One discovers that war-making by the West after WWII around the world started to see a trend that Smedley Butler would knowingly nod at as the sophisticated money-laundering complex to provide weapons and assistance in hundreds of conflicts.The tracking and auditing of these weapons transfers have not always been up to the standards one would expect responsible providers and agencies to employ to provision arms and assistance.
Well, the latest GAO report is out and the findings are not pretty and I think they underestimate the graft and criminality not only in the end use delivery in the Ukraine but where those weapons end up if not employed by the Ukraine forces and sold on the black or illicit markets (basically un-monitored & tracked exchanges or grants). Some savvy Western journalist can make their bones by forming a forensic investigation team that digs up where the money has gone, where the weapons have gone and where the weapons are showing up around the world. They can also try to discover how much money actually leaves the VA-DC corridor when transfers or grants to foreign military forces of legacy weapons and systems.
The imminent corruption possible in these transactions is huge because ultimately combat losses of donated item is an inevitable conclusion which can be fabricated to cover the tracks for illicit transfers o weapons and system to third party buyers.
As a matter of fact, it would be interesting to see how these weapons transfer programs have historically performed.
But on to the GAO report, I read these so you don’t have to.
The theme of all these recommendations is accountability for government funds and weapons allocations which one would think would be an actionable offense but you rarely see government officials held to account but then again, I would love for my readers to let me know who was fired or held accountable for the loss of American conflicts since 1945. What is curious is that these recommendations are made because the law as Congress and the executive function in the US declare by statute has been broken and no one is held accountable.
If the private sector did this with non-weapons modalities, they would be held criminally liable by the usual suspects at the DOJ.
My recommendation is if any violations occur at any process juncture, the transfer is frozen and the parties examined. But don’t expect that to happen. This is performative but nothing will change.
The U.S. and more than thirty international donors have provided security assistance to the government of Ukraine in response to Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. Among international donors, 25 European countries collectively pledged over $73 billion in security assistance to Ukraine as of April 30, 2024. For many of these countries, the pledges are equivalent to a significant percentage of their GDP and defense budgets.
The Departments of Defense (DOD) and State (State) have coordinated within the U.S. government and with foreign donors to develop and execute donation strategies to collectively address Ukraine’s needs. The agencies generally facilitate international donations of defense articles in three ways: 1) authorizing foreign donors to transfer U.S.-origin defense articles to Ukraine; 2) providing logistical support services, such as equipment delivery and maintenance; and 3) incentivizing donations by providing foreign military financing (FMF) to replenish defense articles donated to Ukraine. Of the $72 billion of U.S. security assistance, $6.33 billion is obligated for FMF. State has allocated FMF to 10 European countries that pledged security assistance to Ukraine.
That’s 73 billion dollars pledged.
To date [9 August 2024], we have provided more than $55.4 billion in military assistance since Russia launched its premeditated, unprovoked, and brutal full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, and approximately $58.2 billion in military assistance since Russia’s initial invasion of Ukraine in 2014.
This is probably a low ball figure.
At least 30 countries have pledged over $148 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since Russia’s invasion in 2022. This includes $2 billion worth of defense items of U.S. origin—such as missiles and ammunition—that foreign donors requested to transfer to Ukraine.
The State Department approves these transfers, and the Defense Department is required to monitor the items.
However, State hasn’t consistently shared approval information with DOD and neither DOD nor State verify the delivery of these transfers. DOD can’t effectively monitor these items. We recommended ways to improve information sharing and monitoring.
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-24-106745.pdf
It’s worse than you think with simply this snapshot:
Between February 2022, when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and last June, the U.S. sent the beleaguered country $1.69 billion dollars worth of weapons that require a stringent form of tracking called enhanced end-use monitoring. Most such weapons are missiles, including anti-aircraft Stingers and anti-tank Javelins. Such monitoring includes tracking when the weapons are expended or lost.
The inspector general’s investigators found that U.S. officials did not keep weapons tracking databases updated in a timely manner due to a host of problems, including under-staffing, security concerns, a failure to communicate across multiple federal organizations, and Ukraine occasionally providing information too slowly.
https://www.defenseone.com/business/2024/08/us-still-needs-improve-monitoring-arms-sent-ukraine-gao-finds/398950/
Would it be too hard to have a meta-database that tracks this?
Bottom line: no one knows the total money sent nor accounted for the weapons and aid sent remaining in Ukraine proper.
Email me at cgpodcast@pm.me.
