Ukraine's defense against Russia is being supported by billions
of dollars in military aid from NATO countries.
The Biden administration has so far authorized 2.6 billion in
security assistance since Russia's invasion of Ukraine
during the entirety of the Biden administration spent about 3.2
billion.
One of the most effective and expensive weapons systems
supplied is the FGM 148 javelin.
The Javelin is Co-manufactured between Lockheed Martin and
Raytheon and it is a portable anti armor system.
This means the Javelin is designed to take out hard
targets like modern tanks and armored personnel carriers or
APCs. At a cost of close to 176,000 per system. The Javelin
is not a cheap weapon of war. It also uses many high tech
components, which means that it takes time to make new ones.
So the stated sort of maximum production capacity per annum is
about 6800 missiles. We think that basically USA sent over
7000 missiles of his own stocks. So the US has now exceeded the
amount of missiles that they can replenish in a year.
The biggest challenge for the industrial base will be in
gearing up to replace the weapons that the US is supplying
to Ukraine.
What is the javelin? How is the Ukrainian military used it? And
can the US keep up with demand for not just Ukraine, but for
the US military and other allies who want to buy this versatile
weapon system.
The US has been providing weapons and training to Ukraine
for years and once Russia invaded the US and allies went
all in to resupply the Ukrainian military.
So to date the US has transferred more than 5500
javelins into the theater and Ukraine because it's proving to
be a highly effective weapon system on the battlefield aid
is now flowing, particularly anti tank I would put it in the
category of sufficient now arriving too late. Much of that
I think should have been there last year. As the build up
began. I visited Ukraine last year and the Ukrainians their
Special Operations Command their advisors, American Green Beret
advisors, were practically begging for more
the cost benefit analysis of a javelin versus a tank, javelins
aren't cheap. As they go, you're looking at about 200 grand right
for missle and A CLU but you're looking at several million for a
tank. It's a cheaper weapon that this was a much more expensive
platform.
Although Ukraine has managed to hold off Russian forces in key
areas, the war is likely far from over. Russian forces in the
South East of Ukraine have embarked on a new offensive.
This includes forces that were previously positioned near the
Capitol but were pulled back and reposition to support this new
push by Russia.
The terrain in the east is a lot more open, there's a bit they'll
be less emphasis on like small with a light infantry ambushes
and Russian columns and cities and sort of like wooded areas.
And most of open terrain artillery duels. The weather's
the weather is getting nicer, the mud is drying, which means
cross country cross country mobility will be restored in the
East it is what we would call in the military tank country wide
open rolling plains where you're going to need longer range
heavier systems. And that's why me and many others have been
demanding the Biden administration send more
sophisticated weaponry and send it faster.
The first idea for the javelin was pushed out in a memo in
1983. The concept which took over a decade to develop was to
make an anti tank missile that could be guided by infrared and
had the ability to do a top down attack on the lightly armored
areas of Soviet armor is
once you get a lock through the through the what they call the
CLU, which is basically the operating system. Once you get a
lock onto the tank, and then fire the missile, you can seek
cover, the previous systems had a wire that's that unspooled
behind the missile and you had to stay locked on the tank the
entire time that the missile was traveling the
sort of top attack or lofted flight as it's sometimes
referred to, which is sort of like you know the curve, the
curve flight with a missile takes a steep launch trajectory
flies sort of sort of level for a while and then sort of dives
on to the target.
The effectiveness of these weapons has also shone a light
on the processes needed to create them.
We don't know where and when the next kinetic war will be and
producing new weapons surging production lines takes time, the
US has so far provided a pretty substantial number of javelins,
for example to Ukraine. And this may be a time where we might
want to think about how we invest in increasing the
inventory of precision guided weapons and other weapons and
missiles.
Taking javelins from the existing us inventory depletes
American stockpiles of these high tech weapons for every
javelin, that gets shipped out. It is one less that can be used
for training or for war.
So eventually, NATO members as well as United States are going
to have to turn to defense industry to resupply their own
Arsenal's for
a lot of these weapon systems but especially for javelin, the
production lines have been designed to produce the number
of systems that DOD and its partners plan to buy in in an
efficient way, replacing them will require a manufacturing
surge which must be carefully managed and may not happen
overnight.
Both Lockheed Martin and Raytheon have seen boost to
their stock prices since the invasion on February 15,
Lockheed was at $382 per share. And as of April 28, was at $441
per share return was at around $94 per share on February 15,
and as of April 28, is at $98 per share.
Look, I think we can take some risk here in providing the
Ukrainians as fast as possible, and then over time refilling our
own stocks.
And something else to keep in mind is that it often takes a
long time to get military contracts approved as well as
the production of these types of specialized weapons. The future
of
Ukraine remains murky, but how the Ukrainian military uses the
billions in aid could be a big factor in the eventual outcome.
The simple presence, the vast number of these of these weapons
gives Ukrainians options. It's a fact that the Russians had to
factor in as well. You know, if I was a Russian tanker, the
amount of anti tank weapons in that country would probably make
me have sleepless nights,
Russia's invasion has rattled the world order other hotspots
could develop that would require the US military to have ample
amounts of high tech weapons to either use for its own purposes
or to give to a partner country.
This may be a time where we might want to think about how we
invest in increasing the inventory of precision guided
weapons and other weapons and missiles to every missile you
buy may mean you know less money for training less money for
research and development for exciting new technologies. So
there are a lot of budget trade offs to consider.
As for the javelins battlefield performance, it may be some time
until hard data emerges about how effective it has been in
Ukraine, but there could be ways the US government could help the
Ukrainians employ them better today,
we don't have folks on the ground. And I think that is a
policy decision that we should reconsider, you know, that we
could do so covertly. And we could do so with small numbers
of intelligence officers and special operators to actually
get out there, advise operate even not necessarily in the very
frontline, but perhaps in the command and control and
headquarters level. To get visibility on how effectively
the Ukrainians are employing the systems help them with with the
operational knowledge. I think we could help them be actually
more effective if we had advisors alongside but we'd have
to do that in very small numbers very selectively and very
quietly