According to Western analysts, the high cost of maintaining US F-35 stealth fighters makes it virtually impossible to transfer them to Ukraine.
Why Ukraine should not wait for the F-35 fighter
The publication's analysts note that Ukraine has already received critical modern weapons from its Western partners, including surface-to-air missile systems such as Patriot and anti-tank weapons such as FGM-148.
The authors of the article wonder why Ukraine should be given American F-16 fighter jets if it is possible to give it more modern F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
It is noted that although Ukraine successfully counteracts the attempts of the criminal army of the Russian Federation to dominate the airspace, the Russian occupiers have an advantage in the sky due to the use of Su-35 and Mig-31 against Su-27 and Mig-29 in the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
In particular, the aircraft of the Russian war criminals have more advanced radars and missiles.
They are able to attack Ukrainian aircraft at a distance that allows them to avoid retaliation.
For its part, Ukraine, with the help of its Western partners, has compensated for the vulnerability of its own aviation with modern IRIS-t, NASAMS and PATRIOT systems.
However, they are only a temporary measure until Ukraine receives Western fighter jets.
The arrival of F-16s with advanced radar and modern missiles such as the AIM-120 will significantly improve Ukraine's position compared to the Su-27 and MiG-29, as Ukrainian pilots will be able to engage Russian aircraft from a much greater distance.
But the F-16 is a fourth-generation fighter jet created in the 1970s and is no longer comparable to modern aircraft. So why not give Ukrainians modern aircraft?
Currently, among NATO countries, only the United States has fifth-generation fighter jet technology - the F-22 and F-35.
The F-22 Raptor is considered to be the world's best fighter jet for establishing air superiority, but the United States has never offered this aircraft for sale and is unlikely to do so in the future.
The F-35 Lightning II, on the other hand, is exported to US allies around the world, including NATO countries.
It might be expected that the US-backed Ukraine would receive a fighter jet that the US has already exported to countries such as Singapore and Norway, especially given how useful the F-35 would be to the Ukrainian side.
What tasks should the F-16 solve
Ukraine's Western partners hope that with the help of F-16s, the Ukrainian Armed Forces will be able to push Russian army fighters further away from the front line and, using more advanced radar, shoot down Russian cruise missiles.
But the F-16s will solve a problem that has persisted since the beginning of the invasion in February 2022: Russia's more modern warplanes were difficult to counter with its own outdated fighters, the article says.
Analysts note that the cost of one F-35 alone, compared to the F-16, is about $100 million versus $63 million.
It is noted that the F-35 weapons programme is generally considered to be the most expensive weapons programme in history, worth $1.7 trillion.
American taxpayers, tired of financing the foreign conflict that has been going on for three years, are unlikely to support the transfer of a $100 million aircraft from a $1.7 trillion programme.
In addition, the United States would not dare to send one of its most advanced weapons systems to Ukraine, which would be in the hands of less experienced pilots.
The risk of an F-35 being shot down allows Russia to get to priority technologies and steal them and try to reproduce them.
Of course, Russia already has a fifth-generation fighter jet, about a dozen Su-57s, but getting the F-35 into their hands would be a victory for them.
It should be borne in mind that the longer Russia stays in the conflict, the weaker it becomes in terms of military resources and political capital.
A weak Russia is beneficial to the United States. It is logical to assume that the United States would prefer Russia to remain involved in the conflict indefinitely.
Thus, providing Ukraine with fundamentally new weapons systems may not ultimately be in the US interest. This is a somewhat abstract, hypothetical and cynical viewpoint that may not reflect the strategy of US military planners, but it is a reason to think.
