The GAO says the quiet part out loud: nobody actually knows how much corruption there is in Ukraine's use of US military aid. 

Quelle surprise! Who could have guessed that in the midst of a desperate war in a notoriously corrupt country that unknown quantities of expensive, high-tech military aid might fall through the cracks.

GAO: ‘Unclear’ if Pentagon Tracking Reports of Misused Aid in Ukraine https://t.co/dWKO36JCPi

— Tom Bevan (@TomBevanRCP) March 15, 2024

Let's be clear: the GAO is not saying that billions of aid are being diverted into the pockets of Ukraine's famously corrupt elite. Rather, it is saying that nobody knows and nobody is looking to find out. 

While the Pentagon has assured Congress that no U.S. military equipment sent to Ukraine has been diverted, stolen, or otherwise misappropriated, a new report from the Government Accountability Office could not determine if the Department of Defense was tracking allegations of misuse two years into the conflict.

“If you never look, you will never find it,” a source familiar with how the report was compiled said of the worst-case possibility that aid was being misappropriated.

It has always been the case that corruption runs rampant in the midst of wars, and when you combine that reality with Ukraine's massively corrupt government culture it is a certainty that a lot of graft is clogging up the system. This is no more surprising than the sun rising in the East, and Pentagon officials would be expected to turn a blind eye on some level of aid "leakage." 

It's collateral damage, financially speaking. 

What makes this so concerning is that Ukraine is getting the cream of the crop in military equipment, and the US absolutely positively doesn't want that falling into the hands of our adversaries. Does anybody believe that China isn't scooping up as much military equipment as humanly possible and reverse engineering it?

The US certainly would in similar circumstances. 

The Pentagon's processes are ridiculously flawed:

DOD does not have quality data to track delivery of defense articles to Ukraine.

DOD guidance on PDA does not clearly define at what point in the delivery process defense articles should be recorded as delivered or provide clear instructions for how DOD service branches are to confirm delivery. As a result, DOD officials sometimes record defense articles as delivered while they are in transit, weeks before they arrive in Ukraine. Additionally, DOD has not used its data systems to track the delivery of some defense articles provided under USAl.

DOD officials use these data to ensure that defense articles have been delivered, to request funding for replacement of certain PDA articles, and as a baseline for conducting end-use monitoring. By taking steps to ensure the accuracy and completeness of its data, DOD will better ensure that it has the quality data needed to inform strategic decisions.

DOD has a program to monitor the end-use of all defense articles provided to Ukraine but has had to alter some traditional end-use monitoring procedures in response to the ongoing conflict. For instance, DOD has been unable to directly observe some sensitive defense articles and has allowed Ukrainian officials to self-report the status of such articles. However, DOD has not formally assessed the effectiveness of its modified approach. By conducting such an assessment, DOD will better understand whether its adjusted monitoring approach ensures that defense articles are used for the purposes for which they were provided and will have the feedback needed to inform additional policy changes.

The mishandling of sensitive military equipment is a separate issue from the wisdom of US policy, which depends on a variety of other factors and judgments. The issue here is the exercise of adequate controls to ensure both the best value for the taxpayers and even more importantly the preservation of US military secrets. 

Using sensitive military equipment even in our own wars, requires a delicate balance. On the one hand you want to use your best to ensure a good outcome, while on the other hand, you want to keep some capabilities either secret or at least shrouded in some mystery in order to spring surprises on potential future enemies. 

Whatever you think of the importance of defeating Russia in Ukraine, you have to keep an eye on China. China is and has been our more important adversary in the foreseeable future. Putin is a very bad dude. Xi is dangerous to the United States. One thing is not like the other, and if push came to shove it is more important that we keep China in check than keep Putin from grabbing some Ukrainian terrain. 

The challenge for advocates of continued massive support of Ukraine in its war comes down to the answer to this question: does Ukraine have the manpower and will to beat back Russia indefinitely, or is it time to find a diplomatic solution before the Ukrainian military begins to fray? 

Many people oppose further funding because they oppose the US getting drawn into an indefinite conflict over secondary interests. "It's not our war" sums it up. If Europe really fears Putin, they need to step up, as the US is the primary backer of Ukraine, and our interests are only modestly impacted by the fate of Ukraine. 

For those who are invested in the Ukraine war and believe it is in our interests to preserve its full sovereignty, the issue remains: how many Ukrainians are going to die to possibly not achieve a goal seemingly out of reach, and can Ukraine sustain these losses even if the cause is just and important? 

It sure looks like the best Ukraine can expect is to hold territory. If the last counteroffensive failed, what is the likelihood that a future one with a weaker Ukrainian military will succeed?

I cheered Ukrainian resistance and was pleased to see them push Putin out of the heartland of their country. I would have been happy if they pushed Russia out of the Donbas region last year. 

It didn't happen, and I doubt it ever will. I fear that now people are being killed for a lost cause. 

That's on the Ukrainian side. 

On the American side we have the leakage of our technology to our adversaries and the terrific drawdown rate of our own military capabilities. We may need those weapons, and we probably won't replace them for a long time. 

Losing Taiwan would be a far, far, FAR bigger disaster than Ukraine losing a bit more territory. Western economies are utterly dependent on Taiwan for our information technology hardware. 

The Ukraine war appears to be lost in the east. I think both Ukraine and the US should cut their losses, and our leaders should focus on rebuilding and improving our military capabilities tout suite. Xi is watching.