”Finally NATO isnʼt afraid” and other reactions to Western tanks for Ukraine. The worldʼs leading media about the war on January 26

Dozens of foreign media are commenting on the decision of the USA, Germany and other allies to provide tanks to Ukraine. The media is mostly supportive of the move, although the BBC notes that this increase in Ukrainian defense forces may come too late ― after heavy fighting is expected this winter and spring. But politically, it is difficult to overestimate this decision. Politico describes the whole process of NATOʼs hesitancy, first by the Germans, about the Leopard 2 and the fact that it could be an excuse for Russia to move to some new level of aggression. And then the Americans in relation to Abrams ― a model of tanks, difficult and expensive to maintain. And, in the end, Joe Bidenʼs decision to provide these tanks is quite a lot, if it frees the hands of the Germans and allows to unblock deliveries of the most useful Leopard for Ukraine. Politico, along with The Economist and Slate, call this Bidenʼs move one of the most consequential moves in the war. For Ukraine, these consequences are positive: they show that Kyivʼs allies are determined, united again and ready to provide a lot, including offensive weapons. After all, from now on, these weapons are not called such: tanks or, potentially, fighter jets simply help to drive the Russians out of our land. The most profound analysis of NATOʼs recent decision was published by CNN in an article by its international security editor, Nick Paton Walsh. He states: NATOʼs decision shows that the Alliance is no longer afraid of Russia. Yes, there will always be contradictions in unions this large. For example, Poland still remembers the "steel embrace" of the USSR and understands what exactly Russian imperialism threatens. Germany, on the other hand, was the country whose tanks kneaded the soil of Europe in todayʼs largest military conflict. However, even in such motley associations, it is possible to reach an agreement. The decision regarding tanks also shows a change in attitude towards Russia. First, Europe is less and less afraid of the Kremlinʼs nuclear blackmail. Secondly, a conventional attack by Moscow on one of the European states is considered less likely: that is why the Danes or the French are handing over heavy weapons to Ukraine, which they would need very much in the event of a Russian attack. So, in Europe, they believe that the conflict with Putin will take place ― and end ― in Ukraine. And that Ukraine will win in it. Yes, tanks can arrive already after the spring Ukrainian counteroffensive. But what is more important is the signal received by the Kremlin and, more importantly, its allies. He says that the West is ready to support Ukraine to the limit of its resources ― and they are incomparably greater than what the countries on the other side have. So, perhaps China and other Russian formal or informal partners should distance themselves from the "lame duck" that Russia has actually become. In the same way as to Putinʼs friends or confidants in the Kremlin ― to distance from him. "The Russian military is struggling to fashion a strategic plan around its constantly changing leadership, and to convert into substantial gains the brutal use of manpower as an endless and expendable resource. For those around Russian President Vladimir Putin, the colossus of NATO aid is inescapable and surely weighing into how enduring their support for Putin is. This is not going away," concludes the author of the article. Moscow may appear relatively impotent right now, but the fortunes of this war have changed before and may change again. Perhaps the weeks of public debate over escalating aid are intended to show Moscow that the West is cautious and respectful to what remains of the Kremlin’s ego. But we are into territory here that was impossible to imagine a year ago, with NATO’s best attack technology soon in Ukrainian hands, and Russia seemingly able only to bark its frustration."