The pro-Ukraine media space is furious at a New York Times story that seems to pin the blame for slow counteroffensive advances on Ukraine itself, absolving its allies who slow-walked aid for so long. The premise is this: Ukraine received Western weapons and training, but that didn’t work, so they’re back to Soviet-style tactics of massive artillery barrages and small-unit advances, and that’s slow, which is bad.
Ukraine’s decision to change tactics is a clear signal that NATO’s hopes for large advances made by Ukrainian formations armed with new weapons, new training and an injection of artillery ammunition have failed to materialize, at least for now.It raises questions about the quality of the training the Ukrainians received from the West and about whether tens of billions of dollars’ worth of weapons, including nearly $44 billion from the Biden administration, have been successful in transforming the Ukrainian military into a NATO-standard fighting force.
