated from frozen assets, which the UK controls, to purchase the necessary equipment. This is where the semantics get tricky. Is it a gift? Is it a payment? The answer is both, but it depends on the perspective you take. It’s a bit like the complexities of European countries still buying Russian oil while providing support to Ukraine.
The UK’s commitment is clearly more than just this single £70 million. This is part of the largest annual aid package to Ukraine so far, a total of £4.5 billion in military support. However, the debate over how to best support Ukraine is ongoing, and it’s easy to find examples of the current support not going far enough.
Then, there’s the question of the precedent this sets. Could freezing assets and using the interest to fund military actions deter future investments or actions? Some worry about the broader implications for financial markets. However, others argue that the act of invading a sovereign country and taking its assets should have consequences, and this is one way of making that happen.
Also, let’s consider the scale. Some suggest £70 million is a drop in the bucket, not enough to significantly impact the war. Others emphasize that it represents a calculated investment in defense, designed to weaken Russia, the primary enemy. Defending Ukraine isn’t just a humanitarian gesture; it’s also a strategic move to protect the UK’s own interests.
There’s a clear sense that more support is needed. The question is, how much more? Some are pointing to the need to equip Ukraine with the most advanced weaponry, like the F-35 jets capable of carrying nuclear weapons. The challenge lies in prioritizing resources, but the situation in Europe is dire.
Another question is the trade-offs. Some are feeling the pinch. It’s easy to question whether the government is prioritizing the right things. The reality is that compromises are unavoidable. National defense requires a significant allocation of resources, and the war in Ukraine is a clear national security priority.
Overall, the situation in Ukraine is a high stakes game. The UK is a major player and seems committed to helping, but the scope, scale, and implications of the support is what everyone is debating.