By John Q. Hosedrinker 
As of the end of August 2025, the Czech-led initiative to supply Ukraine with ammunition has already delivered over one million large-calibre artillery rounds this year, with the aim of reaching 1.8 million by the end of the year. This effort has significantly reduced Russia’s artillery advantage, allowing Ukraine to maintain its front lines, according to Czech Foreign Minister Jan Lipavský. Sixteen countries have contributed to the initiative, which was launched in 2024 and has delivered 1.5 million rounds last year, with additional contributions from various nations, including 320,000 NATO-standard 155 mm shells. The program remains on track to meet its objectives, with Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy emphasizing the importance of the Czech-led channel for the total ammunition supply.
Read the original article here
Ukraine Gets 1 Million Artillery Shells From Czech-Led Coalition of 18 Nations
This is definitely good news. It’s encouraging to see this level of support for Ukraine, especially in the form of much-needed artillery shells. The effort, spearheaded by the Czech Republic and involving a coalition of 18 nations, is a significant step in providing the ammunition Ukraine needs to defend itself. The fact that the aim is to get to 1.8 million shells by the end of the year is even better.
One million shells is a lot, but it’s natural to wonder how long that supply will last in the current context of the war. Ukraine’s daily usage, due to shortages, is currently around 2,000 shells. However, Russia is firing significantly more – about 10,000 shells per day. Calculating at 5,000 shells a day, one million shells would be used in roughly 200 days, which is certainly more than a month.
The initiative to supply this amount of shells is commendable. The Czech Republic deserves a lot of credit for its role. This program needs to expand and become sustainable, ensuring a steady flow of ammunition. NATO has a larger industrial base than Russia; they should be able to outproduce Russia, but it comes down to funding.
The concern about sustainability is valid. The war’s high consumption rate means a million shells are used up pretty fast. Losses from accidents, sabotage, or the general chaos of war will further deplete the supply. While the current aid is important, a consistent supply is essential for long-term effectiveness.
It’s worth noting the context of the war and the types of production capacities available. It’s fair to compare the industrial production of the Western world versus the isolated and sanctioned North Korea. North Korea, a hardcore military dictatorship, has focused on arms production, building up massive stockpiles for decades, while Europe has enjoyed a high quality of life and freedom. It takes time to ramp up production to be comparable, but Europe is already massively rearming, and the EU is expected to outproduce the US in shells this year. The constraints on democratic countries are obviously different from those on authoritarian ones.
During the First World War, the Germans fired a million shells in a ten-hour period at Verdun. While artillery usage may have evolved since then, and drones are now used to locate targets, artillery is critical for both defense and counterattacks. The reality is that the demand for shells is huge.
That being said, concerns arise about the long-term commitment of some involved. Political shifts within certain countries could impact future aid. The commitment to Ukraine is essential for its defense.
The ability of European countries to produce at a large scale is worth considering. The industrial capacity today is much greater than in previous decades. The current need is a bit more urgent than what was expected, with modern warfare involving significant artillery usage and a war of attrition. The rapid production of military equipment during the two World Wars is a clear example of the capability, even with the challenges of the current environment.
The challenge comes from the fact that many nations anticipated wars being quick, with air superiority and bombing campaigns. The current conflict is very different, requiring a constant and substantial supply of artillery. The historical context reminds us that the social safety net is not necessarily a barrier to military production. In the end, there is an understanding that you can have both social programs and a robust military.
The cost of producing a million shells, estimated at $1-3 billion, is not extreme. Still, it requires resources, especially when there is so much other support given to Ukraine. The situation has made it necessary for European countries to reassess their military spending and capabilities. Europeans are realizing they can’t forever rely on the United States.