After months without announcements of new US military aid to Ukraine, reports emerged over the weekend that an additional US-made Patriot air defence system will be sent from Israel to the struggling country this summer. Coming on the heels of President Donald Trump’s public frustration with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, the move is likely intended as a signal of Washington’s resolve and willingness to extend military support to Kyiv if Moscow refuses to accept US terms.

The strategy won’t work. Not only will sending the additional air defences to Ukraine do little to pressure Putin, but it will not help Ukraine much in the short or long term. Worse, the decision deepens US engagement and wastes more resources on a war that is peripheral to core US interests.

Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has made ending the war in Ukraine one of his top priorities. While coercing Kyiv to accept significant concessions — even briefly cutting off military aid and intelligence sharing to force compliance — he has offered Moscow favourable terms to agree to a ceasefire, including a promise to keep Ukraine out of Nato, sanctions relief, and at least de facto Russian control of territories it has occupied since 2014.

This approach has attracted backlash, but it reflects the battlefield reality and balance of power between stakeholders. Given that Russia has the upper hand militarily, Washington has limited leverage over Putin. More sanctions, which Trump has threatened, are unlikely to change the Russian President’s calculus, and the US cannot surge military aid to Ukraine given its already depleted stockpiles.

In this context, the decision to send Ukraine an additional Patriot system is both futile and risky. One more Patriot system inside Ukraine will not drastically alter the course of the war. Russia has already demonstrated its ability to overwhelm the Patriot system with drone swarms and low-cost missiles, further limiting its tactical value.

In the near term, Ukraine’s defensive outlook will not change either. The system will not arrive immediately, requiring a refurbishment that will take several months. The global shortage of interceptor missiles will continue to limit the system’s effectiveness, regardless of the deployment. After all, air defence systems are of little use without robust stockpiles of the missiles they require.

If Trump remains committed to brokering a deal, he should double down on his original strategy: withhold new military aid and offer meaningful incentives, such as sanctions relief and limits on Ukraine’s Nato integration. This would mean continuing to limit new US military aid to Ukraine until after a settlement is reached, and offering Putin incentives to convince him to give up his battlefield advantage. So far, the carrots offered have not done the job.

A successful deal will likely require some mix of sanctions relief, territorial concessions and limits on Ukraine’s military integration with the United States and Europe, as well as a reduction in the US’s military presence in Europe — something Washington has not yet put on the table.

Trump’s impatience with Ukraine and Russia has become clear in recent weeks, but he should not let this, or the naysayers, push him away from his initial instincts.

---

Jennifer Kavanagh is a senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities.

jekavanagh

---