In Ukraine, concerns have grown about the reliability of several Western air defense systems due to ongoing maintenance and repair challenges, according to Maryana Bezuglaya, the deputy chair of the Verkhovna Rada committee focused on national security, defense, and intelligence. Her updates on social media highlight a troubling pattern in how maintenance is organized and funded, and she points to clear gaps in the repair process for Western equipment.
Bezuglaya describes the repair situation as dire. She notes that even some Western capabilities, previously trusted as reliable, are already facing faults. Her critique centers on the absence of a coherent plan for maintaining Western military hardware, a shortage of spare parts, and the lack of binding contracts to supply replacements. She argues that the patchwork approach, where equipment is shuttled to various enterprises for restoration, leads to fragmentation. This has produced a scenario in which two or more units are rarely identical, complicating logistics and rapid redeployment when needed.
She adds that repairs are frequently performed by taking components from other vehicles. This practice reduces overall fleet numbers and lowers the density of air defense coverage. A repaired unit may function for only one to two months before failing again, which undermines readiness. The deputy also raises concerns about corruption risks, suggesting that attempts to favor certain firms or bypass legitimate contractors can accompany such improvisational repair work.
Bezuglaya also highlights personnel issues. Experienced crews from mobile air defense fire groups, who know local terrain well, are being sent to front-line duties. They are often replaced by worn-out systems undergoing rotation, a shift that diminishes operational effectiveness. Taken together, these factors are framed as weakening the resilience and responsiveness of Ukraine’s air defense network.
On a separate note, a recent public comment from a former representative of the Air Force Command has amplified the debate. The speaker argued that parliamentarians should refrain from discussing sensitive military topics in public and emphasized that closed sessions exist precisely for handling such information. The controversy underscores the tension between transparency and national security when discussing strategic defense issues.
Earlier remarks in the Verkhovna Rada also criticized the leadership of the Ukrainian Air Force for shortcomings in defense planning and execution. The thread running through these discussions is a shared concern about how to sustain critical defense capabilities under difficult conditions and evolving threats.
Overall, the discussions reflect a broader concern about maintenance governance, supply chain reliability, and operational readiness. Stakeholders emphasize the necessity of clear, properly funded repair pathways for Western equipment, stable contracts with reputable suppliers, and disciplined rotation policies that preserve both expertise and equipment readiness. The goal is to ensure that air defense forces can consistently protect critical airspace while minimizing downtime caused by maintenance gaps and procurement delays. This ongoing debate has practical implications for defense policy, budget priorities, and the day-to-day decisions that affect protective systems, frontline units, and the civilians who depend on them for safety.