With two months to go before the Russian illegal war of  aggression is in its second year, 47 countries provided military and financial aid to Ukraine. Mainly wealthy Western democracies made the majority of the aid. However, some countries like Norway, Baltic countries and Denmark contributed more relative to the size of their economic strength, donating more than 1% of their GDP. On the other hand, some of the countries with sizable economic power like France and Italy donated negligibly. The biggest single contributor to the Ukrainian war efforts is the US with more than $75B which is 0.3% of its GDP and EU provided the largest financial aid with about $85B.

The donations come both as financial and military aid, but from the beginning the cautiousness not to be involved directly in the war cripples provision of the offensive military equipment like battle tanks and modern fighter aircraft to Ukraine. The US encourages other countries by supplying some of the more sophisticated military equipment and breaks the reluctance of the NATO coalition. For example, in the beginning Germany offered just 5000 helmets to Ukraine as aid and today despite their sluggishness, it is one of the countries which contributed more than $20B worth of military equipment and weapons. 

While the West supports Ukraine with aid and sanctions against its adversary, in 2024, Russia plans to increase its defence budget by 70% and spend 6% of its GDP which is  equivalent to about $120B. Despite the sanctions, in 2023, Russian GDP grew about 3% and brought its military industry to full capacity working two-three shifts a day. Moreover most civilian industries also returned back to pre-war production levels. As a result unemployment fell to 3%. This means that further increase in the production capacity won’t be easy because of a deficit in the workforce and also it would limit further mobilisation . 

Since military production makes up a large part of the GDP, the Russian economic growth does not necessarily translate to prosperity. Moreover the budget foresees an expected deficit of $9.5B which will inevitably translate to inflation which will increase living cost.

In 2006, NATO members pledged to invest towards 2% of their GDP for defence to ensure the Alliance's military readiness. Recently, the pledge was renewed by making the target to exceed the 2%. However, even the old target was met with only 11 members of the 31. The military industry also lags behind, unable to meet the demand not only supply Ukraine’s needs but also filling the empty warehouses of the alliance. However  many experts warned of the need to boost the capacity in the beginning of the war. The lack of supply increases the prices leading to inefficient expenditure of the already insufficient military budget. On the other hand, the pledge actually allows for a very large budget as the combined GDP of NATO member states is almost 10 times the GDP of Russia.

Last month, the largest economy of Europe, Germany promised to make its military 'the backbone of defence in Europe'. This task requires transforming the industry and to convince people to make necessary sacrifices and also requires other European countries to follow this transformation.

European leaders delay making the necessary  economical commitment and industrial transformation as they delay the supply of military equipment and weapons to Ukraine. For decades European politicians preferred to solve problems using diplomacy, instead of military interventions. This is because Western democracies define greatness with the capacity to provide prosperity to their people. However today, a must be extinct type of leader insists on defining greatness with military might and refuses to negotiate.

The weakness of the democracies is the reluctance of their politicians to take the hard decision as this may have a heavy cost on their political careers. However democracies are strong even if it is because of one main aspect which is the ability to bring solutions using  the collective effort. Indeed, European resolve may seem to be loosening, but in the Western media, the danger of the Russian expansion and suffering of the Ukrainians takes back its place and also think tanks began to publish new policy papers  - like the German report that warns against a Russian attack on the Baltic states - urging the necessity of the industrial transformation. These new policy papers will be the tools for the leaders to adapt to the new reality while the media keeps public attention alive.

In contrast the totalitarian regimes rely on an ever getting smaller pool of trustable oligarchy to bring solutions. For example, in the emergency of collapse in front of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, General Surovikin constructed a defensive line to hold the ground and today his whereabouts is not known. The Russian media is used not to seek solutions but to use  propaganda to conceal facts and promote obedience. 

Polls show that 86% of the EU approve continuing to provide humanitarian support and two third of the Americans support sending more aid to Ukraine. At least for the leaders who have the right solutions convincing the Western public will be much easier. The year 2024 might be the year that the West sees that Russian aggression must be confronted full front and take necessary steps to achieve it.