Out in a dense forest in central Ukraine, troops from a Ukrainian artillery battery are training before heading out to the front lines.
For some it will be a return to the fight, for others it will be their first time – as they replace those who have been injured or killed.
Firing at targets in a clearing with AK-47 rifles, they are careful to conserve ammunition. And it is not just training camps where supplies are low.
“We have enough fighting spirit to win, of course. Unfortunately, we currently do not have enough weapons,” Roman, their commander, tells me. “The main thing is to have enough ammunition.”
Out on the front lines they are having to economise, he explains. “This is not a secret. The amount of ammunition that the enemy uses daily is at least five times higher than the amount of ammunition that we use.”
Supplies from allies have been essential for Ukraine in this war. For Roman and other soldiers, the Nato summit in Vilnius is a crucial moment to ensure they have what they need to continue the fight.
The widespread expectation is that new weapons will be promised at the summit, as well as more supplies of ammunition. The US decision to provide cluster munitions from existing stockpiles last week was partly to act as a stop-gap before new artillery supplies are ready.
But viewed from Ukraine the summit is about much more than just weapons and ammunition – it is about what type of commitment the country will be offered when it comes to joining the alliance.
Ukraine has been knocking at Nato’s door for years. What it wants is more than just positive noises and a feeling of being left in a permanent waiting room.
At the core of Nato is Article 5, which sets out that an attack on one member is an attack on all. This principle of collective defence could offer protection for Ukraine, but – almost everyone agrees – is very difficult to put in place when a country is already at war. —BBC
