By Zhao Yuyao and Wang Shuo

Washington and its NATO allies have been working on the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL) plan, which would allow European nations to transfer funds into a special US account to purchase US-made weapons and equipment for Ukraine. While the plan is framed as a solution to Ukraine's shortage of weaponry, in essence, it is part of the effort of the US to restructure transatlantic defense responsibilities, with "America First" still at the core. The reaction from European capitals has been divergent, with only a handful of countries showing limited support. As a result, the prospects of its implementation remain uncertain, adding yet another layer of unpredictability to the resolution of the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

So how exactly does this plan work? Ukraine submits an emergency weapons request package worth about $500 million first. Any European country that agrees to supply Kyiv with items from that list will then be granted "fast-track procurement rights," allowing it to bypass the normal US foreign military sales process and directly order US-made weapons as replacements. The ultimate goal is to provide Ukraine with $10 billion worth of arms. The chief advantage is that it avoids lengthy approval procedures. As long as the money is in place, the process can move ahead.

Undoubtedly, the US is the biggest beneficiary of this plan. In the end, the $10 billion will still flow into the hands of the American military-industrial complexes, while Europe becomes a mere "white glove" for Washington to circumvent cumbersome procedures. Much of the procurement cost is shifted onto European shoulders. Even though Europe is footing the bill, the choice of weapons, the standards for data links, and the maintenance systems remain firmly under US control, which indirectly undermines Europe's push for "defense autonomy." In short, through the NATO framework, Washington has shifted part of the financial burden of aiding Ukraine onto Europe. This not only helps soothe anti-war sentiment at home, but also enables the US to maintain its grip on Europe while leaving the latter its "cash cow."

Of course, these are all part of Washington's well-laid plan, but Europe has its own calculations. Europe hopes to keep the US engaged. It wants the entire Western alliance to continue backing Ukraine, or at least, to prevent Ukraine from collapsing on the battlefield. After returning to the White House, Donald Trump has obviously changed his attitude on this issue. Europe has to pay the price to keep the US involved in its defense, or else it risks being left to fend for itself. Thus, even though European countries are fully aware that the US intends to shift the burden and make them foot the bill, they have little choice but to accept this asymmetric arrangement.

Meanwhile, Europe also has to bear the negative consequences of this plan. First, it risks deepening internal divisions. Some Central and Eastern European countries, such as Poland and the three Baltic states, are more dependent on US security guarantees and thus particularly favor supporting America's rapid military aid mechanism. In contrast, countries like France, Germany, and Italy oppose the plan's upfront payment system and prefer to jointly develop European systems to establish an autonomous defense-industrial chain. This growing divide between the "pro-US camp" and the "autonomy camp" will inevitably weaken Europe's efforts toward integrated security and defense. Second, it worsens the prospects for resolving the Russia-Ukraine conflict. At its core, the Ukraine crisis stems from the strategic confrontation between Russia and the West. It is not a simple military issue, nor can it be ultimately resolved through military means. Increasing military aid to Ukraine may further drain Russia's resources, but it also raises the risk of escalation, causing more casualties and humanitarian suffering. Therefore, this risks plunging the West into strategic entrapment.

In summary, this military aid scheme for Ukraine may appear "reliable" on the surface, but it carries numerous hidden risks. It represents yet another instance of US exploitation and control over Europe, while also introducing fresh complications to the peaceful resolution of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. For Europe, participating in this plan is nothing short of a desperate measure. In sacrificing for US interests, it simultaneously places itself in a position fraught with danger and uncertainty.

(The authors are respectively a PhD student at the University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and a professor at the School of International Relations and Diplomacy, Beijing Foreign Studies University.)

Editor's Note: Originally published on huanqiu.com, this article is translated from Chinese into English and edited by the China Military Online. The information and opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of eng.chinamil.com.cn.