Last year, Zelensky and Ukraine** went to NATO countries many times to lobby and put forward requests for F-16 fighters. According to Ukraine, whether or not to obtain this fighter will determine whether the Ukrainian side can win the war. However, just when Western countries were almost ready to supply fighters, a spokesman for the Ukrainian Air Force suddenly shouted "Kyiv cannot receive F-16 fighters", what does this mean? Doesn't Ukraine want this fighter?
A spokesman for the Ukrainian Air Force pointed out that Western countries are preparing to provide F-16 fighters and want to deploy this kind of ** on the territory of Ukraine, but hope they can understand that Kyiv cannot receive this kind of **, because Ukraine does not have enough supporting facilities to use - Ukraine has neither enough pilots, nor available airfields and aviation systems, so Western partners should think clearly about how to solve these problems before sending out F-16s.
From these words, it can be seen that Ukraine does not want the F-16, but euphemistically proposes conditions - hoping that Western countries will be able to solve Ukraine's airport facilities by the way. In addition to this option, Ukraine has previously given another option - to store the F-16 fighters supporting Ukraine in neighboring NATO countries, and Ukrainian pilots will fly F-16 fighters directly from NATO countries into Ukrainian airspace to fight, and then return to NATO airports after the mission is completed.
However, such a crazy proposal may not be adopted by NATO countries. From the perspective of NATO countries, taking off F-16 fighters from their own territory to fight the Russian army, even if the driver is a Ukrainian pilot, is equivalent to starting a war with Russia. Russia has previously warned that any ** from NATO countries going to fight in Ukraine is a "target that must be destroyed", and if there are warplanes taking off from NATO country airfields, then these NATO airfields are also targeted.
In the midst of such warnings, NATO countries do not dare to try lightly, lest they really fall into war. In addition to the threat of war, there are also the voices of their own residents, which are also influencing the decisions of NATO countries. The experience of past wars and military interventions has made it clear to the inhabitants of NATO countries that military involvement will lead to protracted wars and irreversible destruction, negatively affecting peace and stability.
Besides, the Russia-Ukraine conflict is a complex geopolitical issue involving multiple interests and historical disputes. NATO residents may believe that there is no easy solution to the conflict, and that hasty military intervention could lead to an unsatisfactory outcome. As a result, these NATO residents may be inclined to support diplomatic efforts and peaceful settlements rather than resolve them by military means.
It is also necessary to say that military intervention requires a large investment of resources and financial resources, which may lead to neglect and inadequacy in other important areas within NATO. NATO residents pointed out that resources should be more directed to improving domestic social issues such as health care, education, and social welfare.
Moreover, NATO residents fear that involvement in the conflict could lead to further escalation and aggravation of the conflict. The Russia-Ukraine conflict involves nuclear states, as well as complex geopolitical and ethnic issues. Citizens fear that involvement could provoke a larger conflict that could spread to other regions.
In addition to this, there are economic and commercial considerations. Some NATO residents fear that involvement in the conflict will have a negative impact on the country's economic and commercial interests. Russia is an important partner of many NATO countries, in areas such as energy cooperation and investment. They fear that an overly radical anti-Russian program will have irreparable consequences for bilateral ** and economic cooperation.
Besides, NATO countries are not monolithic internally. There are different political views and differences of opinion within NATO countries on international conflicts. Decisions may be subject to pressure and resistance from different political factions and public groups, which may lead to a split in public support. Political leaders must weigh the will of the state and the public before deciding whether to intervene in the conflict.