According to the report below from the 8th of March by Global News, “military supplies are offloaded at airfields in Poland and Romania, driven across the border and delivered into the hands of the Ukrainian army and its newest fighters.”
These “newest fighters” appear to be people coming from countries all over the world to join those fighting on the ground in the Ukraine. This includes extremists from the Middle East, including Syria as set forth in Vanessa Beeley’s NATO White Helmets follow al-Qaeda to Ukraine.
That report mentions the transfer of fighter jets from Poland to Ukraine, however it was reported 9th March that the U.S. rejected this plan because it was too “high risk” as is set forth in the article linked below.
The Pentagon on Wednesday offered a conclusive rejection of a plan to transfer fighter jets from Poland to Ukraine to battle Russian forces there, saying the “high risk” move could have been interpreted as an escalation.
The issue of the jet transfer, which Ukraine’s leadership has been eager to see resolved as it seeks to counter Russian aggression in the skies, has proven to be a notable hiccup in the otherwise solid alliance between the United States and its European allies over Moscow’s invasion.
US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin spoke with Poland’s Defense Minister Mariusz Blaszczak earlier Wednesday and thanked him for Warsaw’s willingness to cooperate in the effort to assist Ukraine, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby told reporters.
“But he stressed that we do not support the transfer of additional fighter aircraft to the Ukrainian Air Force at this time, and therefore have no desire to see them in our custody, either,” Kirby said.
Warsaw had expressed support for a plan in which Poland would have sent its Soviet-era MiG-29 fighter jets to Kyiv via a US air base in Germany, with the suggested follow-on step that the United States would backfill Poland’s fleet with American F-16 fighters.
“That is something that we are not going to explore right now,” Kirby said, adding that adding aircraft to Ukraine’s fighter fleet was “not likely to significantly change the effectiveness” of the Ukrainian Air Force against Russian capabilities.
“Therefore, we believe that the gain from transferring those MiG-29s is low.”
Kirby said the intelligence community had assessed that the MiG transfer to Ukraine “may be mistaken as escalatory and could result in significant Russian reaction that might increase the prospects of a military escalation” with the NATO alliance.
“Therefore, we also assess the transfer of the MiG-29s to Ukraine to be high risk.”
The Pentagon’s on-the-record remarks appear to bring an end — at least for now — to the back and forth on the possible fighter jet transfer scheme.
Kirby said the best way to support Ukrainian defense is by providing them with weapons they need the most, particularly air defense systems.
“We along with other nations continue to send them these weapons and we know that they’re being used with great effect,” he added.
This is the article linked above regarding the weapons the U.S. has been supplying to Ukraine:
The United States has already delivered more than two thirds of the arms it promised in late February to Ukraine, whose forces are “effectively” using them to push back the Russians, a Pentagon official said Friday.
On February 26, Washington authorized $350 million of military equipment — the largest such package in US history — to bolster Kyiv against the Russian invasion, which began last week.
An official with the US State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs told Congress this week that the package aimed to “provide urgently needed ammunition, Javelin anti-tank missiles and the Stinger man portable air defense systems to Ukraine.”
Her testimony officially confirmed for the first time America’s delivery of the high-tech Stingers, which can be used to shoot down low-flying aircraft.
The Pentagon official told reporters that out of the $350 million, “we have already delivered to the Ukrainians $240 million-worth of that package, including some of the most needed capabilities like anti-armour capabilities.”
“You can see how fast we are moving to get those capabilities to the field,” she added, noting there was “no evidence of any Russian interference” to hinder arms deliveries.
Washington had previously authorized $60 million in military assistance to Ukraine last fall, followed by another $200 million in December for weapons and ammunition.
Most of that aid has been distributed to Ukrainian forces, the senior official told reporters Friday.
She added that US authorities “have been tremendously impressed by how effectively the Ukrainian armed forces have been using the equipment that we’ve provided them.”
“They are able to distribute the equipment very quickly” on the battlefield and have “slowed the Russian advance” she added.
Ukrainian forces have received US training, according to the official, including in December and early January, as Russia’s threats against its neighbor became more acute.
“The vast majority of what we have been providing they are already familiar with,” the official said.
She added that 14 other countries had also delivered weapons to Ukraine since Russia’s invasion began on February 24, and that US President Joe Biden had requested a new package from Congress to provide even more US assistance.
Below are excerpts from this article by Thomas Duthois & AFP published by EuroNews, updated 4 March 2022.
In a historic move for the bloc, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen announced on Monday that the EU would finance the purchase and delivery of arms to Ukraine totalling €450 million.
Major shifts on neutrality
In another major shift, Germany has broken its long-standing foreign policy of banning all exports of lethal weapons to conflict zones and will deliver 1,000 anti-tank rocket launchers, 500 Stinger surface-to-air missiles, nine Howitzers, 14 armoured vehicles and 10,000 tonnes of fuel to Ukraine.
Also breaking with its neutral stance, Sweden announced that it would deliver anti-tank weapons to Kyiv.
France, for its part, has committed defence equipment and fuel support.
Belgium and the Netherlands will also provide weapons and protective equipment, with the Belgian government promising 2,000 machine guns, 3,800 tons of fuel, 3,000 additional automatic rifles and 200 anti-tank weapons.
As well as protective equipment, the Netherlands will also provide 200 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles as soon as possible.
Portugal, the Czech Republic and Romania are also supporting the Ukrainian defence by providing military equipment.
Portugal has offered protective equipment such as bulletproof vests and helmets as well as night vision goggles, grenades and ammunition of various calibres.
The Czech Republic is sending 30,000 pistols, 7,000 assault rifles, 3,000 machine guns and several dozen sniper rifles as well as one million rounds of ammunition. Romania is providing fuel, body armour, helmets, ammunition and other military equipment.
In addition, Bucharest has announced that eleven Romanian military hospitals are prepared to receive Ukrainian wounded in the conflict.
Military aid from North America
Help is not only coming from the EU. North American countries are also offering their assistance to the embattled Ukrainian forces.
The US announced a new €350 million military aid package to Ukraine in what US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said was an "unprecedented move," bringing the total military aid from Washington to Ukraine over the past year to a total of nearly €1 billion.
The Ukrainians have in particular asked for Javelin anti-tank missiles, which will be included in the package US president Joe Biden said.
Finally, Canada announced the sending of military protective equipment, such as helmets and bulletproof vests but also anti-tank weapons systems and upgraded ammunition.
More countries around the world are offering their help to Ukraine every day. In the past week, an additional six countries have announced military aid packages for Kyiv.
More European countries offer to help
On Monday, Finland, a country that is not yet aligned with NATO but is a member of the EU, announced a historic policy shift to send weapons to Ukraine, promising 2,500 assault rifles, 150,000 rounds of ammunition, 1,500 rocket launchers and 70,000 field rations.
Denmark too announced on Sunday that it would be sending 2,700 anti-tank weapons and would let Danish volunteers join International Brigades forming in Ukraine to defend the country.
Norway, which had already announced on Sunday shipments of helmets and bulletproof vests, said on Monday it would also be sending 2,000 M72 anti-tank weapons.
In the Balkans, Croatia is sending €16 million worth of protective gear and light arms while Slovenia has promised rifles, ammunition and helmets.
Italy has also announced that it will send military equipment but has not disclosed details yet of what this may entail.
According to an article published by DefenseNews on the 28th of February:
The Italian cabinet signed off on a measure authorizing the dispatch of Stinger surface-to-air missiles, mortars and Milan, or Panzerfaust, anti-tank weapons. Italian media had claimed Israeli-made Spike missiles would be included in the package but a defense source said that was doubtful since Israel would need to approve their use and would be unlikely to do so.
Among other weaponry on the Italian list, which will need to approved by parliament this week, were Browning heavy machine guns, MG-type light machine guns and counter-IED systems.
The consignment could be flown to Romania or Poland and delivered over the border to Ukraine.
In this interview published by DefenseNews the 4th of March, Military Times Pentagon Bureau Chief Meghann Myers says that although U.S. troops are being deployed to Europe they won’t be involved in the Ukraine/Russia conflict. Please watch.
This is my transcription of what was said:
Daniel Woolfalk, DefenseNews: Meghann, you’ve been covering the American response to the crisis in Ukraine from the Pentagon. There is some troop movement. They’re not exactly getting involved in the fight but there are troops going overseas. Tell me a little bit about that.
Meghann Myers: The Pentagon has committed up to 14,000 American troops to Europe – not Ukraine of course, not to fight in Ukraine. None of that.
There are two different kinds of deployments going on.
There’s about 7,000 of those troops that have been committed to go unilaterally to different countries. So to the Baltic countries, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, Germany, Romania, and the rest of them have been activated as part of NATO’s Response Force which is a 40,000 troop organisation that NATO puts together to respond to crisis, just like this. It’s the first time that it’s ever been activated in its history.
The U.S. has committed thousands of troops to that mission but we’re not entirely sure yet who is going to be part of it or how many in total. But a brigade combat team from Fort Stewart has already made its way to Germany to await further instructions for how they might get involved.
DF: And the other mission, the one with partners, tell us a little about that one.
MM: There’s varying sort of situations that are going on. In Poland there’s a lot of training with Polish troops but also the Second Airborne is there – almost 5,0000 of them. And they have sort of a concurrent mission to help American evacuees coming across the border from Ukraine if they need assistance. They helped a handful of people, mostly people who need some food, some water and internet connection, but no heavy duty refugee situation there.
And then there are some places where there’s aircraft. So we’ve sent some F35’s to the Baltic countries. They are going to do some flights there, some training and same thing with Apache Attack Helicopters are going to be up in that area doing the same sort of, with the local forces but doing just some regular training flights. Just being there, being present to make everybody feel more comfortable.
DF: In terms of the NATO Response Force, is there any kind of indication of what their job might be or is there some kind of a goal ahead of actually moving into Ukraine or move closer?
MM: The idea would not be to move into Ukraine. The NATO Response Force is there to defend NATO so really the situation where that would arise is generally some sort of Russia miscalculation where they accidentally, in the course of invading Ukraine and being in Easter Europe, if they accidentally attack troops or facilities in Poland or other countries like that, then the NATO Response Force would be fully activated to go respond to that. But there is no situation where NATO would go into Ukraine to deal with a Russia/Ukraine conflict.
I guess that’s crystal clear. There is no situation where NATO would go into Ukraine but if Russia were to make a miscalculation and accidentally attack troops, facilities or other countries outside the border of Ukraine then the NATO Response Force (NRF) would be fully activated. My skeptical self feels that this scenario would be the perfect pretext for a false flag operation to frame Russia.
From NATO’s website, last updated 28 February 2022:
The NATO Response Force (NRF) is a highly ready and technologically advanced multinational force made up of land, air, maritime and Special Operations Forces (SOF) components that the Alliance can deploy quickly, wherever needed. In addition to its operational role, the NRF can be used for greater cooperation in education and training, increased exercises, support for disaster relief and better use of technology.
The NRF consists of a highly capable joint multinational force able to react in a very short time to the full range of security challenges from crisis management to collective defence.
NATO Allies decided to enhance the NRF in 2014 by creating a “spearhead force” within it, known as the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF).
This enhanced NRF is one of the measures of the Readiness Action Plan (RAP), which aims to respond to the changes in the security environment and strengthen the Alliance’s collective defence.
Overall command of the NRF belongs to the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR).
In response to Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, NATO activated elements of the NRF for the first time in a deterrence and defence role. Allies have placed thousands of additional troops – along with armoured vehicles, artillery units, ships and aircraft – at high readiness earmarked for the NRF, ensuring that it continues to have the speed, responsiveness and capability to defend NATO territory and populations.
The 28th February article, What is NATO’s Response Force, and why is it being activitated? reminds us of the rapid response and mutual defence mechanisms which the EU and NATO both have in place. These “all for one, one for all” agreements mean that if one of the member states is attacked then all members jump in to help defend them together.
The leader of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization announced on Friday the deployment of the alliance’s Response Force in the wake of Russia’s intervention into Ukraine. What is this high-readiness force all about, and what do they hope to achieve?
“We have to take this seriously, and that’s exactly why we are now deploying the NATO Response Force for the first time in a collective defense context,” Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told reporters.
The rapid-reaction, multinational, crisis-response and defense force falls under the command of the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe and is designed to be ready for rapid deployment in the midst of a crisis, says Mai’a Cross, the Edward W. Brooke Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at Northeastern.
[…]
“The meaning of the existence of the NRF is to tangibly show that NATO allies are willing to act together in the name of collective defense and deterrence,” Cross says.
Activation of the response troops does not mean that any U.S. or NATO troops will go into Ukraine, which is not a member. “The intention is to create a red line at the border between Ukraine and NATO member states, not send troops into Ukraine itself,” Cross explains.
[…]
Activation comes as Moscow warned Finland and Sweden against joining NATO, a move that would have “serious military-political repercussions,” says a spokeswoman for Russia’s Foreign Ministry.
Might NATO forces have been alerted because of the threats?
Western countries had begun re-positioning their troops and military equipment before Moscow threatened Sweden and Finland. Even if not in NATO, both Sweden and Finland are in the EU, and the EU has a similar mutual-defense clause, Cross says. So if one EU country is attacked, the others will come to its aid using any means in their power.
“Putin’s threats are just more of the same,” she says. “An effort to dictate the terms of European security in defiance of longstanding norms of sovereignty and self-determination.”
At this point, however, Western countries are preparing a range of tools to deter and defend against Russian aggression, and to prevent a direct confrontation with NATO countries.
“The NRF is part of this and deploying these troops to Europe shows the solidarity and resolve of NATO countries,” says Cross.
With the NATO Response Force activated and troops on standby in locations surrounding Ukraine, along with EU, NATO and other states supplying arms and troops on the ground, the stage is set for a false flag incident to be orchestrated to draw in all involved nations in accordance with their mutual defence agreements to attack their common enemy.
Something like one of the biolabs leaking or being targeted with a missile. Similarly a school or a maternity clinic allegedly being bombed would certainly provide pretext for an all party intervention would it not? This is especially so at a time of profound peak propaganda production.
