Netherlands, Lithuania pledge ammunition, air defenses for Ukraine

The Netherlands is allocating 150 million euros ($170 million) to boost Ukraine's air defenses, while Lithuania intends to allocate 20 million euros ($23 million) for ammunition purchases, the two countries' defense ministers said on April 11.
The announcement came at the 27th meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in Brussels, a coalition of around 50 countries backing Kyiv against Russian aggression.
Referring to President Volodymyr Zelensky's request for additional air defenses, Dutch Defense Minister Ruben Brekelmans told reporters ahead of the meeting that the new aid will help Ukraine defend its skies.
The Netherlands has previously donated Patriot launchers to Ukraine and allocated over $2 billion in military aid this year, including 500 million euros ($540 million) for Ukraine's Drone Line initiative for boosting unmanned capabilities.
Speaking ahead of the Ramstein-format summit, Lithuania's Defense Minister Dovile Sakaliene said her country intends to provide Ukraine with an "additional 20 million euros for ammo acquisition, because this is one of the things that Ukraine really needs right now."
"And the summer may be very difficult. Therefore, we need to push forward our support," the Lithuanian defense chief said, according to the LRT broadcaster.
Both countries have been among the staunchest supporters of Ukraine during the full-scale war, with the Netherlands delivering F-16 jets and Lithuania being among the leading backers in terms of GDP allocated to aid.
The latest packages come atop other assistance announced by Ukraine's partners at the summit. The U.K. and Norway have already committed an additional 450 million pounds ($585 million) in military support, while Germany pledged four new IRIS-T air defenses, armored vehicles, tanks, missiles, shells, and other support.
Read also: 'Today we will pledge billions' for Ukraine — allies begin Ramstein-format meeting in Brussels
We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Business Insider

32 minutes ago

• Business Insider

NATO ships are at rising risk. Top commanders tell BI it's time to rethink naval defense.

NATO warships are sailing into a dangerous new era of naval warfare in which the threats are growing fast, two senior alliance commanders recently told Business Insider. From the Black Sea to the Red Sea, the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have exposed key vulnerabilities and shown NATO what its naval forces need to operate in risky environments. Dangers to warships these days include threats like hostile drones, missiles, and other naval vessels, capabilities built on rapidly advancing combat technology. So what does NATO need? Layered defenses, cheaper ways to destroy enemy threats, and deeper ammunition stockpiles. Vice Adm. James Morley, the deputy commander of NATO's Joint Force Command Norfolk, told BI that Ukraine and the Red Sea "have revealed the need to be ready to deal with a higher level of intensity than we had previously scaled for, both in terms of stock and in terms of time on the front line." In the Black Sea, Ukrainian forces have repeatedly used domestically produced naval drones to damage and destroy Russian warships, showing the risks that relatively cheap, asymmetric combat solutions pose to conventional naval forces. Far away, at the southern end of the Red Sea, the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen have launched missiles and drones at merchant vessels and NATO warships defending international shipping lanes. In its efforts to fend off the Houthi attacks, the US Navy has faced its most intense combat since World War II, US officials have previously said. Morley said NATO warships are at a higher risk because of the number of global actors who are prepared to use military force. Weapons proliferation has given actors who might previously have been unable to threaten advanced navies a new ability to do so. In the case of the Houthis, for instance, the group's missile attacks have raised the level of danger in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden to a level not seen in years. The situation is different in Europe, where NATO warships have not been shot at but tensions are running high. There have been several incidents with Moscow that raise the level of risk. 'The mindset needs to be layered defense' Surface warships face an expanding range of threats, from anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles and torpedoes to enemy aircraft and drones. Some weapons now in play only recently saw combat for the first time. The high operational tempo in the Red Sea has informed Western military planners about what limitations they face regarding magazine capacity, weapons inventory, and reloading capabilities. Morley said that as the weaponry that can threaten warships increases, so must the defensive capabilities aboard the vessels in danger. It's important to invest in missile stockpiles and ensure that NATO defense industrial bases can produce enough and ships can carry enough should they sail into a fight. The days "of driving around with a silo of ammunition that never gets used is sadly now in the past," he said, explaining that "ships routinely come back from the Red Sea, for example, having expended ammunition, and they need to be resupplied and then get back out on patrol." US Navy warships, for instance, have expended significant quantities of SM-series interceptor missiles for air defense. Air defense isn't just about numbers. It's also about dollars. The rise of inexpensive strike drones — some just tens of thousands of dollars apiece — as a tool of naval warfare has NATO forces trying to figure out how they can cheaply defeat these threats without wasting a surface-to-air missile costing millions. The aim is to bring the cost difference between the threat and the interceptor much closer to parity. "I think the mindset needs to be layered defense," Morley said. Warships need the expensive, higher-end missiles to deal with sophisticated threats. But breaking the cost-curve challenge means having a range of capabilities so complex interceptors aren't expended on the simple threats. American Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, for instance, are kitted with options like the M2 Browning .50 caliber machine guns, Mark 38 turret systems, five-inch artillery cannons, and a variety of surface-to-air missiles. These weapons allow the warships to confront a range of threats, though some options, like the deck guns, come with drawbacks, such as permitting threats to get much closer to warships than desired. Big platforms aren't obsolete Adm. Pierre Vandier, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, who oversees alliance modernization efforts, said emerging technologies, like drones, have created new problems for larger platforms like warships, as has been the case in the Black Sea. Anything that exists on the water could effectively be hit. Vandier identified uncrewed systems as one of the biggest changes in naval warfare over the past decade and said one risk is that a warship could be overwhelmed by a swarm of drones. "You need to find ways on the ships to be protected from that and to engage multiple targets at the same time," he said. That could be kinetic, involving a physical strike, or some alternative, like electronic warfare. NATO is working to incorporate lessons learned from Ukraine and the Red Sea into its combat training. At last month's Formidable Shield 25 exercise, US sailors practiced using the deck guns to shoot down small quadcopter drones that they could face in a swarm attack. They also practiced defending against uncrewed surface vehicles like the ones Ukraine has used to batter Russia's Black Sea fleet. Exercises such as Formidable Shield allow allied navies to practice navigating air defense challenges and learn how to engage cheaper threats with cheaper defenses, thus saving the more expensive methods for the higher-end threats. Despite the growing number of threats to warships, Vandier said the rise of drones doesn't necessarily render them obsolete. Aircraft carriers, the flagships of a fleet, can project force globally with embarked aviation. They travel in heavily defended strike groups, making the carriers particularly formidable and hard to reach for enemy attacks. "To get to a carrier, you have layers," Vandier said. "It's a battle between the shield and the sword. My personal feeling is that the story is not finished for the big platforms. Not yet."

3 hours ago

Wartime NATO summits have focused on Ukraine. With Trump, this one will be different

BRUSSELS -- At its first summits after Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, NATO gave President Volodymyr Zelenskyy pride of place at its table. It won't be the same this time. Europe's biggest land conflict since World War II is now in its fourth year and still poses an existential threat to the continent. Ukraine continues to fight a war so that Europeans don't have to. Just last week, Russia launched one of the biggest drone attacks of the invasion on Kyiv. But things have changed. The Trump administration insists that it must preserve maneuvering space to entice Russian President Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table, so Ukraine must not be allowed steal the limelight. In Washington last year, the military alliance's weighty summit communique included a vow to supply long-term security assistance to Ukraine, and a commitment to back the country 'on its irreversible path" to NATO membership. The year before, a statement more than twice as long was published in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius. A new NATO-Ukraine Council was set up, and Kyiv's membership path fast-tracked. Zelenskyy received a hero's welcome at a concert downtown. It will be very different at a two-day summit in the Netherlands that starts Tuesday. NATO's most powerful member, the United States, is vetoing Ukraine's membership. It's unclear how long for. Zelenskyy is invited again, but will not be seated at NATO's table. The summit statement is likely to run to around five paragraphs, on a single page, NATO diplomats and experts say. Ukraine will only get a passing mention. Recent developments do not augur well for Ukraine. Earlier this month, frustrated by the lack of a ceasefire agreement, U.S. President Donald Trump said it might be best to let Ukraine and Russia 'fight for a while' before pulling them apart and pursuing peace. Last weekend, he and Putin spoke by phone, mostly about Israel and Iran, but a little about Ukraine, too, Trump said. America has warned its allies that it has other security priorities, including in the Indo-Pacific and on its own borders. Then at the Group of Seven summit in Canada, Trump called for Russia to be allowed back into the group; a move that would rehabilitate Putin on the global stage. The next day, Russia launched its mass drone attack on Kyiv. Putin 'is doing this simply because he can afford to continue the war. He wants the war to go on. It is troubling when the powerful of this world turn a blind eye to it,' Zelenskyy said. Trump left the G7 gathering early to focus on the conflict between Israel and Iran. Zelenskyy had traveled to Canada to meet with him. No meeting happened, and no statement on Russia or the war was agreed. Lacking unanimity, other leaders met with Zelenskyy to reassure him of their support. Trump wants to broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. He said he could do it within 100 days, but that target has come and gone. Things are not going well, as a very public bust up with Zelenskyy at the White House demonstrated. Trump froze military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine's armed forces for a week. The U.S. has stepped back from the Ukraine Defense Contact Group that was set up under the Biden administration and helped to drum up weapons and ammunition. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth skipped its last meeting; the first time a Pentagon chief has been absent since Russian forces invaded in February 2022. Addressing Congress on June 10, Hegseth also acknowledged that funding for Ukraine military assistance, which has been robust for the past two years, will be reduced in the upcoming defense budget. It means Kyiv will receive fewer of the weapons systems that have been key to countering Russia's attack. Indeed, no new aid packages have been approved for Ukraine since Trump took office again in January. 'The message from the administration is clear: Far from guaranteed, future U.S. support for Ukraine may be in jeopardy,' said Riley McCabe, Associate Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a U.S.-based policy research organization. Cutting aid, McCabe warned, could make the Kremlin believe 'that U.S. resolve is fleeting, and that time is on Russia's side.' 'Putin has less incentive to negotiate if he believes that U.S. disengagement is inevitable and that Russia will soon gain an advantage on the battlefield,' he said. Trump wants the summit to focus on defense spending. The 32 allies are expected to agree on an investment pledge that should meet his demands. Still, the Europeans and Canada are determined to keep a spotlight on the war, wary that Russia could set its sights on one of them next. They back Trump's ceasefire efforts with Putin but also worry that the two men are cozying up. Also, some governments may struggle to convince their citizens of the need to boost defense spending at the expense of other budget demands without a strong show of support for Ukraine — and acknowledgement that Russia remains NATO's biggest security threat. The summit is highly symbolic for Ukraine in other ways. Zelenskyy wants to prevent his country from being sidelined from international diplomacy, but both he and his allies rely on Trump for U.S. military backup against Russia. Concretely, Trump and his counterparts will dine with the Dutch King on Tuesday evening. Zelenskyy could take part. Elsewhere, foreign ministers will hold a NATO-Ukraine Council, the forum where Kyiv sits among the 32 allies as an equal to discuss its security concerns and needs. What is clear is that the summit will be short. One working session on Wednesday. It was set up that way to prevent the meeting from derailing. If the G7 is anything to go by, Trump's focus on his new security priorities — right now, the conflict between Israel and Iran — might make it even shorter.

Hamilton Spectator

3 hours ago

• Hamilton Spectator

Wartime NATO summits have focused on Ukraine. With Trump, this one will be different

BRUSSELS (AP) — At its first summits after Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, NATO gave President Volodymyr Zelenskyy pride of place at its table. It won't be the same this time. Europe's biggest land conflict since World War II is now in its fourth year and still poses an existential threat to the continent. Ukraine continues to fight a war so that Europeans don't have to. Just last week, Russia launched one of the biggest drone attacks of the invasion on Kyiv. But things have changed. The Trump administration insists that it must preserve maneuvering space to entice Russian President Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table, so Ukraine must not be allowed steal the limelight. In Washington last year , the military alliance's weighty summit communique included a vow to supply long-term security assistance to Ukraine, and a commitment to back the country 'on its irreversible path' to NATO membership. The year before, a statement more than twice as long was published in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius. A new NATO-Ukraine Council was set up, and Kyiv's membership path fast-tracked. Zelenskyy received a hero's welcome at a concert downtown. It will be very different at a two-day summit in the Netherlands that starts Tuesday. NATO's most powerful member, the United States, is vetoing Ukraine's membership. It's unclear how long for. Zelenskyy is invited again, but will not be seated at NATO's table. The summit statement is likely to run to around five paragraphs, on a single page, NATO diplomats and experts say. Ukraine will only get a passing mention. If the G7 summit is anything to go by ... Recent developments do not augur well for Ukraine. Earlier this month, frustrated by the lack of a ceasefire agreement, U.S. President Donald Trump said it might be best to let Ukraine and Russia 'fight for a while' before pulling them apart and pursuing peace. Last weekend, he and Putin spoke by phone, mostly about Israel and Iran , but a little about Ukraine, too, Trump said. America has warned its allies that it has other security priorities , including in the Indo-Pacific and on its own borders. Then at the Group of Seven summit in Canada, Trump called for Russia to be allowed back into the group; a move that would rehabilitate Putin on the global stage. The next day, Russia launched its mass drone attack on Kyiv. Putin 'is doing this simply because he can afford to continue the war. He wants the war to go on. It is troubling when the powerful of this world turn a blind eye to it,' Zelenskyy said. Trump left the G7 gathering early to focus on the conflict between Israel and Iran . Zelenskyy had traveled to Canada to meet with him. No meeting happened, and no statement on Russia or the war was agreed. Lacking unanimity, other leaders met with Zelenskyy to reassure him of their support. Questions about US support for Ukraine Trump wants to broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. He said he could do it within 100 days , but that target has come and gone. Things are not going well, as a very public bust up with Zelenskyy at the White House demonstrated. Trump froze military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine's armed forces for a week. The U.S. has stepped back from the Ukraine Defense Contact Group that was set up under the Biden administration and helped to drum up weapons and ammunition. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth skipped its last meeting ; the first time a Pentagon chief has been absent since Russian forces invaded in February 2022. Addressing Congress on June 10, Hegseth also acknowledged that funding for Ukraine military assistance, which has been robust for the past two years, will be reduced in the upcoming defense budget. It means Kyiv will receive fewer of the weapons systems that have been key to countering Russia's attack. Indeed, no new aid packages have been approved for Ukraine since Trump took office again in January. 'The message from the administration is clear: Far from guaranteed, future U.S. support for Ukraine may be in jeopardy,' said Riley McCabe, Associate Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a U.S.-based policy research organization. Cutting aid, McCabe warned, could make the Kremlin believe 'that U.S. resolve is fleeting, and that time is on Russia's side.' 'Putin has less incentive to negotiate if he believes that U.S. disengagement is inevitable and that Russia will soon gain an advantage on the battlefield,' he said. What the summit might mean for Kyiv Trump wants the summit to focus on defense spending. The 32 allies are expected to agree on an investment pledge that should meet his demands. Still, the Europeans and Canada are determined to keep a spotlight on the war, wary that Russia could set its sights on one of them next. They back Trump's ceasefire efforts with Putin but also worry that the two men are cozying up. Also, some governments may struggle to convince their citizens of the need to boost defense spending at the expense of other budget demands without a strong show of support for Ukraine — and acknowledgement that Russia remains NATO's biggest security threat. The summit is highly symbolic for Ukraine in other ways. Zelenskyy wants to prevent his country from being sidelined from international diplomacy, but both he and his allies rely on Trump for U.S. military backup against Russia. Concretely, Trump and his counterparts will dine with the Dutch King on Tuesday evening. Zelenskyy could take part. Elsewhere, foreign ministers will hold a NATO-Ukraine Council, the forum where Kyiv sits among the 32 allies as an equal to discuss its security concerns and needs. What is clear is that the summit will be short. One working session on Wednesday. It was set up that way to prevent the meeting from derailing. If the G7 is anything to go by, Trump's focus on his new security priorities — right now, the conflict between Israel and Iran — might make it even shorter. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .