Nato free-riders

Once again, Britain is leading Europe in its provision of advanced weapons to Ukraine. Ben Wallace, the Defence Secretary, confirmed yesterday that the UK is supplying Kyiv with Storm Shadow cruise missiles, which have a much longer range than anything sent before. The Ukrainians had requested such weapons in advance of their spring offensive, but there has been a degree of nervousness in Western capitals about acceding to their demands. The fear had been that providing missiles that can hit targets far inside Russia would result in massive retaliation.

But much the same was said about everything from anti-air defences to tanks. Time after time, the likes of Germany and France have had to be dragged into giving Ukraine the support it needs by stouter-hearted allies. By some estimates, the United States alone has donated 90 per cent of the military supplies that Kyiv has received.

That is patently unsustainable, especially if the war drags on and the political leadership in Washington changes. Donald Trump appeared equivocal at best on Ukraine during an appearance on the broadcaster CNN on Wednesday. Some Republicans question why the US is bearing such a disproportionate military and financial burden, while countries much more closely affected by the fighting are doing so little.

It is a version of a familiar debate: the failure of too many European members of Nato to pull their weight. Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has focused minds in Eastern Europe, with Poland, for example, launching a massive new programme of investment in its armed forces. The likes of Germany, however, still appear to think they can free-ride off the rest of the Western alliance.