Sending Patriot Missiles to Ukraine is an Expensive Blunder

Geoff LaMear works as a fellow at Defense Priorities. He is also an U.S. Army air defense artillery officer. His views do not represent the opinions of the Department of Defense.

These opinions are the author’s and may not reflect those of Military.com. Send your commentary to [email protected] Consider it.

Washington now sends some of its most advanced weapons to Ukraine to strengthen the country’s existing air defense system. Although sending Patriot missile systems and other missile systems to Ukraine could seem beneficial, considering repeated Russian missile attacks on civilian areas from drones and missiles, the solution is not the right one.

Patriot systems are just as likely to prevent the drone threat from happening as a water balloon or forest fire. This mismatch is too large. Washington’s stubborn persistence despite this reality is a mistake that will be costly.

Radars are used to scan for threats in an area. These areas are very small for Patriot systems and should be located at specific locations, such as a military base or power station. Given the vast front of Russian troops fighting it, a single Patriot system wouldn’t change the vulnerability Ukraine feels in the air. While it might be able to protect some nodes Kyiv values, Russian air attacks are capable of countering these missile systems.

Mass drone or missile strikes could be used to inundate the Patriot with more targets that it can defend against. Even if Patriot’s detection systems don’t get overwhelmed, there are steps to ensure that civilian aircraft and friendly planes are not downed. given the history of mistaken strikesThis may cause a slowdown in response time that can lead to failure.

Patriot systems themselves can be attractive targets as they are easily compromised during maintenance or when the system is prone to technical problems. Patriot systems provide protection for strategic assets and are part of a multi-tiered air defense bubble. Without additional air defense layers, putting Patriot systems on their terms could compromise the system’s survival and effectiveness.

Due to Russia’s shift towards nighttime attacks, short-range air defenses will not be able to protect drones. Only missile-based air defences are possible. The Soviet-era S-300 missile defense, which has roughly the same functions as a Patriot, is Ukraine’s most advanced.

This is not to say that Kyiv has a 85% interception rate without the systems. Given Ukraine’s old arsenal and difficulties in intercepting drones, this number is probably exaggerated. However, if Kyiv has sufficient air defense capabilities, it won’t require additional American systems. Russia will be a costly target if it adds Patriots to its arsenal.

The Patriots are not available in Ukraine. American personnel spend many months studying this complex and technical system. Military planners dedicate this time despite the fact that U.S. troops are not faced with any language barriers in technical or doctrinal documents. They also have access to specialists with years of experience and support from contractors who designed the systems.

The equipment will continue to be operated and maintained by Ukraine even after it has been trained. Embarking U.S. personnel on these missile batteries would be necessary to effectively employ Patriots. It could result in American casualties, as well as a direct U.S.-Russian confrontation that could quickly escalate.

Constant drone strikes are likely to put stress on both the ability supply anti-air missiles as well as the ability to destroy the equipment. It’s not easy to hit missiles with missiles. There are problems between the factory floor, the field, and both. The failures of Patriot systems can be catastrophic, with any one being enough for the system to fail. Even if luck is on Kyiv’s side, it’s not wise to use multimillion-dollar interceptors for drones that cost 100x less. Contrary to this, many of Ukraine’s most valuable ploys were the most affordable. One example was the use of radar-mimicking emitters in order to fool Russia into attacking its fake air defenses.

Washington’s knee-jerk dosomethingism is not helping. Although it can produce warm and fuzzy feelings this doesn’t translate to a peace that will bring about normalcy in Ukraine. Is it the pretense of moral superiority, or the end to the carnage that is more important?

Washington absolutists may believe that principle overrides pragmatism. How many will die before negotiations can bring an end to the war? Tactically questionable weapon shipment won’t affect the outcome. They might delay it. They might delay it.

Show Full Article