一劍飄塵：援助烏克蘭，美國為什麼要承擔更多責任

反賊網注：世界應該援助烏克蘭的主要原因是因為烏克蘭是在打一場反抗侵略的戰爭。本文則主要講為什麼美國應該承擔更大比例的援助。 關於美國為什麼要支援烏克蘭，我這次寫得長一點，希望能解釋清楚。

關於歐洲對烏克蘭支援力度不及美國的討論引發了廣泛關注。然而，深入分析後可以發現，這種比較並未充分考慮雙方在國際責任、經濟實力和軍事能力方面的差異。

1. 國際責任的分擔：美國的全球領導角色

美國在全球事務中扮演著主導角色，其軍事和經濟影響力使其承擔起維護國際秩序的責任。歐洲國家普遍承認美國的霸權地位和美元的國際貨幣地位，這意味著美國在全球安全事務中應承擔更大的責任。因此，美國對烏克蘭的支援力度更大，符合其作為全球領導者的角色定位。例如，北約的集體防禦原則中，美國的行動往往是決定性的。如果美國放棄對烏克蘭的支援，基本上就相當於放棄了這種領導地位。短期看，一年節省幾百億，但這種軟實力（美元、全球領袖）的損失，是幾百倍於這種經濟節省的。

1. 經濟實力對比：人均GDP的差異

美國的人均國內生產總值（GDP）顯著高於歐洲國家。根據國際貨幣基金組織的資料，2023年美國的人均GDP約為7萬美元，而歐盟國家的平均人均GDP約為4萬美元。這種經濟實力的差距直接影響了各國對外援助的能力。美國更強的經濟實力使其能夠提供更多的援助資金，而歐洲國家在經濟能力有限的情況下，已盡力提供支援。例如，德國和法國雖然在提供援助，但其經濟負擔相對較高。

1. 軍事能力對比：軍費開支和軍備水平

美國的軍費開支遠超歐洲國家。2022年，美國的軍費開支佔全球軍費的39%，而歐洲國家的軍費支出總和僅佔全球的約20%。這種軍事投入的差異導致美國在武器裝備、軍事技術和全球投送能力方面具有明顯優勢。因此，美國能夠為烏克蘭提供更多的軍事援助，而歐洲國家在軍備水平相對落後的情況下，已盡其所能提供支援。例如，波蘭、英國等國雖然提供了武器，但規模和技術水平與美國相比還是有差距。

1. 武器援助與美國經濟：利用庫存落後武器

美國對烏克蘭的援助很大一部分是武器支援，而這些武器中，很多是庫存的落後武器。這些武器不需要進一步的生產成本，且在使用前需要拆卸和維護，這實際上為美國的軍工企業帶來了一系列的經濟效益。例如，據報道，美國向烏克蘭提供的武器中包括大量的過期或即將過期的彈藥和裝備，這些物資的處理成本原本會很高，但現在反而透過援助變相清理了庫存，同時創造了新的就業機會和經濟活動。2023年，美國國防部的資料顯示，超過60%的援助物資是來自現有庫存，這直接減少了儲存和處理這些過時武器的成本，同時促進了軍工企業的新訂單和生產活動，間接支援了美國經濟。相對來說，歐洲並沒有美國這樣強大的軍工企業。支援烏克蘭，歐洲並不會像美國這樣，取得經濟上的利益。

I wrote a longer article this time to explain why the United States supports Ukraine. I hope I can explain it clearly.

• The discussion about Europe's support for Ukraine being less than that of the United States has attracted widespread attention. However, after a deeper analysis, it can be found that this comparison does not fully take into account the differences between the two sides in terms of international responsibilities, economic strength and military capabilities.

1. The Distribution of International Responsibilities: America's Global Leadership Role

The United States plays a dominant role in global affairs, with its military and economic influence requiring it to shoulder the responsibility of maintaining international order. European countries generally acknowledge America's hegemonic position and the global status of the U.S. dollar, which means that the U.S. is expected to take on greater responsibilities in global security matters. Therefore, America's greater support for Ukraine aligns with its role as a global leader. For instance, in NATO's principle of collective defense, U.S. actions are often decisive. If the U.S. were to abandon its support for Ukraine, it would essentially be abandoning its leadership role. In the short term, this could save billions annually, but the loss of soft power—such as the influence of the U.S. dollar and its global leadership status—would outweigh these savings by hundreds of times.

1. Economic Strength Comparison: The Per Capita GDP Gap

The United States has a significantly higher per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) compared to European countries. According to the International Monetary Fund, the per capita GDP of the U.S. in 2023 was about $70,000, while the average per capita GDP of European Union countries was about $40,000. This disparity in economic strength directly affects each country's ability to provide foreign aid. America's stronger economic power allows it to contribute more funds, while European countries, despite their limited economic capacity, have already done their best to provide support. For example, although Germany and France have offered aid, their economic burdens are relatively higher.

1. Military Capability Comparison: Defense Spending and Armament Levels

The United States' defense spending far exceeds that of European countries. In 2022, U.S. defense spending accounted for 39% of global military expenditures, whereas European countries collectively accounted for only about 20%. This difference in military investment gives the U.S. a clear advantage in weaponry, military technology, and global deployment capabilities. As a result, the U.S. can provide more military aid to Ukraine, while European countries, with their relatively lower levels of military readiness, have already done their utmost to support Ukraine. For instance, countries like Poland and the United Kingdom have supplied weapons, but the scale and technological sophistication of their contributions pale in comparison to those of the United States.

1. Weapon Aid and U.S. Economic Benefits: Leveraging Obsolete Stockpiles

A significant portion of U.S. aid to Ukraine consists of weaponry, much of which comes from existing stockpiles of outdated equipment. These weapons incur no additional production costs and often require dismantling or maintenance before use, creating economic benefits for U.S. defense industries. For example, reports indicate that much of the U.S.-supplied aid includes expired or soon-to-expire ammunition and equipment, which would otherwise entail high disposal costs. Instead, through this aid, these stockpiles are effectively cleared while generating new employment opportunities and economic activities. According to 2023 data from the U.S. Department of Defense, over 60% of the aid provided came from existing stockpiles, directly reducing the cost of storing and handling these obsolete weapons while stimulating new orders and production activities for defense companies. Comparatively, European countries do not possess defense industries as powerful as those of the United States. Supporting Ukraine does not yield the same economic benefits for Europe as it does for the U.S.