The Italian Parliament today voted for a new shipment of arms to Ukraine, in the vain hope that they will at least slow down (I don't think anyone seriously thinks that Kiev has any chance of victory) the Russian advance.
However, public opinion is not exactly cohesive about the usefulness of supplying weapons to a nation at war. Apart from the moral discourse, one should ask oneself whether the anti-tank and sup-air missile systems really end up in the hands of the Ukrainian regular forces or if they go to arm someone else.
Apparently the now famous FGM-148 Javelins, NLAW and Panzerfaust 3, the latter acquired by the Italian Army in the 90s of the last century (17.000 units), would have ended up in the hands of the Russians who are using them to arm the militias of the separatist Republics.
In practice, what has already happened in Afghanistan is happening, where the jihadist groups were able to dispose of huge quantities of weapons that NATO sent to the reconstituted Afghan Army which, as our readers will remember, melted like snow in the sun even earlier. the departure of Westerners from the country.
Beyond the tactical situation on the ground, the choice of the European Union and NATO to feed the Ukrainian “resistance” by proxy could reveal another failure. In practice, not only is the goal not achieved but money is spent to support the counterpart, as director Nanni Moretti would say: "Let's continue like this, let's get hurt".
