Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
Ukraine urgently needs interceptor missiles for Patriots, but they are scarce worldwide and American production capacity cannot quickly meet the demand. One possible solution could be licensed production of such missiles in Ukraine, but Washington is not rushing to open this possibility for Kyiv yet.
Political scientist Volodymyr Fesenko explained on air 24 of Channel what interests the United States may have behind such a decision and why it is not only about security concerns. He said that the desire to retain control over Patriot production could ultimately work against the Americans themselves.
Why don’t the United States grant Ukraine a license?
Interceptor missiles for Patriot are scarce worldwide. Demand significantly exceeds production capacity, and Ukraine, despite constant Russian ballistic strikes, is far from the first in line for PAC-3. An additional problem is that interceptors are technologically more complex and expensive, while ballistic missiles are produced much more.
This is not the only reason; I think there are others, including security concerns. But there is a very clear, purely business explanation — Americans do not want to lose the monopoly on rocket production for Patriot,
— Fesenko explained.
Washington has already allowed other countries to manufacture American missiles, but such licenses do not give the manufacturer full freedom. The United States can determine production volumes, while some critically important components still have to be sourced from American companies.
There is no full monopoly anymore. Japan has a license to manufacture modern PAC-3, but the license itself limits production scale. There is also a problem with procuring certain components,
— the political scientist noted.
Such a model allows the United States to retain control over the technology even after transferring the license to another country. For Ukraine, permission to manufacture would not automatically mean mass production of missiles.
Even Japan produces only 30 PAC-3 missiles per year.
How restrictive these limits can be is shown by Japan’s experience. The country already produces PAC-3 under an American license but releases only about 30 missiles per year. One of the bottlenecks is the guidance heads, supplied by Boeing, which are in short supply.
Japan produces only 30 missiles PAC-3 per year. This is less than what we would need per month. The guidance head is a key part of the missile, without which it cannot operate effectively, and these heads are currently in huge deficit,
— Fesenko said.
Ukraine’s needs are significantly larger due to the scale of Russian attacks. In July alone Russia used more than 60 ballistic missiles. President Volodymyr Zelensky previously spoke of a need for at least 30 interceptors of Patriot per month.
The Americans are now increasing production and want to scale it up threefold, but by 2030 year. And now is 2026 year. We cannot wait so long,
— the political scientist emphasized.
Rapidly closing the deficit solely through American plants is not working. Therefore for Ukraine, expanding production outside the United States and engaging European facilities becomes increasingly important.
Ukraine could create a Patriot rival
One possible path already exists in Europe: Germany has obtained a license to produce missiles for Patriot of earlier variants, a portion of which is purchased by Ukraine. There is discussion of involving Ukrainian enterprises in such production, but Washington’s consent is also needed for this.
We see a contradiction between business and security interests. And, to the great regret, under the Trump administration business interests prevail. That is the main problem now,
— Fesenko said.
If a license-based production agreement cannot be reached, Ukraine and European partners could pursue another path and create their own anti-ballistic interceptor. Fesenko considers such a scenario practically inevitable if the United States continues to restrict access to its technologies.
If they won’t grant us a license to produce anti-ballistic missiles, we will produce them ourselves or together with European partners. And ultimately the Americans will lose because a cheaper competitor will appear on the market,
— he explained.
The current desire of American manufacturers to protect their market share could have the opposite effect. Instead of preserving a monopoly, the United States risks speeding up the emergence of a separate Ukrainian-European system that will compete with their products.
Fesenko assessed the Patriot situation for Ukraine: watch the video
Document: PDF proof of the original version of the news item "Помилка для США: чому насправді Трамп не поспішає дозволити Україні виробляти Patriot". It records the publication content at the moment of the first scan, the preservation date and the source: Channel 24.
