Can Ukraine’s counteroffensive prevail without combat air cover, and will the West come to regret not providing Ukraine with such battle-winning capability?
Although the West has provided a wealth of financial and military support to Ukraine to help combat the illegal invasion of Russian forces, it has been reluctant to provide the modern Western air power that President Zelenskyy clearly needs.
For much of the war in Ukraine, the Russian Air Force has been conspicuous by its absence.
Primarily used to launch long-range missiles at targets all over Ukraine, the Russian fighter jets have found the airspace over Ukraine particularly dangerous, and reports suggest they have lost 10% of their assets in the war to date.
The Russian Air Force has been constrained – to some degree – by the provision of modern Western air defence systems; however, since the start of Ukraine’s counteroffensive, the Russian Air Force has increased dramatically its sortie rate and effectiveness.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
11:04
Ukrainian village’s ’28 days in hell’
Air superiority is the degree of dominance that permits the conduct of operations by one side and its related land, sea and air forces at a given time and place without prohibitive interference by opposing air forces.
Successful land operations without local air superiority are very difficult; even in Afghanistan, just the sound of jet noise sparked panic in the Taliban fighters.
However, Ukraine does not have the air power capability to dominate the skies and is obliged to conduct its much-anticipated counteroffensive without effective air support.
Advertisement
As an interim measure, the West has provided a comprehensive suite of modern air defence systems – man-portable and mobile – which have taken their toll on the Russian Air Force.
However, the Russians can operate over southeast Ukraine with relative impunity and are supporting their land colleagues with a selection of glide munitions that enable the Russian fighters to remain a safe distance from the Ukrainian air defence systems.
It appears that the Russians have neither the training nor expertise to conduct effective close air support.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:47
Sean Bell on ‘sobering’ battles in Ukraine
Delivering explosive ordnance close to friendly forces is a challenging task, especially for fighters travelling at 1,000ft a second.
The difference between friendly and enemy is often a fraction of a second’s flying time, and thus the risk of fratricide is high.
If the Russian pilots were better trained, the results for Ukraine could be devastating.
Regardless, this is a very high-risk operation for Ukraine, sending inexperienced new recruits against robust Russian defences, where they will expect to suffer 3x the casualty rate on offence than they have on defence.
So, would the earlier provision of F-16s to Ukraine from the West have made a difference?
In short – no.
Ukraine needs modern air power, not a squadron or so of second-hand F-16 platforms that are neither supportable nor credible, against modern, stealthy Russian fighters.
Air power is a complex amalgam of technology, high-tech software, state-of-the-art precision weapons, and a wealth of supporting capabilities – such as airborne warning and control systems (AWACs), surface-to-air missiles and electronic warfare.
The Russian Air Force could decimate a small number of autonomous ageing F-16s, thus destroying Ukraine’s fledgling air power capability almost overnight and emboldening the Russian military.
The only credible way to provide Ukraine with the air capability required for this year’s offensive would be for the West to intervene and commit Western assets – and crews – to the conflict.
There is no sign of any international appetite for that level of escalation, despite the critical importance of this Ukrainian offensive.
For now, the Ukrainian military has to take on established Russian defences and without the protective umbrella of air support. That is a tough challenge.
Ukraine appears confident that it can prevail – despite the limited resources at its disposal.
Meanwhile, the West will be hoping it does not come to regret the decision not to provide battle-winning combat air capability to Ukraine.
Donald Trump has threatened sweeping new tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China on his first day in office.
The president-elect, who takes office on 20 January next year, said he would introduce a 25% tax on all products entering the country from Canada and Mexico.
Posting on his Truth Social platform he also threatened an additional 10% tariff on goods from China on top of any he might impose as one of his first executive orders.
If implemented, the tariffs could raise prices for ordinary American consumers on everything from petrol to cars and agricultural products.
The US is the largest importer of goods worldwide and Mexico, China and Canada are its top three suppliers according to the country’s census data.
More than 83% of exports from Mexico went to the US in 2023 and 75% of Canadian exports go to the country.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
“On January 20th, as one of my many first Executive Orders, I will sign all necessary documents to charge Mexico and Canada a 25% Tariff on ALL products coming into the United States, and its ridiculous Open Borders,” Mr Trump said.
He also spoke against an influx of illegal immigrants heading into the country.
While migrant arrests reached a record high during President Joe Biden’s administration, illegal crossings fell dramatically this year as new border restrictions were introduced and Mexico stepped up enforcement.
Mr Trump added: “Both Mexico and Canada have the absolute right and power to easily solve this long simmering problem. We hereby demand that they use this power… and until such time that they do, it is time for them to pay a very big price!”
After issuing his tariff threat, Mr Trump spoke with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and they were said to have discussed trade and border security.
“It was a good discussion and they will stay in touch,” a Canadian source said.
Turning to China, the president-elect said he “had many talks with China about the massive amounts of drugs, in particular Fentanyl, being sent into the United States – But to no avail”.
“Until such time as they stop, we will be charging China an additional 10% Tariff, above any additional Tariffs, on all of their many products coming into the United States of America,” he wrote.
The Chinese Embassy in Washington said there would be losers on all sides if there is a trade war.
“China-US economic and trade cooperation is mutually beneficial in nature,” embassy spokesman Liu Pengyu posted on X. “No one will win a trade war or a tariff war.”
It is not clear if Mr Trump will actually go through with the threats.
He won the recent election in part due to voter frustration over inflation and high prices.
Mr Trump’s nominee for treasury secretary Scott Bessent – who if confirmed, would be one of a number of officials responsible for tariffs – has said previously that tariffs are a means of negotiation.
Conor McGregor has spoken out after losing a civil rape case as a feminist march was held in Dublin.
The MMA fighter was accused of raping Nikita Hand, who was awarded €248,603 (£206,000) in damages on Friday after a jury at Dublin’s High Court found McGregor assaulted her in a Dublin hotel in 2018.
Posting on social media, the 36-year-old said: “I know I made mistakes”.
It comes as hundreds of people in Dublin staged a demonstration in “utter solidarity” with Ms Hand.
Posting on X, McGregor said: “People want to hear from me, I needed time. I know I made mistakes. Six years ago, I should have never responded to her outreaches. I should have shut the party down. I should never have stepped out on the woman I love the most in the world. That’s all on me.
“As much as I regret it, everything that happened that night was consensual and all the witnesses present swore to that under oath. I have instructed my legal team to appeal the decision.
“I can’t go back and I will move forward. I am beyond grateful to my family, friends and supporters all over the world who have stayed by my side.
“That’s it. No more. Getting back to the gym- the fight game awaits!”
Speaking outside court after the decision, an emotional Ms Hand said the two-week-long civil case had been a “nightmare” but that “justice has been served”.
“It’s something that I’ll never forget for the rest of my life,” she added.
In Dublin on Monday night, a march in support of Ms Hand was organised by the socialist feminist movement group Rosa to mark the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women.
Participants chanted “stand with Nikita” and “no more fear, no more shaming, we reject your victim blaming” as they carried signs and banners through the capital’s streets.
Ruth Coppinger, a councillor and general election candidate, and Natasha O’Brien, who became a public figure after a soldier received a suspended sentence for assaulting her, both spoke at the event.
Ms Coppinger said Ms Hand was “an incredibly brave woman” and that she was watching the event via a live stream.
Ms O’Brien was cheered as she said she’d been “in awe” of Ms Hand’s courage and that Ireland had let out a collective “sigh of relief” after the jury found in Ms Hand’s favour.
McGregor was accused of having “brutally raped and battered” Ms Hand.
She was taken in an ambulance to the Rotunda Hospital the following day where the paramedic who assessed her told the court she had not seen “someone so bruised” in a long time.
Following eight days of evidence, and three days of closing speeches and the judge’s instructions to the jury, the jury of eight women and four men spent six hours and ten minutes deliberating before returning their verdict.
Twelve British soldiers were injured in a major traffic pile-up in Estonia, close to the border with Russia, local media have reported.
Eight of the troops – part of a major NATO mission to deter Russian aggression – were airlifted back to the UK for hospital treatment on Sunday after the incident, which happened in snowy conditions on Friday, it is understood.
Five of these personnel have since been discharged with three still being kept in the military wing of the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham.
The crash happened at an intersection at around 5pm on Friday when the troops were travelling in three minibuses back to their base at Tapa.
Two civilian cars, driven by Estonians, are thought to have collided, triggering a chain reaction, with four other vehicles – comprising the three army Toyota minibuses and a third civilian car – piling into each other.
According to local media reports, the cars that initially collided were a Volvo S80, driven by a 37-year-old woman and a BMW 530D, driven by a 62-year-old woman.
The Estonian Postimees news site reported that 12 British soldiers were injured as well as five civilians. They were all taken to hospital by ambulance.
The British troops are serving in Estonia as part of Operation Cabrit, the UK’s contribution to NATO’s “enhanced forward presence” mission, which spans nations across the alliance’s eastern flank and is designed to deter attacks from Russia.
Around 900 British troops are deployed in Estonia, including a unit of Challenger 2 tanks.
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Defence said: “Several British soldiers deployed on Operation CABRIT in Estonia were injured in a road traffic incident last Friday, 22nd November.
“Following hospital treatment in Estonia, eight personnel were flown back to the UK on an RAF C-17 for further treatment.
“Five have since been discharged and three are being cared for at the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham. We wish them all a speedy recovery.”
Defence Secretary John Healey said: “Following the road traffic incident involving British personnel in Estonia, my thoughts are with all those affected, and I wish those injured a full, swift recovery.
“Thanks to the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine at Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham for their excellent care.”