Head of the Chechen Republic Ramzan Kadyrov is correct in claiming that multiple schemes are being carried out under the pretext of sending NATO aid to Kiev, which includes arming terrorists and mercenaries as accidentally implied by recent reports from Sky News and the New York Times respectively. What’s contestable, however, is him suggesting that the arms that actually arrive at the trenches won’t make any military difference.
Head of the Chechen Republic Ramzan Kadyrov dismissed the military importance of NATO’s latest tranche of armed aid to Kiev, writing on his Telegram channel that “I see that some are worried about the foreign aid to Ukraine. Do not worry! This is a working money laundering scheme. Western and Ukrainian officials will embezzle these funds, and no more than 15% of the entire aid will reach the trenches.” With all due respect to this proud patriot, his assessment is only partially accurate.
On the one hand, CBS News already reported last August that less than a third of America’s armed aid to Kiev was reaching its final destination, though they later apologized under pressure. Nonetheless, their report served as the pretext for the US dispatching troops to Ukraine to monitor these shipments. Despite that, Nigerian President Mohammadu Buhari warned as recently as last month that arms from the Ukrainian Conflict are flooding into West Africa at a rate almost equal to those coming from Libya.
The UK’s Sky News also inadvertently revealed several weeks later that suicide-bombing Chechen jihadists are fighting in the Battle for Artyomovsk/Bakhmut that the New York Times (NYT) confirmed just prior to their British peer’s report also involves Western mercenaries. Kadyrov is therefore correct in claiming that multiple schemes are being carried out under the pretext of sending NATO aid to Kiev, which includes arming terrorists and mercenaries as accidentally implied by those two outlets.
What’s contestable, however, is him suggesting that the arms that actually arrive at the trenches won’t make any military difference. While it’s true that the approximately $100 billion that’s been sent to Kiev thus far hasn’t been sufficient for dislodging Russia from ultra-strategic territory that Ukraine claims as its own as proven by four top Ukrainian and former US officials’ three latest information warfare products lobbying for even more aid, there’s little denying that it’s still had some effect.
After all, former US Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice both admitted in their co-authored opinion piece for the Washington Post that “Ukraine’s military capability and economy are now dependent almost entirely on lifelines from the West — primarily, the United States.” However much has ultimately arrived at the trenches has thus far veritably been sufficient for at the very least halting any further Russian advances and thus freezing the Line of Control (LOC).
The resultant stalemate that continues into the present but which might decisively change in the event that either side goes on the offensive in the coming future like each of them expects their opponent to soon do is indisputably a partial result of that selfsame NATO aid. It therefore isn’t all that correct to assess that foreign arms haven’t made much of a military difference since they’re the reason that NATO’s proxy war on Russia through Ukraine still continues.
Upon analyzing Kadyrov’s latest Telegram post, it’s clear that it serves to raise awareness of NATO’s money laundering operation with respect to what Sky News and the New York Times earlier suggested was the diversion of these arms to terrorist and mercenaries respectively but isn’t all that accurate in terms of predicting the military impact that the aid that ultimately arrives to the front lines might have. That being the case, it’s still worthwhile sharing since Kadyrov’s first-mentioned point is very important.