hankyoreh

A Ukrainian soldier carries an artillery shell near the front line of the war with Russia in Kharkiv on May 21, 2024. (Reuters/Yonhap)

In the fall of 1917, as World War I (July 1919–November 1918) was at its peak, an odd notice from the British military was affixed to the walls of every elementary school classroom in the country. The notice asked teachers to encourage their students to collect horse chestnuts (called conkers) and acorns. “This collection is invaluable war work and is very urgent,” the notice said. 

The British had bombarded German troops with an incredible number of shells in the early years of the war, and by 1915, munitions were beginning to run low in what came to be called the “shell crisis.” The workhorse of the Allied forces was a field gun known as the French 75 with a maximum range of 11 kilometers, but as the Allies ran out of ammunition, these crucial weapons were in danger of becoming useless. 

The problem was that supplies of acetone, a liquid compound needed for the manufacture of cordite (smokeless powder), were nearly exhausted. Just then, Chaim Weizmann, a professor at Manchester University, informed the UK’s wartime government that he had discovered a method of deriving acetone from acorns and horse chestnuts. Weizman was a monumental figure who went on to become the first president of Israel upon its establishment in 1948 for this and other achievements. 

The acorns and horse chestnuts picked up by children’s tiny hands were turned into artillery shells, tipping the scales back in favor of the Allies. After surmounting the “shell crisis,” the Allies ultimately managed to defeat Germany the next year and claim victory in the war. 

Today, more than a century after the end of World War I, armies have access to a huge variety of cutting-edge weaponry, including AI-powered assault rifles, drones, fifth-generation fighters and stealth carriers. But on the actual battlefield, the howitzer shells that were first developed some 120 years ago remain the most important weapon that determines the outcome of a war. That has been amply illustrated by the Russia-Ukraine war, the largest military conflict to take place in Europe since World War II. 

A report titled “Weapons of War: The Race Between Russia and Ukraine” that was published by the US-based Council on Foreign Relations on April 24 said, “Artillery has been known as the ‘king of battle’ for centuries, and this largely remains true today. In the Russia-Ukraine war, artillery fire accounts for about 80 percent of the casualties on both sides.” 

According to an analysis of the damage rate of major weapon systems in the Russia-Ukraine war that the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses published in February, Russia’s damage rate was 13.4% for artillery, 11.9% for drones and 5.0% for armor. The Ukrainians had a damage rate of 11.5% for drones and 6.2% for artillery. 

The institute concluded, “It can be said that for the Russian and Ukrainian armed forces alike, the damage rate from drones and artillery was very high relative to other weapon systems, which means that as the war continues, both sides have been relying on drone and artillery systems.” 

Indeed, the Royal United Services Institute, a UK think tank, reported that with Western weapon support since the start of the war, Ukraine had fired 7,000 rounds per day as of summer 2023, compared with Russia’s 5,000. Benefiting from the Western support, Ukraine even attempted to use its firepower to launch a counteroffensive. 

But as weapon supplies from the West became more uncertain, Ukraine began suffering from a severe shortage of shells. Since autumn of last year, it has been unable to fire more than an average of around 2,000 per day. 

Meanwhile, Russia, which enjoys advantages in both population and economic strength, has operated a full-scale wartime weapon production system that has increased its domestic shell production to the range of 250,000 per month and 3 million per year. It has also drastically increased its occupied territory, raining an average of over 10,000 shells a day on Ukrainian land. 

Commenting on this, Gen. Christopher Cavoli, NATO’s supreme allied commander for Europe, signaled a sense of alarm, telling the US House Armed Services Committee last month that Russia was already firing five times as many shells as Ukraine and that the ratio would “immediately go to 10 to 1 in a matter of weeks” in the absence of additional aid.  

Since Russia’s surprise invasion of Ukraine, the two sides have been confronting each other over a long front on the ground. It’s a situation where their respective fates hinge on how many shells they can continue to fire. The course of the war is being dictated by shells in the 150–160 mm caliber range (155 mm for Ukraine, 152 mm for Russia), which both are relying on as mainstays. 

Measuring 85 cm in length and 47 kg in weight, 155 mm shells can travel for up to 22 km (standard model) with around 10 kg of explosives before striking enemy territory. 

When artillery is too large, it becomes too heavy to send over long distances. When it is too small, it ends up with weaker firepower. In this sense, shells in the 150–160 mm caliber range are the most efficient option. 

Howitzers are capable of being used to strike around obstacles, and the short firing preparation times make it difficult for the adversary to predict strikes. With production technology already in place around the world, they can also be mass-produced over a short timeframe. 

For this reason, some are saying that the weapons that decide the fate of Ukraine will not be advanced AI-based weaponry but “low-tech” 155 mm shells. 

Those shells are also becoming even more potent, as they can be loaded with multiple smaller shells for use as cluster munitions, which are even more destructive. In Korea, the Defense Acquisition Program Administration recently announced the completion of the development of extended-range munitions, with the maximum range increased to 60 km, or about 37 miles. 

But analysts are predicting that Ukraine is unlikely to overwhelm Russia with its artillery firepower. According to NATO estimates, Russia is expected to produce 3 million shells this year. It has also been alleged that Russia is being supplied with over 1 million shells by North Korea. 

In contrast, Ukraine has received around 100,000 shells a month from the US and EU members. The US has been the major provider, but supplies there have ended up delayed amid difficulties in reaching a political consensus. 

As of March, the EU had only supplied 520,000 of the one million 155 mm shells that it had pledged last year to provide, raising concerns in Ukraine. The UK daily The Guardian observed last month that Ukraine’s inferiority in artillery capabilities meant that its armed forces were ill-equipped to thwart large-scale ground strike operations by Russia. 

For this reason, Ukraine appeared to have requested shell supplies from Japan and Korea, which also use 155 mm artillery with similar specifications.  

Up until even the early days of the war in Ukraine, Japan’s three principles on the ban of defense equipment exports prevented it from sending 155 mm shells to the country in any shape or form, due to the ban on exporting finished equipment. But at the end of 2023, Japan amended these guidelines to allow for the export of even finished products under license to the provider of the license.  

Earlier this year, the Wall Street Journal reported on discussions of a roundabout method of getting Japanese shells to Ukraine in which the UK, where the shell’s license holder BAE Systems is located, makes a request, Japan exports its domestically made shells to the UK, at which point they can be rerouted to Ukraine. The newspaper reported that the UK had opted not to pursue this option, and that no progress has been made on it, making it unclear if any form of Japanese shell support did occur.  

There have also been reports that Korea was providing roundabout shell provisions via the US. Because Korea restricts lethal weapons from being supplied to conflict areas, it is unable to provide direct support to Ukraine. However, there was a series of reports last year suggesting that Korea was shipping 155 mm shells to the US, which was then sending its own shell reserves to Ukraine. The Wall Street Journal later reported that Korea had begun the process of providing artillery shells to Ukraine following Yoon’s state visit to the US in April 2023.  

By Hong Seock-jae, staff reporter 

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]