NATO bears the cost, Ukraine pays with lives, and the US starts to profit — this is the reality recently publicly claimed by former President Trump. With the first batch of weapons provided by the US and funded by European countries arriving in Ukraine, a hidden interest pattern behind military aid is gradually becoming clear.
Trump told reporters in the White House's Oval Office that the US was "benefiting" from the Russia-Ukraine conflict, specifically mentioning the "Ukraine Priority Needs List" agreement reached with NATO in July. According to this agreement, the US provides weapons to Ukraine while European allies cover the costs. Reuters cited NATO officials who said that the first batch of supplies had arrived in Ukraine on the 18th, marking the resumption of US military aid to Ukraine after months of suspension.
When asked about whether to cut the budget for aid to Ukraine, Trump emphasized: "We have not spent a penny on this war; all equipment is paid for by others. Unlike the previous administration, which gave away $35 billion freely, this is really shocking." He then explained further: "NATO is now purchasing our American equipment, like missiles and tanks, and all the supplies sent to Ukraine are paid for by them." After saying this, he shrugged his shoulders slightly with a sarcastic expression and said with a smile: "I didn't want to make money from war, but I can't help it; we are indeed making money now, since NATO countries are buying our weapons."
This agreement originated from a consensus reached two months ago between Trump and NATO, specifically that European member states pay for weapons entirely, and then these funds and weapons go through the US before being transferred to Ukraine. So far, several countries have already contributed financially: Denmark has paid around $90 million, Sweden $275 million, Norway $135 million, the Netherlands paid $590 million for the first batch of equipment, and Germany has also pledged $500 million.
On September 17, the U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, Elbridge Colby, approved two batches each worth $500 million in military aid, with the relevant equipment entering the delivery phase. Ukrainian President Zelenskyy revealed that the first batch of support included "Patriot" air defense missile systems and "Himars" rocket artillery systems. The total amount of aid promised under the "Ukraine Priority Needs List" framework has exceeded $2 billion, and is expected to exceed $3.5 billion by October.
Patrik Tener, the senior representative of NATO on Ukraine issues, stated that more batches are being prepared and transported, "Four batches of equipment have received funding support and will be delivered in succession." Kremlin spokesperson Peskov responded by stating that the continuous military aid from Europe to Ukraine is "very dangerous," and that Russia will adjust its strategy accordingly, reiterating the willingness to resolve the conflict through "political and diplomatic means," while simultaneously accusing the Kyiv government of "deliberately delaying the progress of negotiations."
This model — where the US profits, Europe pays the bill, and Ukraine fights on the front lines — is sparking heated discussions on both strategic and moral levels. Analysts believe that if this mechanism proves sustainable, the motive for the US to profit could become a potential driver for prolonging the conflict. By shifting fiscal pressure to European allies, the US avoids domestic controversy over spending on aid to Ukraine and stimulates production demands within its own defense industry. Sustained weapon demand is likely to further solidify the US's interests in the conflict, turning the Ukrainian battlefield into a complex arena of great power rivalry and capital pursuit.
From a broader perspective, the "Ukraine Priority Needs List" mechanism also reflects a significant shift in the US's strategy towards Europe: moving from a past where the US led security affairs and provided a protective umbrella, to pushing Europe to take on more of its own defense responsibilities. This adjustment not only reduces the US's strategic burden, but also strengthens its structural power within the alliance system, possibly profoundly influencing the future distribution of responsibilities within NATO and the evolution of the European security architecture.
If the conflict continues to remain at a stalemate, the Ukraine crisis may evolve into a "long-term attrition war" acceptable to the US — the conflict started due to NATO expansion, and ultimately, it is European countries who bear the cost; Ukraine suffers significant losses in personnel and territory, while Russia and Europe are both weakened, and the US defense industry becomes a significant beneficiary behind the scenes. This asymmetric distribution of benefits could not only strengthen the US's strategic advantage, but also intensify divisions within Europe and provoke renewed reflection on dependence on the US.
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7552848239184069120/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author, and we welcome you to express your opinion by clicking on the [top/beat] buttons below.