I'm Adelaipuja-Pon-Ponte, and this is a special episode of Ukraine, the latest.

It's a public holiday here in Britain.

So today we thought we'd do something a little different, and we would answer your questions.

You sent many of them every day in the inbox, and we're always happy to read your messages.

So today, we've picked a few of them them and my colleagues Frances Dernley, Executive Editor for Audio and Dom Nichols,

Associate Editor for Defence, we'll try and answer them. Boys, no pressure. Are you ready?

Ready, ready to go. Okay. Before we start, I think you've got a little announcement for us. Yes, we're releasing a new weekly newsletter where we answer more of your questions and Dom and I will be offering some more exclusive insights about the war. We're going to be punging in a few maps and diagrams and bits and bobs like that. A few insights. Analysis, a few recommendations maybe, books, beers, things coming up.

That sounds great. As long as I don't have to play referee between you two, that's great.

You can sign up via the link in the episode description and it's free for everyone.

No subscription required. Let's dive into the first question then, shall we?

Dom, this one's for you. It's from Eric in the US. If we accept that drones are orders of magnitude

cheaper than tanks, at one point should we start evaluating a country's military spending

on the kind of kit that they're buying versus the percentage of GDP?

Okay, thanks Eric. Great question. So the evaluation of military capability is always a tricky

and imperfect science. So GDP is a nice, easy, ready reckoner. We know what we're talking about

with GDP.

We can rate this year's GDP against last years and two centuries ago and et cetera, et cetera.

So we kind of know what we are with GDP.

But that only measures the input.

It doesn't measure the output.

So it doesn't show what you actually get for that money.

And, of course, when you talk about defence, it's a blend of politics as well.

...